ellauri164.html on line 818: As Aaron’s staff was chosen above all others, so Christ is above all others. We are a royal priesthood; but He is our High Priest.
ellauri164.html on line 871: This pattern shows itself again in the beginning of Numbers 20 after the death of Miriam. Once more Israel rebels against Moses and Aaron, this time over a lack of water in the desert of Zin. They claim that it would have been better to have died with Korah’s rebellion rather than wander without food and water, and they express regret over leaving Egypt, a land of “grain, figs, vines, and pomegranates.” This might seem a bold claim, since in our reading Korah has just died a few chapters earlier. Careful reading, however, indicates that there’s actually been a quiet time skip; Numbers 33:38 indicates that Aaron died in “the fortieth year after the sons of Israel had come from the land of Egypt, on the first day in the fifth month.” Given that Aaron’s death is recorded in Chapter 20, just a few verses after the episode at Meribah, this would indicate that the episode at Meribah occurred in year 38 of the 40 year wandering in the wilderness (remember that Israel had spent more than a year at Sinai in addition to travel time from Egypt to Sinai and from Sinai to the Promised Land before the wandering). This means that this rebellious generation of Israelites aren’t referencing a recent event, but instead wishing they had died nearly forty years earlier with Korah! Moses and Aaron have been dealing with this wicked and hard group of people for a very long time, and they are now claiming it would have been better to have died with Korah: a fate they were only spared because of Moses and Aaron’s own intercession!
ellauri164.html on line 873: We would expect the pattern to repeat here. The people have rebelled, so the next part would be God’s wrath and threats of destruction. Instead, however, God merely grants their request for water. No mention of sin or possible annihilation, just grace in providing for Israel’s needs. The fact that this cycle we’ve come to expect changes is designed to highlight an important event; the oddity of the text “awakens us from our narrative slumber,” as one commentator puts it, and forces us to pay attention closely to what’s occurring. Why would God not threaten destruction? To answer that, we have to remember a key aspect of God’s character: He does not change. Hebrews 13:8 says He is the same yesterday and today and forever, “without variation or shifting shadow,” (James 1:17). The purpose of the threats of destruction, and Moses/Aaron’s intercession, was not to actually change God’s mind. God knew exactly what was going to happen in all these instances. God’s threats on Israel are spoken to Moses so that Moses will intercede. They are tests of Moses’ (and Aaron’s) character, just as God’s conversation with Abraham over the fates of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18) was about testing Abraham’s character rather than the doomed cities. Yet here, in Numbers 20, God does not follow the pattern. Why?
3