Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 23:31-33

31 And I will set thy bounds from the Red sea even unto the sea of the Philistines, and from the desert unto the river: for I will deliver the inhabitants of the land into your hand; and thou shalt drive them out before thee.

32 Thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor with their gods.

33 They shall not dwell in thy land, lest they make thee sin against me: for if thou serve their gods, it will surely be a snare unto thee.

Israel had been promised the land of Canaan, but in these verses God defines the exact boundaries of their inheritance. One of the bounds given is the very desert that they now wandered through, so they were not yet in the land that God meant for them, but stood upon its border, in limbo, suspended between the death of their old life and full rebirth.

Other scholars have noted that even after coming into the Promised Land Israel’s borders would not extend out to the places described in these verses for many years, but would eventually be reached during the campaigns of David and Solomon. Afterward, those borders would recede. This was therefore a prophetic foretelling of the limits that Israel would reach at its largest point, not what its borders would be at all times. God had set the maximum borders, and Israel would play within those bounds.

Israel is also told that they are to remain a people apart. They are not to make a covenant with the other people of the land, meaning entering into no alliance or contract, nor open their borders to them. This does not seem to be a ban on immigration as God had already detailed how a foreigner might live among them if he or she was assimilated into the faith, like Ruth famously did, but there were not to be pockets of foreign nationalities within God’s own people.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 23:27-30

27 I will send my fear before thee, and will destroy all the people to whom thou shalt come, and I will make all thine enemies turn their backs unto thee.

28 And I will send hornets before thee, which shall drive out the Hivite, the Canaanite, and the Hittite, from before thee.

29 I will not drive them out from before thee in one year; lest the land become desolate, and the beast of the field multiply against thee.

30 By little and little I will drive them out from before thee, until thou be increased, and inherit the land.

God continues His promises, now detailing how He will fight Israel’s wars for them, breaking down their enemies before Israel even arrives. Verse 28 promises that the Lord will even send a plague of hornets to drive them out.

As it turns out, we do not hear of the fulfillment of that prophecy in the books of scripture. It may have very well occurred, just no record of it has survived to this day. Other scholars have suggested that “hornets” may not have been meant literally, that the Lord may have just been saying He would send all manner of afflictions and plagues to wear the enemies down and drive them from the land. If this interpretation is correct, then it may be primarily a reference to the Egyptians, who would, in fact, break many of these nations in the campaigns of Ramses III.

Yet in the midst of all this dramatic conquest the Lord also shows a well-thought-out strategy. If all the enemy is driven out in a single year, the land will be ravaged by the destruction and the Israelites would have more fields than they can handle. By driving them slowly, by degrees, there would be less sudden brutality upon the land and the Israelites would be able to gradually take over those places.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 23:25-26

25 And ye shall serve the Lord your God, and he shall bless thy bread, and thy water; and I will take sickness away from the midst of thee.

26 There shall nothing cast their young, nor be barren, in thy land: the number of thy days I will fulfil.

In return for the Israelite’s faithfulness, God now makes some significant promises. He assures them of the basics, bread and water, and also that He will heal them of their diseases. He says that “the number of thy days I will fulfil,” meaning they will be a people that live full lives without meeting an early demise. Thus, God is ensuring the necessities for a full life. Not only this, but nature itself will be particularly blessed for them, their livestock giving birth to healthy young and the land yielding its fruit.

Notice in these promises that God is removing from the Israelites much of the curses He pronounced to Adam and Eve. He had told Eve that “I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children.” Obviously the Israelite women would still face the pains of childbirth, but would not suffer the anguishes of infertility or maternal or infant death, given God’s promises that there would not be barrenness or shortened days. God had told Adam that “cursed is the ground for thy sake. Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee.” Obviously the Israelites would still have to labor for their food, “in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread,” but here He describes that the land would no longer be actively working against them.

What we read here is the first step in the Lord reclaiming His people from the fall. Humanity had been in an extremely dejected state, and now God’s people were half-exalted, living blessed lives. God had begun the work of taking the sting out of death and the victory out of the grave (1 Corinthians 15:55).

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 23:24

24 Thou shalt not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, nor do after their works: but thou shalt utterly overthrow them, and quite break down their images.

Yet again the Israelites are commanded not to worship false gods in place of the Lord. Today’s verse takes it further, though, commanding Israel to actively overthrow and break those idols. The Israelites are to be the anti-idolatry. A faithful Israelite and an unbroken pagan god cannot remain in the same place, for either the god will be broken or the Israelite will become unfaithful for not doing so.

I confess, I am not sure that I can fully identify this same attitude in my own life. Certainly there are all manner of sinful behaviors that are totally incompatible with my faith, but if I find those practices occurring around me my reaction will depend on my location. If I am out in public, or in someone else’s domain, my natural behavior would be to remove myself from that place, not to destroy the problematic elements. On the other hand, I would not tolerate anything that I perceived as an idol or a vessel of sin to stay within my house. Should I find drug paraphernalia in a drawer or pornography on a hard drive within my own home I would destroy those things.

Perhaps this difference in attitude is cultural. We do not have the legal right in our Western civilizations to destroy the things of others just because they are an affront to God, and I don’t see many Christians looking to die on that hill. Of course, it does not seem that the Israelites toppled every pagan edifice when they were a captive people in strange lands either. Perhaps such absolute refutation and destruction of false gods is dependent upon living in a free theocracy.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 23:20-23

20 Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared.

21 Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.

22 But if thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak; then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary unto thine adversaries.

23 For mine Angel shall go before thee, and bring thee in unto the Amorites, and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Canaanites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites: and I will cut them off.

We have reached the end of these laws and now comes a grand promise to the Israelites, detailing all the great things that Gods will do for them if they obey Him. To start it off, God declares that there will be an angel sent down among them. Apparently that angel would speak to them at times, and also he would watch the people closely to see their behavior. If they broke their covenant, he would not be able to tolerate it. The angel carried the name of the Lord, and so he had to condemn everything that was unworthy of the Lord.

On the other hand, if the people were to obey every word, then the angel would set himself against their enemies. He would go before the Israelites, cutting off the pagan nations in Canaan before Israel even arrived in the land.

Thus, there was no neutral outcome. The angel’s strength would be against one side or the other, it was simply up to Israelites to steer that wrath according to their faithfulness. Even today we have this sense that obedience to the Lord will cause Him to be a champion in our cause, fighting our enemies for us and winning our battles. Even if we still experience trials after being faithful, we believe that we are fighting through those trials alongside God, as opposed to fighting against Him for having been unfaithful. Thus, everyone in life fights, the only question is against who and with who?

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 23:17-19

17 Three times in the year all thy males shall appear before the Lord God.

18 Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread; neither shall the fat of my sacrifice remain until the morning.

19 The first of the firstfruits of thy land thou shalt bring into the house of the Lord thy God. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother’s milk.

We are told that all the males must present themselves before the Lord at the tabernacle three times in the year. Given that we just heard about three feasts to be observed in a year, it may very well be that this mass gathering would coincide with those celebrations.

This would certainly make Israel a well measured nation. On a regular basis they would have a sort of informal census, seeing exactly what their maximum military strength and workforce was. This would also require the people to remain a close-knit society. Being required to regularly travel to one central location would mean that they could not spread themselves too far from their center, and on a regular basis they would see one another in close company. Separation, distinction, and rivalry would therefore all be deterred.

Also, it would seem, they were not to come to this great gathering empty-handed. The assumption is that these following verses about appropriate sacrifice are referencing these three gatherings in the year, and that every man would come to the Lord with something to offer. They would bring offerings of firstfruits or offerings of livestock, perhaps according to which feast was being observed or according to the man’s occupation.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 23:14-16

14 Three times thou shalt keep a feast unto me in the year.

15 Thou shalt keep the feast of unleavened bread: (thou shalt eat unleavened bread seven days, as I commanded thee, in the time appointed of the month Abib; for in it thou camest out from Egypt: and none shall appear before me empty:)

16 And the feast of harvest, the firstfruits of thy labours, which thou hast sown in the field: and the feast of ingathering, which is in the end of the year, when thou hast gathered in thy labours out of the field.

God had already given instructions for the feast of unleavened bread (the Passover), which He reminded the people of here in verse 15, and He also told them of two more feasts to be observed throughout the year. Those two new feasts would be tied to the beginning and ending of the season.

The first feast wasn’t at the very start of the season, though, but rather when the crops had developed enough to give up their firstfruits. The second feast was after they had gathered in the last fruits at the end of the year. Thus they were feasts based on the bounty of nature, celebrating that God had given them some in the beginning, and in greater measure at the end.

Three feasts throughout the year. Converted to our current Gregorian calendar, the feast of unleavened bread would happen towards the end of April, when the firstfruits were well on their way, yet not quite ready to be plucked. The feast of harvest falls in May or June, when the first fruit is completely ripe, and the feast of ingathering comes around October, when the stalks are fully spent and give their last before perishing.

That is their sequential order in our Gregorian calendar, but recall that the Passover occurred at the very beginning of the ancient Israelite calendar. It marked the transformation from the old year to the new. With that in mind, it becomes clear that these feasts are symbols of our lives. The feast of harvest was the feast new birth, fresh life being brought forth anew, like the firstfruits that it celebrated. The feast of ingathering was the end of one’s work, the succumbing to death, and the long winter of the grave. The feast of unleavened bread was the state in between, the limbo betwixt death and rebirth. The bread was unleavened because it represents us still dead in the tomb, but it is looking forward to the fruit that is about to come forth, the life that is about to be restored when the cycle repeats.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 23:13

13 And in all things that I have said unto you be circumspect: and make no mention of the name of other gods, neither let it be heard out of thy mouth.

Once again the Lord reiterates the importance of not worshipping other gods. Today’s verse take it a step further, though, forbidding even the utterance of those other god’s names. This might seem an extreme measure to take, why would even the names be forbidden to the people?

I believe this commandment recognizes the incredible power of words. Psychologists have noted that only when something is named can it become a fully realized concept in our minds. When it has no name it is only a vague, unformed notion, with a name it starts to become real. It is our natural tendency to try and name every reality and concept, turning them into a concrete abstractions so that we can fully grapple with them in our minds. But some of these beasts would be better left sleeping.

Imagine if after the Israelites left Egypt they never again mentioned the names of Ra and Horus. The concept of those Egyptian gods would have gone extinct among them within a generation. Imagine if they had never spoken of Baal or Ashtaroth, how much harder would it have been for those Canaanite gods to gain sway in their hearts.

Of course, the complete obliteration of a perverse idea would require universal cooperation. Even if the Israelites stopped themselves from uttering the names of foreign gods, they were still a part of the world, with neighbors and trade partners, and it would be inevitable for them to hear many strange things in that association, just as every Christian today learns from society all manner of inappropriate practices and beliefs. Even with that acknowledgement, though, we can do what we can to censure our own minds, tongues, and homes, and that does make a difference. Those who leave the depraved things unsaid leave no room for those seeds to take root and blossom, whereas those who give voice to perversions in their private, intimate settings are the most likely to abandon the Lord for foreign fruit.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 23:10-12

10 And six years thou shalt sow thy land, and shalt gather in the fruits thereof:

11 But the seventh year thou shalt let it rest and lie still; that the poor of thy people may eat: and what they leave the beasts of the field shall eat. In like manner thou shalt deal with thy vineyard, and with thy oliveyard.

12 Six days thou shalt do thy work, and on the seventh day thou shalt rest: that thine ox and thine ass may rest, and the son of thy handmaid, and the stranger, may be refreshed.

Today the laws of the sabbath are expanded and we are given the concept of a sabbath year, which is that after six years of working the field, then the field must be left to rest for the seventh. This is actually very practical, as sowing the same land over and over will take out all of its nutrients, and giving it a rest year to replenish those nutrients is better in the long run.

Of course, the land might naturally produce even without sowing. Vines and trees would continue to produce their grapes and their olives, and these were to be left for the poor and the animals. One can see why Jesus would later reprove the Pharisees for missing the point of the sabbath. From these verses it is clear that the sabbath was for the people, not the people for the sabbath.

Of course, for the owner of the field, having a year of no productivity would require an act of faith. When the Israelites were given manna they were told that God would allow them a double portion on the day before the sabbath, so they wouldn’t have to gather on the rest day. Once again, the owner of the field would have to trust that God would provide enough surplus in the six other years that he could rely on what he had stored up through the seventh. The Israelite might pursue his own wealth and ambition, but every seventh year he would be drawn back to remember his constant dependence on the Lord.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 23:9

9 Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger: for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.

God had already commanded the Israelites not to vex or oppress any foreigner living among them, but now He repeats that directive a second time, and once again the reason given is that the Israelites had themselves been strangers in a strange land, and so they knew the heart of those that lived such a life.

This is an interesting logic, a sort of divine paradox, to say that because the Israelites were themselves oppressed when they were the foreigners, that they therefore must not oppress any foreigners themselves. Our human tendency is far more inclined towards “since you did it to me, I get to do it to you.”

Recall that when Israel departed Egypt a mixed multitude went up with them, which means foreigners in their midst. These may have been other slave nations that had served under Egypt, but it may also have been some of the Egyptians themselves. Furthermore, after they entered the Promised Land some immigrants of their own enemies would come live among them, such as Ruth who came from Moab. Thus, when God says to not oppress the stranger, He is including strangers that came from lands that were directly hostile to Israel. It would be absolutely natural to let their anger against those enemies loose upon the immigrants that came from them, but God required His people to take the higher road, to return kindness for offense.