Milo

Carrickfergus (from Irish: Carraig Fhearghais [ˌkaːɾˠəɟ ˈaɾˠɣəʃ], meaning “Fergus‘ rock”) is a large town in County Antrim, Northern Ireland. It sits on the north shore of Belfast Lough, 11 miles (18 km) from Belfast. The town had a population of 27,998 at the 2011 Census. It is County Antrim’s oldest town and one of the oldest towns in Ireland as a whole. Carrickfergus was the administrative centre for Carrickfergus Borough Council, before this was amalgamated into the Mid and East Antrim District Council in 2015, and forms part of the Belfast Metropolitan Area. It is also a townland of 65 acres, a civil parish and a barony.

The town is the subject of the classic Irish folk song “Carrickfergus“, a 19th-century translation of an Irish-language song (Do Bhí Bean Uasal) from Munster, which begins with the words, “I wish I was in Carrickfergus”.

The British peerage title of Baron Carrickfergus, which had become extinct in 1883, was bestowed upon Prince William on his wedding day in 2011.

The town is said to take its name from Fergus Mór (Fergus the Great), the legendary king of Dál Riata. According to one tale, his ship ran aground on a rock by the shore, which became known as “Carraig Fhearghais” – the rock of Fergus.

As an urban settlement, Carrickfergus far pre-dates the capital city Belfast and was for a lengthy period both larger and more prominent than the nearby city. Belfast Lough itself was known as ‘Carrickfergus Bay’ well into the 17th century. Carrickfergus and the surrounding area was, for a time, treated as a separate county. The historical walled town originally occupied an area of around 97,000 square metres, which now comprises the town centre, bordered by Albert Road to the west, the Marine Highway to the south, Shaftesbury Park to the north and Joymount Presbyterian Church grounds to the east. Segments of the town wall are still visible in various parts of the town and in various states of preservation. Archaeological excavations close to the walls’ foundations have yielded many artefacts that have helped historians piece together a picture of the lives of the 12th and 13th century inhabitants.

Carrickfergus became an inhabited town shortly after 1170, when Anglo-Norman knight John de Courcy invaded Ulster, established his headquarters in the area and built Carrickfergus Castle on the “rock of Fergus” in 1177. The castle, which is the most prominent landmark of Carrickfergus, is widely known as one of the best-preserved Norman castles in Ireland.

Sometime between 1203 and 1205, De Courcy was expelled from Ulster by Hugh de Lacy, as authorised by King John. de Lacy oversaw the final construction of the castle, which included the gatehouse, drum towers and outer ward. It was at this time that he established the nearby St Nicholas’ Church. de Lacy was relieved of his command of the town in 1210, when King John himself arrived and placed the castle under royal authority. de Lacy eventually regained his title of Earl of Ulster in 1227, however the castle and its walled town were captured several more times following his death (in 1242) and the town largely destroyed by the Scots in 1402.

The Battle of Carrickfergus, part of the Nine Years War, took place in and around the town in November 1597. It was fought between the crown forces of Queen Elizabeth I and the Scots clan of MacDonnell, and resulted in a defeat for the English. A contemporary Elizabethan illustration of Carrickfergus shows ten tower-houses, as well as terraces of single-storey houses, some detached cottages and 70 or more Irish beehive-type huts in the town. A drawing of Carrickfergus Castle circa 1840.

Sir Arthur Chichester was appointed by the Earl of Essex to govern the castle and town in 1599 and was responsible for the plantation of English and Scottish peoples in the town, as well as the building of the town wall.

In 1637 the Surveyor General of Customs issued a report compiled from accounts of customs due from each port and their “subsidiary creeks”. Of the Ulster ports on the list, Carrickfergus was first, followed by Bangor, Donaghadee, and Strangford. In the same year the town sold its customs rights – which ran from Groomsport, County Down, up to Larne, County Antrim, to Belfast. This in part led to its decline in importance as the province of Ulster grew. A plaque at the harbour commemorates the landing of William of Orange in the town in 1690.

Nevertheless, the decaying castle withstood several days of siege by the forces of William of Orange in 1689, before surrendering on 28 August. William himself subsequently landed at Carrickfergus on 14 June 1690.St Nicholas’ Church in the town of Carrickfergus

During the Seven Years’ War, in February 1760, the whole town was briefly captured and held to ransom by French troops landed from Francois Thurot‘s naval squadron, after the defenders ran out of ammunition. In 1711 Carrickfergus was the scene of the last witchcraft trial in Ireland. Eight women were charged with bewitching a young girl, and were convicted, despite a strong indication from one of the judges that the jury should acquit. They were sentenced to a year in prison and four sessions in the pillory.

In April 1778, during the American War of Independence, John Paul Jones, in command of the American ship Ranger, attempted to capture a British Royal Navy sloop of war, HMS Drake, moored at Carrickfergus. Having failed, he returned a few days later and challenged Drake to a fight out in the North Channel which the Americans won decisively.

During the 1790s there was considerable support in the Carrickfergus area for the United Irishmen.^[15] On 14 October 1797 William Orr was hanged in the town following what was widely regarded as a show trial held in Carrickfergus Courthouse^[16] (now the Town Hall) and in 1798 United Irish founder Henry Joy McCracken was captured on the outskirts of the town while trying to escape to America.

In 1912 the people of Carrickfergus turned out in their thousands to watch as the RMS Titanic made its first ever journey up the lough from its construction dock in Belfast. The famous passenger liner was anchored overnight just off the coast of Carrickfergus, before continuing on its journey. View of Carrickfergus Castle from the dock, June 2020.

During World War II, Northern Ireland was an important military base for United States Naval and Air Operations and a training ground for American G.I.s. The First Battalions of the elite US Rangers were activated and based in Sunnylands Camp for their initial training. The US Rangers Centre in nearby Boneybefore pays homage to this period in history. It is rumoured that Italian and German POWs were held in the town, the Italians in a camp at Sullatober mill, and Germans at Sunnylands.

FEBRUARY 4

Reading 35

PROMISES TO PILGRIMS Numbers 31–36

“Take possession of the land and settle in it, for I have given you the land to possess” (Num. 33:53).Israel reached the border of the Promised Land. Everything in these last chapters can be taken as a firm promise that God will give His people victory and peace.

Overview

Israel crushed the Midianites (31:1–54), and 2 of the 12 tribes were granted their lands (32:1–42). Moses reviewed Israel’s journey (33:1–49). He charged the people to utterly destroy the Canaanites (vv. 50–56), fixed the boundaries of the Promised Land (34:1–29), and reminded Israel to set aside towns for the Levites and as cities of refuge (35:1–34). He also commanded that women who inherit land must marry within their own tribe (36:1–13).

Understanding the Text

“Take vengeance on the Midianites” Num. 31:1–24. The Midianites had not only opposed the Israelites, but had carried out Balaam’s strategy and turned many Israelites to idolatry. The complete destruction of Midian was a divine judgment on this sin and on idolatry itself. Often God uses human beings as instruments to punish sin. “Not one is missing” Num. 31:25–54. The strength of the enemy is suggested by the 808,000 animals and 32,000 virgins taken as spoil. In Bible times girls married in their early teens, so the 32,000 represent a small percentage of the total population. When roll was called by the Israelite commanders, they discovered that this total victory had been won without the loss of a single man! The victory over Midian was a preview and promise of the success God would bring His people if they continued to trust Him. This time Israel responded appropriately. They donated all the gold they had acquired as a gift to the Lord. God’s people had at last learned to be thankful. “Let this land be given . . . as our possession” Num. 32:1–42. At first Moses took the request of the Reubenites and Gadites for the land of the Midianites as a failure to follow God wholeheartedly. The promise of these tribes to join in the battle for Canaan showed they remained committed to the Lord. We need to measure others by their commitment to God, not whether they agree with us completely. “Here are the stages” Num. 33:1–49. Commentators have come up with a variety of creative theories about the significance of the 42 stops mentioned here. Yet one thing is very clear. God had brought His people from Egypt to the very border of Canaan. Despite Israel’s sins and failures, despite desolate and waterless wastes, despite enemy armies, God had been faithful. Looking back at each stage of the journey, Israel could see in what had happened a preview of the future. The God who had kept them safe would surely fight for them when they at last invaded the Promised Land. Looking back can have similar value for us. Yes, we’ll find many examples of personal failure. We’ll recall times when life seemed desolate and empty. But we will also realize that God has brought us through those times, has guided, strengthened, and brought us safely to the present moment. Remembering God’s faithfulness helps us to move ahead confidently as we take our next step toward the Promised Land. “Drive out all the inhabitants of the land” Num. 33:50–56. Moses repeated God’s command to expel all the Canaanites from the Promised Land. Too-intimate association with pagan peoples would corrupt Israel. God’s people were to remain separate and pure. The New Testament reflects this thought, with a significant modification. Paul notes that the only way we could avoid contact with pagans and their practices would be to “leave this world” (1 Cor. 5:10). So we are simply to avoid being “yoked together” with unbelievers (2 Cor. 6:14). We are to identify with our fellow believers, not with the unsaved. If our hearts belong to the Lord alone, and our most intimate values are shaped within a Christian community, then we will remain both separate and pure, able to represent Jesus to the people of this world. “Give the Levites towns” Num. 35:1–5. Towns for the Levites were scattered through the territory of the other tribes. In this way the Levites, who with the priests were to teach God’s Law to Israel, would be available. We can’t influence those with whom we have no contact. “Cities of refuge” Num. 35:6–34. Old Testament Law makes a clear distinction between premeditated murder and accidental homicide. Specific situations are included as cases from which precedents can be drawn. No national or local police force existed in Israel. The people of each community were responsible to enforce God’s laws, after a jury of local elders determined the facts of each case. In the event of a killing, it was the responsibility of a near relative of the victim, called the “avenger of blood,” to execute the murderer. The law is very strict in its treatment of premeditated murder. “Bloodshed pollutes the land, and atonement cannot be made for the land on which blood has been shed, except by the blood of the one who shed it.” God would provide the land for His people. They were responsible to maintain its purity. Cities of refuge were located so that anyone who killed another person accidentally would be within a day’s journey of safety. God, who judges the guilty, is quick to safeguard the innocent. “Marry within the tribal clan” Num. 36:1–13. The Promised Land was to be divided among the tribes of Israel. Each tribe, and each family within the tribe, was to hold the plot of land it was given perpetually, as a permanent heritage from the Lord. While the daughters of Zelophehad were guaranteed land, they were told to marry within their tribe in order to preserve that tribe’s heritage. What God gives us is not to be lightly transferred to others.

DEVOTIONAL

It’s Their Choice (Num. 32)

Many years ago I was best man at a friend’s wedding. Jack was a young flier whom our pastor was convinced should go to the mission field as a Missionary Aviation Fellowship pilot. I remember how upset the pastor was when Jack announced he was getting married and staying with his airline. Pastor was convinced that Jack had chosen something less than God’s best. Moses would have understood our pastor’s reaction. He was just as upset when the tribes of Reuben and Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh petitioned him to give them the Trans-Jordan region they had taken from the Midianites. The problem was that this territory lay outside Canaan, the land that God had promised to Abraham. Was their request wise, or even right? The text gives no clear answer, though at first glance settling outside the Promised Land would seem to be an outright rejection of God’s stated purpose and promises. Yet two things suggest that the request was not motivated by a lack of commitment or of faith. The petitioning tribes promised to “cross over to fight” in the battle for Canaan. The Hebrew here is impressive. It actually says “hurrying before the Israelites” (v. 17). The tribes of Reuben and Gad demonstrated their commitment by their willingness to lead Israel into battle and bear the brunt of the attack. They showed their trust in God by a readiness to leave their families and herds unprotected while the fighting men went off to the war. Moses accepted these conditions and granted Rueben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh vast lands east of the Jordan River. It is a good thing to remember when you or I are tempted to stand in judgment over another person’s decision. Moses may not have liked the decision Reuben and Gad made. But, convinced of their commitment and trust in God, Moses granted them the freedom to make it. You and I can’t really say what God’s best for another person is. And our view isn’t really important. What counts is still his or her commitment to, and active trust in, God. Each person must have the freedom to follow where God leads.

Personal Application

The most important advice we can give another person is, Trust the Lord, and follow wherever He leads.

Quotable

“Every time we say, ’I believe in the Holy Spirit’ we mean that we believe there is a living God able and willing to enter human personality and change it.”—J.B. Phillips

FEBRUARY 3

Reading 34

PROSPECTS FOR PILGRIMS Numbers 26–30

“The land is to be allotted to them as an inheritance” (Num. 26:53).Purified again, the Israelites prepared to enter the Promised Land. The incidents and laws reported in these chapters serve as promises to God’s people. Canaan was ahead, and victory was assured.

Overview

A military census revealed Israel’s readiness to attack Canaan (26:1–65). Confidence that Israel will possess her heritage was shown by Zelophehad’s daughters (27:1–11), by the commissioning of Joshua (vv. 12–23), and by a review of offerings to be made perpetually after the Conquest (28:1–29:40). Rules for personal vows, frequently made just before a war, were clarified (30:1–16).

Understanding the Text

“Not one of them” Num. 26:1–65. The census taken of those able to serve in the army established two important facts. The total number of men available was 601,730; just a few thousand less than 40 years before. And “not one of them was among those counted by Moses and Aaron the priest when they counted the Israelites in the Desert of Sinai” (v. 64). The old, disobedient generation was dead. Yet the community had suffered no loss of strength! The obedient would inherit the land the disobedient despised. “He died and left no sons” Num. 27:1–11. Moses was approached by five daughters of a man who had died and left no sons. Their request for property reflects the patriarchal structure of Israelite society. Only sons inherited, and the eldest son received twice as much as younger brothers. First, the request reflected the daughters’ faith that Israel would be successful and take Canaan. Only in victory would there be land for them to inherit. This illustrates the way many Old Testament laws were developed. A new situation occurred, Moses brought the case to the Lord, and God’s ruling became the precedent for determining similar cases. “Commission him in their presence” Num. 27:12–23. The closer Israel came to Canaan, the nearer the time approached for Moses to die. Moses put aside any fears for himself and thought of what his death might mean to Israel. He prayed that God would “appoint a man over this community” to replace him. The incident demonstrates Moses’ stature as a truly godly man. The New Testament gives us a partial definition of Christlikeness when it says, “Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others” (Phil. 2:4). God responded to this prayer and told Moses to publicly commission Joshua to succeed him. Laying on of hands here is a symbol of transference of leadership. It’s good to know that, when people we depend on move on, God has others ready to fill their shoes. “Present to Me at the appointed time . . . My offerings made by fire” Num. 28:1–29:40. The function of the next section, with its details concerning ritual offerings, seems out of place. Why here, rather than in a book like Leviticus? These regulations function here as a divine promise. God specifies the animals which are to be offered to Him each day of the year, throughout Israel’s occupation of its land. Adding them up, we see that each year the Israelites are to offer 113 bulls, 32 rams, and 1,086 lambs, plus over a ton of flour and a thousand measures of oil and wine. This is in addition to any freewill offerings or sin offerings made by the people. The daily, week-after-week, and month-after-month listing of the offerings is a dual promise. Israel would surely occupy the land where the offerings were to be made. And that land would prove fertile, rich enough to support the Israelites and to provide generous offerings for the Lord. “When a man makes a vow” Num. 30:1–16. Vows were voluntary pledges to give money or something else of value to the Lord. Once a person uttered such an oath, it was binding and could not be broken. Vows often took the form of bargains: “If God does this, then I will . . . ” (cf. Gen. 28:20–22; 1 Sam. 1:11). It was quite common for individuals to make vows just before a nation went to war (Jdg. 11:30–31; 21:1–7). Now, just before Israel was about to invade Canaan, the laws concerning vows are clarified. Briefly, any man making a vow was bound by it. Married or single women could also make vows but if, when first hearing of it, a husband or father wished, he could void the vow. The passage introduces an important legal principle. If the husband or father does not say anything when first hearing of a wife or young daughter’s vow, the vow is binding. Silence implies consent. It’s the same today. If you and I fail to speak out concerning something that is wrong but remain silent, our silence implies consent. And makes us a party to the wrong.

DEVOTIONAL

The Prospect for Women (Num. 27:1–11)

“It’s time to leave that church,” Carol insisted. “I simply won’t have my daughter brought up in an atmosphere where women are constantly put down.” What bothered Carol wasn’t so much what church leaders said as what they did. Everything was done by men. There were no women ushers. Women never spoke from the pulpit—not even to give an announcement. Only men were allowed to serve Communion. Only men served on the church board. Carol realized that her church had much to commend it. But the impression that women don’t count, subtly conveyed by the church’s practices, created a sense of oppression she could no longer stand. The issue raised by Zelophehad’s five daughters seems to mirror Carol’s concern. Didn’t Israel’s patriarchal system discriminate against women? Weren’t women second-class citizens in Israel too? Some might even argue that Israel’s male-dominated culture is precedent for ruling women out of significant participation in churches today! But were women discriminated against? On the surface, perhaps. However, when an Israelite girl married, her father provided her with a dowry. This marriage gift, frequently of clothing, jewelry, furniture, money, or even slave-girls, represented the daughter’s share in the family estate. So women were valued and they did get their fair share! They simply received that share in a different way than through inheritance. The story reminds us how important it is to understand the whole Old Testament way of life before we judge the fairness or unfairness of specific practices, and before we apply principles drawn from them to modern times. What the story of Zelophehad’s daughters actually reminds us of is that women did count in Israel. The significance of daughters was simply shown in a different way than that of sons. Yet each was valued. And each deserved a fair share of all the family possessed. Perhaps what we should draw from this story is a challenge to reevaluate practices in our churches. The importance of women may not need to be affirmed in the same way that the importance of men is shown. But unless we do affirm women as full participants in the Christian commmunity, we violate their personhood, and deny the gifts that God has given to each and every one.

Personal Application

As we journey toward the Promised Land there’s a place of service for every pilgrim.

Quotable

“Scripture ultimately proves that the Apostle Paul had high regard for the work and ministry of women. Scripture shows that local churches and other Christian ministries should eagerly endeavor to find fulfilling effective ministries for the godly women who serve them. Some of the tragic situations arising out of intense counseling between members of the opposite sex might well be avoided by allowing godly women to exercise their calling to counsel other women. . . . Many other facets of God’s work often stand or fall on the availability of godly effective women to lead them.”—H. Wayne House

FEBRUARY 2

Reading 33

HOSTILITY TO PILGRIMS Numbers 22–25

“Now come and put a curse on these people” (Num. 22:6).In one way or another, believers on pilgrimage to God’s Promised Land do threaten others. When opposition comes, it’s good to remember that while some may curse us, God is committed to blessing us.

Overview

When Israel approached, the terrified Moabites and Midianites summoned Balaam, a pagan prophet, to curse God’s people (22:1–8). Despite repeated warnings Balaam went to Moab (vv. 9–41). Three attempts to curse Israel failed, as God forced Balaam to bless Israel instead (23–24). The wily prophet suggested the Moabites seduce Israel into idolatry to force God Himself to curse His people (25:1–5). The plot failed when a godly priest intervened (vv. 6–18).

Understanding the Text

“Summon Balaam son of Beor” Num. 22:1–21. The approach of Israel terrified the Moabites and Midianites. Balaam was summoned to curse Israel. Here “curse” is a magic utterance believed to bind or limit another’s powers. Biblical passages invariably picture Balaam as a perverse character who loved money rather than God and was all too eager to curse Israel (cf. Deut. 23:4–5; 2 Peter 2:15; Jude 11; Rev. 2:14). The Old Testament says that Balaam was given “the fee for divination,” and commonly would “resort to sorcery” (Num. 22:7; 24:1). These pagan practices are abominations forbidden in Israel (Deut. 18:10). Numbers 31:8–16 says that Balaam suggested Israel’s enemies seduce God’s people and lead them into idolatry, in hopes that God would then be forced to curse them. In view of all this, we can better understand Balaam’s motives and his actions. Balaam’s constant reference to money should be seen as a subtle demand for a larger fee. His insistence that he would say only what God wanted him to say was not piety, but an effort to promote himself as God’s appointed spokesman. While at first glance Balaam looked and sounded pious, piety was a front in his case intended to cover greed. “Build me seven altars” Num. 23:1–6. Balaam followed a procedure laid out on a cuneiform tablet found in Babylon. That tablet prescribes, “At dawn, in the presence of Ea, Shamash and Marduk, you must set up seven altars, place seven incense burners of cypress and pour out the blood of seven sheep.” The position of Balak “beside your offering,” and Balaam’s choice of a barren height to seek some revelation, also reflect common pagan practices. Balaam was a pagan, following a pagan ritual, when God seized the initiative and spoke through him. “Balaam uttered his oracle” Num. 23:7–24:9. The sacrifices were repeated three times, from three different heights. From each a different section of Israel’s camp could be seen. Much to Balaam and Balak’s frustration, each attempt to curse Israel was transformed by God into a blessing. The first blessing (23:7–10) reflects on God’s choice of Israel to be “a people who live apart and do not consider themselves one of the nations.” How can Balaam curse a people whom God has not cursed? How important this is for us to remember. We may experience hatred and even persecution on our Christian pilgrimage. But how can anyone harm a people God has not cursed? Paul reflects this reality in Romans 8:31 when he says, “If God is for us, who can be against us?” The second blessing (Num. 23:18–24) focuses on God’s presence among His people. “The Lord their God is with them; the shout of the King is among them.” Therefore, “there is no sorcery against Jacob, no divination against Israel.” What Balak fears will surely happen: Israel’s army will be like a lion that “devours his prey and drinks the blood of his victims.” Today too it is God’s presence that keeps us safe. Because of Him, it is our enemies who will ultimately know defeat. The third blessing (24:3–9) predicts Israel’s settlement in the land. Then it passes on to predict a day when a king “greater than Agag” will appear, and “their kingdom will be exalted.” Saul, Israel’s first king, did defeat Agag. Under the second king, David, Israel’s kingdom was “exalted.” Our future too is certain and bright. “In days to come” Num. 24:10–25. A furious Balak refused to pay Balaam, who argued that he could only say what God commanded. Balaam then volunteered additional oracles which portrayed the doom of Israel’s enemies. The Hebrew rendered “in days to come” is literally “in the latter days.” That phrase may simply mean “in the future,” but often indicates history’s end. The clear direct reference of “a star will come out of Jacob; a scepter will rise out of Israel” is to David, with probable allusion to David’s greater Son, Jesus. The Dead Sea Scrolls and many rabbis viewed the passage as messianic. David did in fact crush Moab and Edom, as Balaam predicted. Other prophecies in these oracles have been fulfilled. The Amalakites (v. 20) were defeated by Saul and by David, and finally destroyed by Hezekiah (1 Chron. 4:43). The ships of Kittim most likely carried invading sea peoples, the Philistines, who defeated Israel’s coastal tribes but ultimately came to ruin. The point of these last prophecies, however they are interpreted, is to announce the ultimate defeat of all enemies of God’s people. Believers do experience opposition as they move toward God’s Promised Land. That opposition may cause real and serious harm. But “in the days to come” it is our enemies who will suffer defeat at God’s hand. “The people ate and bowed down before these gods” Num. 25:1–18. Numbers 31:16 says that Balaam advised the Moabites to corrupt Israel morally and spiritually. So Moabite women made themselves available on the edge of Israel’s camp, and after seducing men “invited them to the sacrifices to their gods.” A death sentence was passed against those who had sinned, but apparently execution was delayed, and God sent a devastating plague. During this time one Israelite openly brought a Midianite woman into his tent. Phinehas, a priest, followed them into the Israelite’s tent and killed them both with a single spear thrust. This act stopped the plague, but not until 24,000 had died. The story contains two lessons for us. First, it’s dangerous not to deal with sin immediately. If we are unwilling to deal with our sin, God will. Second, Phinehas acted responsibly in killing the offending Israelite. As a priest he was responsible to maintain the purity of the camp. You and I too are responsible, if we see open and blatant sin in the community of faith, to take the initiative in dealing with it. Those who love God are to hate evil and stand against it.

DEVOTIONAL

When Donkeys Speak (Num. 22:21–41)

It was fascinating talking with the publicist one of my publishers had hired. I was in Los Angeles, visiting several radio stations for interviews on one of my books. Between stations the publicist spoke familiarly of a number of Christian “greats”: men who have significant ministries, who are admired by many, and probably idolized by some. “Take Jerry Falwell,” she was saying. “He’s one of the nicest, most gracious men I’ve ever worked with. When things went wrong, he never got upset. And after our trip, unlike some of the others, he thanked me for my help.” Then she went on to speak of another, very different, Christian superstar. This man was impatient, arrogant, and thoughtless. “Whatever they offer me,” she said, “I’ll never do any work with him again.” I remembered her as I read again the story of Balaam and skimmed several commentaries. Some writers are so impressed that God spoke through Balaam they assume that this proves Balaam was a true prophet, and even a pious man. One of God’s own. But such commentators fail to consider Balaam’s donkey. You see, when Balaam set out for Moab, the text says God was “very angry” (v. 22). Balaam had kept on bugging God to go, despite the fact that he knew very well God had refused him permission. As Balaam approached an angel set to kill him, the donkey stopped and refused to go on. Balaam angrily beat the beast who resisted his will. And then the donkey spoke! What irony. If the fact that God spoke through Balaam really proves he was a true prophet and a godly man, what does the fact that God spoke through a donkey prove? I suspect that being used as God’s spokesman is evidence neither of personal piety or holiness—as several TV evangelists have demonstrated recently. The story of Balaam finds its parallel in the New Testament. There Paul warns against the naive assumption that success in ministry or reputation indicates personal piety. He says, “If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing” (1 Cor. 13:1–3). What is evidence of holiness? Paul answers, “Love.” And says, “Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres” (vv. 4–7). God can use anyone as His spokesman. Let’s remember that it is love, not spectacular gifts, not “success” or reputation or even being used by God that is the mark of true spirituality and an intimate personal relationship with the Lord.

Personal Application

Being sensitive to God and obedient to Him is better than public recognition as one of His spokesmen.

Quotable

King Jesus why did You choose a lowly ass to carry You to ride in Your parade? Had You no friend who owned a horse -a royal mount with spirit fit for a king to ride? Why choose an ass small unassuming beast of burden trained to plow not carry kings? King Jesus why did You choose me a lowly unimportant person to bear You in my world today? I’m poor and unimportant trained to work not carry kings -let alone the King of kings and yet You’ve chosen me to carry You in triumph in this world’s parade. King Jesus keep me small so all may see how great You are. Keep me humble so all may say “Blessed is He who cometh in the name of the Lord” not “what a great ass He rides.” -Joseph Bayly

FEBRUARY 1

Reading 32

PURITY FOR PILGRIMS Numbers 15–21

“They are to be responsible” (Num. 18:3).Repetition of earlier laws on sacrifice, and severe judgments that God inflicts on disobedient priests remind Israel that believers are called to be pure while on pilgrimage.

Overview

A review of sacrifices and offerings (15:1–31), execution of a Sabbath-breaker (vv. 32–36), and a new law (vv. 37–41) reminded Israel that God’s people are to be holy. Swift judgment fell on disobedient Levites (16:1–50), as God reaffirmed Aaron’s primacy (17:1–13) and emphasized again the responsibilities of priests and Levites (18:1–19), as well as the need for continual cleansing (19:1–22). Trust was taught as the king of Arad was defeated (21:1–3), snakebite was cured merely by looking at a bronze serpent (vv. 4–9), and major Amorite powers were crushed in battle (vv. 10–35).

Understanding the Text

“Offerings made by fire” Num. 15:1–31. The travel narrative is interrupted here by rules governing a variety of offerings. Why? These chapters on ritual serve as a commentary on the preceding chapters. God’s people had refused to believe and had disobeyed. These laws reminded them of God’s original call to holiness. Note too that the regulations were for “after you enter the land I am giving you.” So these laws were also a promise that God would bring Israel home despite one generation’s unbelief. “The man must die” Num. 15:32–36. Verses 30–31 decree that anyone who “sins defiantly” must be “cut off from his people.” A Sabbath-breaker, caught gathering fuel on that day, was stoned to death by the entire assembly. Israel needed to realize that deliberate sin corrupts the community and must be dealt with decisively. “A blue cord on each tassel” Num. 15:38. Blue represents royalty and deity. It was the dominant color in the high priest’s garments and the color of the cloth that wrapped the ark of the covenant. The blue thread in the tassels to be attached to the clothing of ordinary Hebrews reminded them that each believer was holy, a community called to be a royal priesthood. “Isn’t it enough for you that the God of Israel has separated you?” Num. 16:1–41 The Levites Korah, Dathan, and Abiram challenged the spiritual leadership of Moses and Aaron. They based the challenge on the very truth emphasized by the blue cord: the whole community is holy. Like others today, however, they emphasized one truth at the expense of others. The whole community was holy, but God had chosen Moses for leadership and Aaron’s family for the priesthood. We need to be careful of those who base their views on one line of biblical teaching and ignore other truths intended to provide balance. Psychologically, it’s fascinating that this rebellion was led by Levites, for they enjoyed far greater spiritual privileges than the majority of the Israelites. Yet these Levites were upset that they could not serve as priests. Even today some with almost nothing are more thankful than those who have almost everything. It seems that when we have almost everything, the little we lack is most likely to create discontent. This challenge to the leaders was yet another expression of unbelief. Korah and his coconspirators refused to acknowledge that God had spoken clearly, and often, through Moses. Their sin too was met with immediate, spectacular judgment. Fire consumed those who dared to approach God with incense in violation of His law, while the earth opened to swallow Korah and the rest of his followers. “You have killed the Lord’s people” Num. 16:41–49. Accusation is yet another sign of unbelief. Again God acted in judgment, and a plague killed 14,700 Israelites. This time the plague was stopped by an act of Aaron, who hurriedly offered incense and stood between the living and the dead. This event initiated a series of events intended to underline the importance of Israel’s priesthood, which alone could offer the sacrifices which cleansed Israel, and made holiness possible. “You are to be responsible” Num. 17:1–18:32. To demonstrate His choice of Aaron, God miraculously caused Aaron’s staff to sprout, bud, blossom, and produce fruit overnight. With the priesthood confirmed to Aaron’s family, the text goes on to define their responsibilities. The priests are to care for the sanctuary, and offer the sacrifices necessary to cleanse a people so prone to sin (18:1–7). In return, the priests are to receive a part of the sacrifices offered to God, and also to be given a 10th from the tithe given to the Levites by the other tribes. Spiritual privileges bring both heavy responsibilities and great rewards. “Water of cleansing” Num. 19:1–22. In Israel ritual uncleanness was contagious. If a person touched a dead body, he not only became unclean himself, but whatever he touched then became unclean. This meant that uncleanness had to be dealt with immediately, before the whole camp and the tabernacle itself could be contaminated. Thus the ashes of a sacrificed heifer were kept nearby, ready to be mixed with water and immediately sprinkled on anyone who had touched a dead body. The rite was not magical, but reflected spiritual realities. Sin does contaminate and must be dealt with immediately. You and I too are to deal with our sins without delay. We are to confess our sins to God at once, make restitution, and rely on God’s promise to forgive us and cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9). “Just as [the Lord] commanded him” Num. 20:1–13. As the journey toward Canaan resumed, Israel reached the depths. Miriam died and was buried. When no water was found, opposition again arose. Moses became so upset that he failed to obey God completely, and struck rather than spoke to a rock from which God intended to produce water. This failure to follow God’s command, as much as Israel’s open rebellion at Kadesh Barnea, was an expression of unbelief. As a result, God announced to Moses that he too would die before Israel entered the Promised Land. No one is too important to God’s work to avoid discipline. No one is so important that he or she need not bother to obey the Lord completely. “Israel turned away from them” Num. 20:14–29. The dark days continued, as Israel retreated before a great Moabite army, and Aaron met his death. Yet even in the gloom, a bright hope is expressed. The text says Aaron was “gathered to his people.” This phrase is used in the Old Testament of the death of believers who have lived into old age. It expresses a firm belief that in death an individual is reunited with the loved ones who have gone on before. When we suffer the loss of a loved one today, and everything seems dark, this phrase reminds us of the hope shared by God’s people of all times. Death is not the end. It is a reunion. One day all who believe will join the happy company of the redeemed and enjoy fully God’s gift of eternal life.

DEVOTIONAL

Look, and Live (Num. 21)

Often the sequence of events recorded in Scripture, as well as the events themselves, teach us important truths. This is certainly the case in Numbers 21, which contrasts so greatly with chapter 20. In the former chapter, Israel reached the low point on her journey toward Canaan. Even Moses was shown to be vulnerable to unbelief. Hopelessness, defeat, and death seemed to be all that God’s people could look forward to. But then the tenor of the Old Testament text shifts dramatically. Israel sought God’s help and won a victory over the Canaanite king of Arad (vv. 1–3). What if that southern kingdom was tiny? It was a victory at last. When everything seems dark, every victory is important. And then the people spoke against God and Moses again! This time the Lord sent an infestation of poisonous serpents. But again a new theme was introduced. Moses made a bronze serpent, raised it high on a pole, and promised that bitten individuals could simply look at the bronze snake and be cured. Individuals with faith looked. And they lived! Even though the community is riddled with unbelief, there remains hope for individuals who are willing to trust God. Clearly, trust is an effective antidote for unbelief! The next incident suggests that trust was now contagious, just as unbelief had been contagious before. The Israelites faced a major enemy in two neighboring Amorite kingdoms—and conquered them. God had said, “Do not be afraid of him, for I have handed him over to you, with his whole army and his land.” This time the people believed, obeyed—and won! This phase of the journey, which had begun in such despair, ended in joy. Israel was learning that a purified people, willing to trust God, would enjoy victory rather than defeat. What a message for us to remember. No matter how flawed our past life, no matter how dark our present, we do have hope. We can determine now that the next steps we take on our pilgrimage will be steps of faith. We can believe. We can obey. And, when we do, we can win!

Personal Application

Remember that both trust and unbelief are contagious. Be sure to give your loved ones the right “disease.”

Quotable

Did we in our own strength confide, Our striving would be losing, Were not the right man on our side, The man of God’s own choosing. Dost ask who that may be? Christ Jesus it is He—Lord Sabaoth His name, From age to age the same, And He must win the battle.-Martin Luther