This is a text reader for the article below: Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

 

Wednesday 10/07/26

Thru the Bible: Old Testament Review – – Exodus 32 – Numbers

Message Video Player

Message Audio Player:

Podcast: Download (Duration: 1:43:11 — 64.8MB)

Subscribe: Spotify | RSS

***Video is HERE***

Thru the Bible: Old Testament Review – Deuteronomy Part 1

Overview of Deuteronomy 

Deuteronomy is Moses’ address to the 2nd generation of Israelites coming out of their 40 years of wandering in the wilderness due to the rebellion of their parents. It is Moses’ retelling of the laws and judgments given by God, the rebellions of the 1st generation of Israelites, the lands conquered, the lands already allotted to others which were therefore off limits to Israel, the spying out of the land and its results including the 40 years of wandering, the blessings and curses evoked upon this 2nd generation at Mount Ebal and Gerizim, the reading of the law to this 2nd generation, Moses’ prayer, intercession, inauguration of Joshua as his successor and his death before Joshua led the 2nd generation of Israelites into the Land promised to them.

It begins with these words of Moses in Deuteronomy 1:1-8, 

“(1) These are the words Moses spoke to all Israel across the Jordan in the wilderness, in the Arabah opposite Suph, between Paran and Tophel, Laban, Hazeroth, and Di–zahab.  (2)  It is an eleven-day journey from Horeb to Kadesh–barnea by way of Mount Seir.  (3)  In the fortieth year, in the eleventh month, on the first of the month, Moses told the Israelites everything the LORD had commanded him to say to them.  (4)  This was after he had defeated Sihon king of the Amorites, who lived in Heshbon, and Og king of Bashan, who lived in Ashtaroth, at Edrei.  (5)  Across the Jordan in the land of Moab, Moses began to explain this law, saying:  

(6)  “The LORD our God spoke to us at Horeb, 
‘You have stayed at this mountain long enough.  

(7)  Resume your journey and go to the hill country of the Amorites and their neighbors in the Arabah, the hill country, the lowlands, the Negev and the sea coast–to the land of the Canaanites and to Lebanon as far as the Euphrates River.  (8)  See, I have set the land before you. Enter and take possession of the land the LORD swore to give to your fathers Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and their descendants after them.’”

You remember we spend SOME time looking at the reason why God made Israel wait 400+ years to go in and conquer the land promised to them. Also, we looked at one of the reasons why God called for Israel to kill all the inhabitants of the land, showing them no mercy when they did. 

We did this in order to offer what the scriptures actually say in plain text were the reasons for this as well as to counter much of the silliness and misinformation rampant in the church today about angel-human hybrids playing a role in this decision.

Well, this last week I was listening again to an audiobook from R.C. Sproul on The Holiness of God and while I certainly do not agree with all brother Sproul’s beliefs in scripture he made a very good additional point regarding this that I thought needed to be addressed.

This point is not really in the same spirit as all I’ve said so far, but does address a side issue. 

One of the reasons why many in the modern church look to the existence of angelic-human hybrids is to give God an out, for how nasty a guy He appeared to be in issuing a command to the Israelites to kill everyone, even women and children without mercy. 

They claim it is because they were not truly human and that if left unculled would eventually pollute the entire human genome. A fanciful tale to be sure, but it has zero basis in the truth or in reality.

You see people who have not put in the time which is necessary to responsibly study God’s words, struggle with the notion of a loving God Who could issue such a command. They perceive a stark difference between the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament. 

Now I am not implying that what they think they are witnessing does not have some superficial external support – it most certainly does. Neither am I arrogantly claiming that I have been able to conclusively answer all objections. But one thing I have learned over the years, we do not need to run to God’s rescue and clean up after Him. He does not need us to be His PR people, making apologies for His anger, wrath and judgment. 

No, what we need to do is take an emotional and even a theological step back from those passages which offend and seek God for Who He really is regardless of where that leads or how that may require a rewriting of our beliefs.

We need to look at God for Who He is, honor that, deal with it and learn from it what we may.

R.C. addressed this apparent softening of God between the testaments and covenants by examining its roots and its development and I have done the same. It does not answer all the questions and in fact, uncovers a few more, but it DOES side-step fanciful explanations and adheres to the facts as they are presented.

Most people looking at some of the commands of God in the Old Testament feel as if He is unduly harsh and is quick to anger – which is different from how He describes Himself to Moses.

“(5) The LORD came down in a cloud, stood with him there, and proclaimed His name Yahweh.

(6)  Then the LORD passed in front of him and proclaimed: 
Yahweh—Yahweh is a compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger and rich in faithful love and truth,  (7)  maintaining faithful love to a thousand generations, forgiving wrongdoing, rebellion, and sin. 

But He will not leave the guilty unpunished, bringing the consequences of the fathers’ wrongdoing on the children and grandchildren to the third and fourth generation.” – Exodus 34:5-7  

And even here we found room for misunderstanding since the word transgressions in the plural here is awon and in this context means that the iniquity and its punishment will continue in the family if left unchecked. This does not go on as long as the outcomes for good (thousands versus third or fourth generations), and it is limited to those who hate God. [Notes from the New English Translation]

Well, says Sproul, not if you look to the standard which goes all the way back to the beginning. God told Adam and Eve that the wages of sin was death. Not specifically in those words, but the only “sin” they were confronted with the potential of committing carried only one penalty and it was death.

Actually, what God said was, in “dying you will die” – which does not refer to two aspects of death: dying spiritually and then dying physically. The construction simply emphasizes the certainty of death, of whatever sort was indicated – which the text in Genesis does not indicate. 

We have at least 2 options as to what happened here:

• God either meant physical death, which God in His mercy commuted until much later in their lives.
• God meant only spiritual death which happened immediately but also made them subject to eventual physical death.

Death is essentially separation. 

• To die physically means separation from the land of the living, but not extinction. 
• To die spiritually means to be separated from God. 

Both occur with sin, although the physical is a progression to death and is more gradual than instant, while the spiritual is immediate, although its effects are continuous and progressively destructive.

The point being that from the beginning we were told the wages or results of sin is certain death. This was the judgment demanded for any and all sin, it was and is an expression orf justice! God is LIFE and to sin is to rebel not against an arbitrary standard of law, but to rebel against His person and place yourself at variance against Him which cannot produce anything BUT death as a result. 

Yet even in the very first sin, God… in His mercy, did not cause them to reap physical death for a very long time – though it did come!

So THAT is the standard. Anything shy of immediate death is mercy. 

So why does it appear to us that the God of the Old Testament is so quick to anger… quick to judge?

Well, like so many things in human experience, we tend to make the mistake that what is common, is normal… even just. 

So it is that when day after day, we do wrong and do not reap the immediate consequence of death, we grow accustomed to mercy as if it IS justice and should be expected. So when judgment finally DOES arrive, we think we have been wronged!

Far from revealing a God of pure judgment, the Old Testament is an overwhelming testimony to God’s mercy. In it, we witness God’s just decree that sin is worthy of death, then as we move forward He didn’t demand death for the very first sin – nor even the very first murder. 

As we progress, we eventually get the 10 commandments and we see in Deuteronomy where the death penalty is assigned to only a few  dozen infractions rather than to all sin – 36 to be specific. 

• The list for sins worthy of death before the law was near infinite since its only limits were the ways in which one could sin. 
• When the law came, the list of death penalty sins was officially reduced, but more people died due to a system in place where justice was able to be systematically carried out.

So people can be excused for not understanding. 

On the surface, it appears the God of the Bible is all over the place in terms of justice. Reading into the text is SO easy to do, especially when the circumstantial evidence is so alarmingly huge and consistent.

But taking a step back and examining what God said from the beginning, allowing our hearts to take it in and give it the full weight it deserves requires us to remember we are dealing with God here. 

God does not mince with words. When He says you will die and that death is the just penalty for all sin He was speaking the truth.

Also, it is impossible for God to misappropriate judgment.

So what is going on here – death is justice, but no one dies immediately for their sin – at least at first.

Then God gives a set of laws, in which the death penalty is immediately decreased to 36 infractions and lots of people die.

What is going on?

The first assumption we make which has to be laid to one side is that God did not lower His standards. Sin is still sin and death is both the penalty and the natural consequence.

The fact that God reduced the tangible list of sins which could result in physical death from near infinite to a list of 36 is an overwhelming expression of mercy!

And even in these cases, God is sovereign over judgment and can resend the death penalty or at least commute it as He did in David’s case. David, as you remember committed at least two sins which carried the death penalty – adultery and premeditated murder.

The child to be born of that union was the one that died as a result.

From a human perspective this is not justice, but from God’s perspective it was not only justice it was mercy.

From there, we move to the New Testament under the New Covenant where sin has been paid for through Jesus Christ, Who died for the sins of the whole world. This is the assumed default for all humans until they reach a point of complete and settled defiance against that provision and then assume the weight, penalty and consequence of their own sins. This even seems to set aside the immediate consequences of at least some offenses which previously evoked the death penalty – adultery being one of them.

Now I want to be careful here since Christians had no official standing in Rome and therefore, probably lacked the legal right to execute someone for a moral crime as did the Jewish community. But in Paul’s handling of adultery we see no reference to the deserving of death, only an urgent need for repentance and there are absolutely NO New Testament examples of murder among Christian where we could witness how such a crime would have been dealt with in the Christian community.

However, none of this sets aside the reality of sowing and reaping, which is different – it is not punitive, it is not judicial, but merely a result. 

So under the New Covenant, mercy is SO common as to be assumed the standard and any judgment is viewed as hateful and harsh.

So in this light, we need to examine what God was calling for in the killing off of these people groups in the land promised to the Jews.

The land God was giving Israel was inhabited by 7 nations who also, had connections with others not immediately in the land God was giving Israel and those other lands Israel did have interactions with and some war, but God’s call for annihilation was ONLY and EXCLUSIVELY for the 7 nations alone.

These are listed in Deuteronomy 7:1 and Deuteronomy 20:16-18 as being the:

• Hittites
• Girgashites
• Amorites
• Canaanites (specific subgroup/tribe)
• Perizzites
• Hivites

In the geographical region of the Promised Land, there were at least 3 to 6 major people groups that were excluded from the specific command for complete destruction (herem).

While the “seven nations” were marked for total destruction because they lived directly within the boundaries of the land Israel was inheriting, God explicitly forbade the Israelites from destroying or taking territory from several neighboring groups. 

Additionally, other regional tribes were handled under a specific set of warfare laws.

The specific groups not included in the call for complete destruction include:

1. The 3 who were directly related Abraham

• The Edomites (Esau’s descendants): Located just south and east of the Dead Sea.
• The Moabites (Lot’s descendants): Located east of the Dead Sea.
• The Ammonites (Lot’s descendants): Located east of the Jordan River.

God strictly commanded Israel not to provoke or destroy three specific nations in the immediate area because they were related to Israel through Abraham and Lot. Israel was told they would receive “not so much as a foot’s length” of their land (Deuteronomy 2).

(Note: In Genesis 15:19-21, God initially promised Abraham a wider region spanning 10 nations. The three extra groups mentioned there—the Kenites, Kenizzites, and Kadmonites—are traditionally identified by rabbinic commentary as falling within these protected territories east of the Jordan, held back for a future time –  possibly the Millennial kingdom).

2. Distant Cities (The “Far Off” Nations)

In Deuteronomy 20:10-15, God established a completely different law of warfare for cities that were “very far from you, which are not of the cities of these nations nearby.”

• Instead of complete destruction, Israel was commanded to offer terms of peace first.
• If they accepted, the inhabitants were spared and subjected to forced labor. If they fought, only the men were killed, while the women, children, and livestock were spared as plunder.

3. Other Regional Groups

Several other notable groups lived in or alongside the Canaanite territory but were distinct from the list of the “seven nations“. 

These included:

• The Philistines: They had migrated to the southern coastal plains of Canaan. While Israel fought them extensively for generations, they were not part of the original seven nations marked for total destruction (herem).
• The Amalekites: A nomadic group dwelling primarily in the Negev desert south of Canaan. While God did later order the destruction of the Amalekites (1 Samuel 15) due to their ambush of Israel during the Exodus, they were treated as a separate judgment outside of the list of 7 Canaanite nations.
• The Rephaim / Anakim: Often described as groups of unusually tall people or “giants” dwelling in places like Hebron and Bashan. While Joshua fought them because they aligned with or lived among the Amorites, they were a distinct ethnic remnant.

I want you to notice who this last group were. They were the very people the modern church believes were half-breeds and the reason why God called for the total destruction of the nations in the Promised Land. In reality, they were not even included in God’s list! We know they were not all destroyed for it is recorded as such in Joshua 11:16-23.

Joshua 11:16-23,

“(16) Thus Joshua took all this land: the mountain country, all the South, all the land of Goshen, the lowland, and the Jordan plain—the mountains of Israel and its lowlands,  (17)  from Mount Halak and the ascent to Seir, even as far as Baal Gad in the Valley of Lebanon below Mount Hermon. 

He captured all their kings, and struck them down and killed them.  

(18)  Joshua made war a long time with all those kings.  

(19)  There was not a city that made peace with the children of Israel, except the Hivites, the inhabitants of Gibeon. All the others they took in battle.  

(20)  For it was of the LORD to harden their hearts, that they should come against Israel in battle, that He might utterly destroy them, and that they might receive no mercy, but that He might destroy them, as the LORD had commanded Moses.  [See Exodus 23:23–33, Deuteronomy 7:1–5, and Deuteronomy 20:16–18]  

(21)  And at that time Joshua came and cut off the Anakim from the mountains: from Hebron, from Debir, from Anab, from all the mountains of Judah, and from all the mountains of Israel; Joshua utterly destroyed them with their cities.  

(22)  None of the Anakim were left IN THE LAND OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL; they remained only in Gaza, in Gath, and in Ashdod.  

(23)  So Joshua took the whole land, according to all that the LORD had said to Moses; and Joshua gave it as an inheritance to Israel according to their divisions by their tribes. Then the land rested from war.”

He captured all their kings, and struck them down and killed them.  

(18)  Joshua made war a long time with all those kings.  

(19)  There was not a city that made peace with the children of Israel, except the Hivites, the inhabitants of Gibeon. All the others they took in battle.  

(20)  For it was of the LORD to harden their hearts, that they should come against Israel in battle, that He might utterly destroy them, and that they might receive no mercy, but that He might destroy them, as the LORD had commanded Moses.  [See Exodus 23:23–33, Deuteronomy 7:1–5, and Deuteronomy 20:16–18]  

(21)  And at that time Joshua came and cut off the Anakim from the mountains: from Hebron, from Debir, from Anab, from all the mountains of Judah, and from all the mountains of Israel; Joshua utterly destroyed them with their cities.  

(22)  None of the Anakim were left IN THE LAND OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL; they remained only in Gaza, in Gath, and in Ashdod.  

(23)  So Joshua took the whole land, according to all that the LORD had said to Moses; and Joshua gave it as an inheritance to Israel according to their divisions by their tribes. Then the land rested from war.”

We later read in 2 Samuel 21 and 1 Chronicles 20 that Goliath and his four relatives (including his brother Lahmi) were descendants of Rapha (or the Rephaim) in Gath. By most accounts this was close to 400 years later. If God had intended to destroy these “so-called” hybrids, He did a terrible job and deliberately let them breed for 400 more years!

So my point is this – God did not call for the complete annihilation of everyone in, near or surrounding Canaan. God only called for the destruction of 7 nations and that was because they had been given that land for a VERY long time, in order to “seek God and find Him” though He was never far from any one of them [See Acts 17:24-28] . These failed, and so God called for their destruction as we covered back in our first review lesson, ‘Old Testament Review – Exodus Part 1’.

Deuteronomy 3 – Moses recounts the kings they conquered in their wilderness wanderings, and their allotment to the tribes of Reuben, Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh across the Jordan. These included…

King Sihon of the Amorites

• Kingdom: The Kingdom of Heshbon.
• Territory Included: His realm spanned from the Arnon Gorge (the southern border) up to the Jabbok River (the boundary of the Ammonites). It encompassed the southern half of Gilead and the eastern Jordan plain (the Arabah) stretching down to the Dead Sea.

King Og of Bashan

• Kingdom: The Kingdom of Bashan (he was noted as one of the last of the giant Rephaites).
• Territory Included: His realm extended from northern Gilead up to Mount Hermon. It prominently featured the entire Argob region, which contained 60 heavily fortified cities with high walls, gates, and bars, as well as numerous unwalled villages. His primary royal cities where he ruled were Ashtaroth and Edrei.

Chapter 4 says something which is born out by modern archeology, legal archaeology and legal history.

Moses tells this second generation,

“(5) Look, I have taught you statutes and ordinances as the LORD my God has commanded me, so that you may follow them in the land you are entering to possess.  (6)  Carefully follow them, for this will show your wisdom and understanding in the eyes of the peoples. When they hear about all these statutes, they will say,
‘This great nation is indeed a wise and understanding people.’ 

(7)  For what great nation is there that has a god near to it as the LORD our God is to us whenever we call to Him? 
(8)  And what great nation has righteous statutes and ordinances like this entire law I set before you today? 

(9)  “Only be on your guard and diligently watch yourselves, so that you don’t forget the things your eyes have seen and so that they don’t slip from your mind as long as you live. Teach them to your children and your grandchildren.” – Deuteronomy 4:5-9 

Max Weber, a highly influential and credited German scholar, in his seminal work Ancient Judaism (Das antike Judentum), painstakingly outlines how ancient Israelite prophecy and the moral codes of the Torah introduced a unique rational religious ethic to the ancient world.

He pointed out how Jewish moral law broke away from the dominant ancient traditions of magic, fatalism, and the status quo.

He argued that by framing the world as a historical product shaped by a single God and human ethical behavior, Judaism laid the indispensable moral and rational foundation for Western civilization, heavily shaping Christianity, Islam, and modern global ethics.

In other words, it took matters of morality and social responsibility and applied a universal absolute to them which was rooted in the notion of a Creator before whom we must give an account. It is the complete opposite of the moral relativism of our day which had had the complete opposite effect of disruption to society by the elevation of the individual above the society and the irrational substitution of individual emotional response to others as the basis for forming societal judgments and codes of ethics.

Other notable modern professors who agree:

• Rabbi Jonathan Sacks (Former Professor of Law, Ethics, and Theolog) Argued that Judaism introduced a profound moral revolution into the ancient world—championing the divine image of every individual, universal education, human dignity, and social responsibility long before modern welfare states emerged.
• Professor John Barton (Professor of Holy Scripture, University of Oxford) Outlines how ancient Israelite law was fundamentally distinct from neighboring Near Eastern codes because its divine laws were consistently tied to universal, rational ethical standards and moral accountability.
• Professor David Novak (Professor of Jewish Studies, University of Toronto) He demonstrates how the foundational moral architecture of Jewish law (such as the universal Noahide Laws) operates on rational presuppositions meant to define universal morality for all humanity.

A quote from a Google search on “The societal moral code outlined in Judaic law has set the outline or underpinning for how many modern systems of law across the world?”

Judaic law, through its historical progression into the Judeo–Christian tradition, serves as a major ethical and foundational pillar for dozens of modern legal systems, primarily across the Western world (including Europe, the Americas, and Oceania). Rather than acting as a direct statutory blueprint, Judaic law—specifically the Mosaic code and Talmudic jurisprudence—underpins modern law by introducing critical conceptual frameworks regarding morality, human value, and judicial fairness. [1, 2, 3]

Legal historians and scholars generally view the influence of Judaic law on modern systems through three distinct channels:

1. Direct Integration in Western Law (Common Law and Civil Law)

The legal structures of most Western countries—representing roughly 80 to 100 jurisdictions worldwide—were heavily shaped by English Common Law and European Civil Law, both of which historically incorporated biblical and canon law. [1, 2]

• The Foundations of Criminal Law: Core prohibitions in modern criminal codes, such as those against murder, theft, and perjury, explicitly mirror the societal boundaries established in the Ten Commandments (specifically the 6th, 8th, and 9th commandments). [1, 2]
• The American Synthesis: Early American jurisprudence was profoundly influenced by Mosaic law. For example, the Puritans modeled early statutory codes and town assemblies explicitly on biblical precedents and synagogue structures. [1, 2]

2. Conceptual Underpinnings of Modern Jurisprudence

Many systemic legal principles taken for granted today have strong roots or early parallels in ancient Talmudic law: [1]

• Due Process & Rules of Evidence: Judaic law rejected arbitrary rule by monarchs, demanding instead rigorous court procedures. It heavily restricted circumstantial evidence and pioneered the requirement of independent witnesses (mirroring modern cross-examination and perjury laws). [1, 2]
• The Presumption of Innocence: The systemic protection of the accused and a baseline philosophical commitment to fair, impartial courts are deeply embedded in the historical Jewish legal process. [1, 2]
• Universal Public Education: Legal mandates for universal public schooling, a bedrock of civil society and modern civic law, find an early historical precursor in systems established in ancient Israel. [1]

3. Direct Application in Modern Sovereignty

• The State of Israel: In the modern Israeli legal system, Halakha (Jewish law) holds direct, binding jurisdiction over specific areas of personal status, including marriage, divorce, and inheritance for Jewish citizens. Furthermore, Israeli secular courts frequently consult historical Jewish legal principles for “general equity” and legislative guidance. [1, 2, 3]

While modern secular states do not enforce religious or ritual commandments, the foundational idea that laws must stem from a higher, universal moral code—rather than the whims of a ruler—remains Judaism’s most lasting contribution to the global rule of law. 

This is an OUTSTANDING attribution to the Word of God found in the Torah and it perfectly agrees with the inspired observations and statements Moses made to this second generation of Israelites before entering the promised land. It was also a solid argument for observing them and being committed to loyal obedience to God through them.