Week 68, Day 4: Choose
Today’s Reading: Joshua 24:1-33
Some thoughts from today’s reading…
Joshua brings Israel together to address them one last time. He reminds them of all that God has done for them. He also points out that God brought their fathers from a far away land where they served other gods to this land. He emphasizes all of these things to convict them to be faithful to God alone. They need to choose who they are going to serve. Not going back and forth or being lead astray after the gods of the Amorites. They tell Joshua that they will serve the Lord. So Joshua sets up a “witness” against them because it has heard what they have committed to doing. This witness is a stone that was nearby. In the years to come the good land Israel inherited would witness the unfaithful acts of Israel. But as long as Joshua and the elders who lived during his time were alive, Israel remained faithful to God.
Question: Do you think Joshua knew that Israel would be unfaithful?
Popularity: unranked [?]
Week 68, Day 3: Joshua’s warning
Today’s Reading: Joshua 23:1-16
Some thoughts from today’s reading…
Joshuas is nearing death. He gathers Israel to give them some last words of warning. Joshua is very aware of the trouble that surrounds Israel. They have many of the inhabitants of the land now living relatively close to the sons of Israel. There will be the temptation to interact with and be influenced by these people. Joshua gives Israel a strong warning not to associate with them, don’t adopt their gods, and don’t intermarry with them. They were to be firm. Not yielding or straying from God’s commands. The consequence for not obeying would be disaster.
Question: What does it mean when Joshua says in verse 14 that he is going the way of all the earth?
Popularity: unranked [?]
Week 68, Day 2: The Witness
Today’s Reading: Joshua 22:1-34
Some thoughts from today’s reading…
This chapter displays for us how attentive Israel was during this time to be want to please God. A blatent act of unfaithfulness was not going to be tolerated. When Gad, Reuben and Manasseh built this other alter it was perceived as being another place of worship (instead of the tabernacle at Shiloh) and therefore viewed as straying away from serving Jehovah. Notice that the chiefs refer to the sin of peor and the sin of Achan when speaking to Gad and Reuben. The leaders were very concerned about a sin among the children of Israel causing trouble and distress for the rest of Israel. They sought then to correct this problem quickly before it evoked God’s anger.
It is interesting though to see how Israel reacts to what is perceived to be a blatent act of rebellion verses more subtle actions. Was a lack of diligence in taking the land any less an act of rebellion? Israel was commanded to be diligent to drive out all of the inhabitants (Deut 7:2). This was a command just as much as being faithful to serve God only. Instead we read of times where when Israel became strong they made the Canaanites their forced labor instead of destroying them. Certainly God had said that He would drive out the inhabitant over some period of time so that the land did not become overrun by wild animals (Deut 7:22). But at some point the people begin to display a willingness to allow some to stay, a lack of trust in God to help them drive out the inhabitants, and a lack of dilligence in taking the land.
Question: How do you think we can be on our guard against the subtle acts of disobedience as well as blatent acts of disobedience in our lives and the lives of our family?
Popularity: unranked [?]
Week 68, Day 1: The Levite’s Possession
Today’s Reading: Joshua 21:1-45
Some thoughts from today’s reading…
It makes sense that now that the land has been divided up among the tribes that they would then alot which cities are to be given as the portion for the Levites. The Levites did not receive a chunk of land like the rest of the tribes because their inheritance was the Lord. So they were given cities to live in as well as the pature lands for that city. I want you to notice that cities of refuge and other cities were given to the Levites on the East side of the Jordan. Although not originally promised to the Israelites as their inheritance, we see no distinction now being made in regard to this eastern land. Cities of refuge are set up there just like they were assigned west of the Jordan. Cities were given to the Levites east of the Jordan just like they were given to them West of the Jordan.
The other key point I see in this text comes at the very end of the passage. We are told that the Lord gave them all the land promised to their fathers and that not one of the good promises which the Lord had made failed, they all came to pass. We have pointed out in previous post where some statements were made about Israel not driving out the inhabitants from a certain place. I think that we need to see clearly that God kept His promise to deliver the land to them and to provide Israel with victory over their enemies. But we are also told of where Israel failed. This failure was not due to God not keeping His promise but because they did not do as God commanded them or did not trust in God as they should have. Those inhabitants who were still left to be driven out were to now be overcome. Israel still had to go and destroy them as well. But we will see in time that Israel did not do as they should and were not diligent to take the rest of the land. How sad.
Question: The Levites approached Eleazar and Joshua at Shiloh. What is currently set up at Shiloh during this time? Why does this make Shiloh an important place for the time being?
Popularity: unranked [?]
Week 67, Day 5: Refuge
Today’s Reading: Joshua 20:1-9
Some thoughts from today’s reading…
One of the things left to be done after dividing the land was to set up cities of refuge. God set up these cities as a place for a man guilty of manslaughter to flee to. Two conditions were given; he had to kill the man unintentionally and without hatred for him beforehand. If his situation met these conditions then he would remain in the city, kept safe from the avenger of blood and await his trial before the congregation.
Question: Why do you think God would set up cities for someone guilty of manslaughter? Knowing the conditions required before the manslayer would be allowed to stay in the city of refuge, how do you think these condition should shape our sense of justice?
Popularity: unranked [?]
Week 67, Day 4: Dividing the rest
Today’s Reading: Joshua 19:1-51
Some thoughts from today’s reading…
After the surveying was completed, Joshua divides the rest of the land by lots. Here we have detailed for us who received their portion. Much of the land still remained to be taken. If you look at the map of how far they came into the land you will see that Israel did not take the land all the way to the great sea, rather they went about two-thirds of the way into the land and then went north or south. We are not told why this is but if you look at the geography of the land, Israel took the land until they came to the plains along the coast. Israel took the hilly inner region of palestine but did not push out into the plains along the coast. This makes me wonder if this is because of the comment made in 17:16 where they reference the iron chariots of those who live in the valley. In the plains or valleys the inhabitants would have had chariots to use in their warfare. This is another indicator that Israel was not trusting fully in God to deliver the inhabitants into their hands, no matter what weapons they had.
Also consider that within the tribe of Asher’s territory were two well known cities. Sidon and Tyre. Tyre is described as a fortified city. Certainly these cities would require determination to take and great strength if it were just up to man to overthrow them. But Israel had God’s promise that He would fight for them and with them. This truth had been displayed through their many victories and through the overthrow of such places as Jericho. What match was a fortified city to an army who captain is the Lord?
Question: What was left for the children of Israel to do now that they have apportioned the land?
Popularity: unranked [?]
Week 67, Day 3: Surveying the rest
Today’s Reading: Joshua 18:1-28
Some thoughts from today’s reading…
Apparently I had a lapse of memory and forgot to make the post yesterday.
Chapter 18 gives us another indicator that Israel was not doing as it should in possessing the land. We have already seen several examples of where they did not drive out certain inhabitants and where they instead used some as their servants. Here we have recorded that Joshua speaks to Israel and gives them a reproof because only 5 tribes have taken possession of their land. This makes it sound like the other seven tribes are not anxious to move forward and leave the camp at Shiloh to go and possess their land. I take this as a negative because they are not expressing any sense of being anxious to take the land for themselves. Joshua’s question to them was “how long will you put off entering to take possession of the land?”
We are told of 3 men from each tribe surveying the land and which portion Benjamin gets. So the men map out the land and then Joshua casts lots for who gets what. Thus no disagreements should come up that someone got an unfair portion of land or were shown favortism. They surveyed the land together, divided it togetherr but then who got which portion was selected by the casting of the lots.
Question: What could be considered important about the cities or location of Benjamin’s portion?
Popularity: unranked [?]
Week 67, Day 2: Manasseh’s portion
Today’s Reading: Joshua 17:1-18
Some thoughts from today’s reading…
Manasseh’s portion stretched over a large stretch of land. On the east side of the Jordan Manasseh’s portion included the regions of Bashan and Gilead. These areas were the northern portion of the land on the eastern side. We are told that this portion was given to the descendants of Manasseh’s son Mchir because he was a man of war. This region was on the frontline and would be likely attacked by foreign armies. It seems appropriate to give this portion to a man of war so that he would be accustomed to the hardships of conflict.
We have also told to us another account of the sons of Israel not driving out the inhabitants of the land. So far, this is the third tribe to receive its land and the third time that we are told they didn’t drive out the inhabitants. Not a good trend. I again will point to the problem with Israel not being “able” to take the land as being due to their lack of faith or trust rather than any problem with God delivering upon His promises. Here we have manasseh complaining about how strong the Canaanites are who live in the valley. They have iron chariots! After all this time, after all the miracles and great victories given to them and they still let appearance affect their determination. This is the same problem their fathers had when they first came to spy out the land. They saw a strong, tall, well fortified people and became distressed. How is Manasseh’s response now any different? Too often today Christians will walk by faith, being strong in their commitment but then some tempest or trial will come up that shakes their faith. Let us strive to make certain that our reliance in God is sure and complete. He will never leave us nor forsake us and He is always true to His promises.
Question: Why did Ephraim and Manasseh complain about their inheritance?
Popularity: unranked [?]
Week 67, Day 1: Joseph’s portions
Today’s Reading: Joshua 16:1-10
Some thoughts from today’s reading…
We now have recorded the giving of Joseph’s portions of the inheritance. I say portions because Joseph received two portions. Both of his sons received a portion so he received two portions of the land. This again reflects Jacob’s favortism toward Joseph over the other brothers.
We have another statement given at the end of detailing Ephraim’s possession that tells us some of the inhabitants of the land were not driven out. This time there is no mention of not being able to do overcome them. Rather we are told that they did not drive them out and they were made forced laborers. This again reflects that there is something wrong with how Israel is taking the land. God had instructed them to remove ALL of the peoples and to not spare them, pitty them or make covenants with them. Here is yet another time stated where they do not remove them. In order to make these people forced laborers indicates that they subjugated them. If you can subjugate a people then you can defeat them. Ephraim was able to defeat these people, but for some reason they allowed them to stay. Violations like these will lead to God turning against Israel. They will soon not have the Lord fighting for them to drive out the rest of the inhabitants which will lead to further conflicts down the road. I can imagine Ephraim being willing to let these few people remain so that they may serve them. I can imagine that they reasoned that these people were few and would not be a problem. But when man begins to alter or stray from God’s commands there will be unintended consequences. They didn’t think about what consequences would come from such disobedience. Again, it is sad to see how Israel squandered a rich blessing from God (to deliver the land completely to them).
Question: If Joseph received two portions of the land and there are still only 12 portions given, whose other portion of land did he receive?
Popularity: unranked [?]
Week 66, Day 5: Judah’s portion
Today’s Reading: Joshua 15:1-63
Some thoughts from today’s reading…
This chapter details for us the border of the territory of Judah. It is hard to follow the exact lay of the territory from just reading the description. But you can easily tell from the description that the lay out of the land was very detailed. I was also struck by the number of cities inherited by Judah. Remember that in the counting of Israel before entering the land, Judah had 76,500 men in it, Num 26:22. The territory of Judah is one of the larger territories.
We also have a note given in this chapter regarding Jerusalem. It is interesting to read that Judah was unable to drive out the inhabitants of Jerusalem. I wonder if this was because of some lack of trust in Jehovah by the people of Judah or if this was due to some plan that God was setting into place for later.
Question: What problems could arise later for Israel if the territories were not clearly laid out?
Popularity: unranked [?]