One of the most traumatic things we can experience is the death of someone we love and have shared life with. Even when we know they were a Christian, so that grief is tinged with hope, it can still be a horrendous experience to live through (I Thess.4:13). Miriam had been so incredibly significant in the life of the Church (e.g. Ex.15:20-21), and of Moses. This profoundly personal loss must have created a fault line in Moses’ emotional landscape... which might perhaps explain his signal failure in the incident that followed.
I’m sure the ‘gathering in opposition’ in v.2 wasn’t premeditated to take advantage of Moses in this moment of vulnerability. It is probably more likely that they simply didn’t think to give Moses space to grieve. A congregation can often see an ‘office’ rather than a ‘person’ in their leader, and are often unaware of them struggling with all the pain and pressures of life that everyone else struggles with, and even less aware of the stresses and temptations that are unique to those in spiritual leadership. Did it simply not occur to them that, whatever their issues might be, there could be compassion, wisdom, gentleness is giving Moses space to grieve before grumbling, criticising and complaining against him in this way (v.3-4)? Probably not. We fallen humans can even in our redemption, be a remarkably egocentric bunch at times. And even when we know our leaders are under personal pressure, we can still expect them to be available... the good news is that it may be they learned from this episode, and when Aaron died (20:27-29), the whole Church took 30 days to mourn.
But for Moses the convergence of his personal grief and pressure of another round of public criticism and complaint has tragic consequences. The pressures he has lived with since confronting Pharaoh and leading the Church out of Egypt has had an accumulative effect. The people’s relentless and pathetic infatuation with Egypt has eroded his patience and humility. His personal loss has left him uniquely susceptible to temptation. They blame him for what their own sin had caused. And yet whilst his impatience, frustration and anger may seem justified – or at least justifiable – to us, it constituted an act of disobedience that had disastrous consequences. However true his allegation against the Church might appear (you rebels... v.10), it was not his place to judge. It remained his place rather to teach the Church and to model the implicit obedience Christ will only ever show to His Father (Jn.5:19). A new generation of the Church is growing up, and it is crucial they see that obedience is non-negotiable, and that the Word of the Lord is sufficient.
Questions:
This is a significant moment that ripples through Scripture. One such ‘ripple’ is Psalm 95, which embeds it in the corporate worship of the Church.
Does what we see of God in Num.20:1-13 inspire you to worship? Or does God’s dealing with Moses raise too many questions for you?
What other grounds in Ps.95 are we given for worshipping Him? Which of these speak particularly to you? Why?
In Ps.95:8-9, the Lord complains that the Church should have learned by then to trust His faithfulness. Why had the Church not learned these basic lessons even so far into their wilderness experience? Why were they still so nostalgic for Egypt (Num.20:3-5)? Why were they still quarrelling?
How do we exhibit the same reticence to learn the basic lessons of Christian discipleship?
What does it mean that the first generation of the Church (apart from Caleb and Joshua) never entered His rest?
...and back to Num.20.
How do we ‘quarrel’ with the Lord? Based on this passage, how serious would it be to do so?
Have you ever seen a Church leader treated in the way Moses is being treated here?
What are the critical errors Moses makes in 20:10-11? How are they expressions of his distrust of the LORD (20:12)?
Do you think Moses disobedience is sufficiently serious to warrant the punishment he receives (20:12)?
How does this episode ‘prove’ the Lord was holy amongst His people (20:13)?
