Gooding, David: 11 - Conquest of Canaanite Kings

There was a prime obstacle in the way of the objective being obtained, which was, of course, the strength of those kings and the principalities and powers. And in particular, the first instance of that opposition, we notice, came as a confederacy of southern kings attacked not Israel, Joshua and Israel, but attacked the city of Gibeon and its satellite towns because they had gone over and made a covenant pe- uh, treaty with Israel and had been, in that sense, converted to Israel and to Israel's God. Since Gibeon was a royal city, a very big city by their standards, with its satellite towns, the loss of Gibeon to the cause of the Southern Confederacy was substantial and ominous. So that whereas at the beginning of chapter nine we are told that the kings gathered themselves together to fight against Joshua and Israel, their attention was now diverted as they attacked, came to attack the Gibeonites for making peace and a league with Israel. In that case, we noticed that not only did Joshua and Israel were required now to come and fight these kings that besieged Gibeon, but God himself took the initiative, encouraged Joshua to take his army to relieve the siege at Gibeon, and himself did two spectacular miracles to overcome the kings of the southern confederacy. So this time, the fighting that Joshua did, interestingly enough, was in the cause of salvation, if you see it, I mean, rather than in the cause of executing the wrath of God. It was aimed at saving the city of Gibeon and its satellite town. And then we considered the treatment, how that the, uh, forces tried to escape back down the pass of Bethoron to their cities. And God took hand, along with Joshua, to mop up those forces before they could get back to their fortified cities. Here then were two miracles. So this section three is running in the same pattern as sections one and two, where on each occasion there is a big obstacle, but the obstacle is overcome not simply by Israel's fighting hard, but by God's intervention with mirac- mir- miraculous power. And this time, of course, it was the hailstones from heaven upon the fleeing army, and then the causing of the sun and the moon to stand still, presumably to give Joshua daylight enough to, uh, uh, uh, mop up the fleeing forces, uh, while daylight lasted. We also noticed the space given to the capture of the five kings as they tried to flee. How that they hid in a cave. And when they were discovered, Joshua ordered that stay stones be put at the mouth of the cave so that they couldn't get out. Soldiers posted to guard it until they had sufficiently mopped up the fleeing forces. And when they had done so, they came back to the cave, brought out the five kings. Joshua ordered the captains to put their feet upon their necks, then slew them and hanged them on the tr- on trees, and thus made a show of them openly, and encouraged Israel with the promise that thus shall the Lord do to all your enemies. The promise being necessary, for not all the kings had yet been defeated. The southern kings, five of them now executed, there remained others in cities of the south. Then there would come the coalition of kings in the north, a much more serious opposition, because they were more advanced technologically than the people of the south. So that we notice that the operation of putting down the rule and authority, the principalities and powers in Canaan was in two parts. Just let's refresh our, our minds of the details for a moment. Uh-huh. First, there was then the reduction of the kings of the southern Confederacy and the tremendous victory gained over them, a promise of further victories. But a whole chapter is then devoted to what had to be the second campaign against the principalities and powers, namely chapter eleven, dealing with the Northern Confederacy. Now these things can be very suggestive to us when we come to think of the ha- different levels of exposition and application. We have tried in these studies to concentrate first on the actual and historical. It is difficult, however, when one is doing so, to confine oneself to it, because these stories shout at us. They are prototypes of coming things. I want to spend just a minute or two explaining why I personally use the term prototype rather than type. Excuse me, if you will, if it becomes, in your estimation, far too technical. But people talk about the Old Testament things as being types. Uh, it is helpful to observe the New Testament use of that term. For the Greek has a word tupos, which in English comes transliterated and then becomes type. But the meanings that the New Testament gives to the term are varied, and they do not normally coincide with what we use the word to mean. For instance, in one Corinthians ten, Paul cites the misbehavior of the Israelites in the wilderness and at various stages, and he's warning his fellow believers at Corinth not to follow their example. And the phrase he uses is this: these things happened unto them for types. The Greek word tupos. Whatever does he mean? Well, he can't mean that, uh, these are types to be full, Old Testament stories are types to be fulfilled in the behavior of the believers of the first century. The very opposite, of course. These are things to be avoided by the believers of the first century. So, if you like, it's better to translate the word there, these things happened as examples, warnings not to be followed. It would be very misleading to translate the term, these things happened to them for types in our modern system of thinking. Or take the famous example of the tabernacle itself. You'll see. In common parlance, believers will say that the tabernacle was a type of all kinds of things of the Lord Jesus, of the great work of salvation. It was a type of it, you see. And, uh, the, uh, tabernacle was the type. The reality, Christ and his sacrifice, is the anti-type. Actually, in the Greek of Hebrews, it is not so. Moses was warned to make the tabernacle after the pattern showed him in the mountain. It's that word pattern that is the Greek word tupos, type. Moses was shown a type, uh, but then not in our modern sense, a pattern in the mountain. The building of the actual historical tabernacle had to be according to that pattern, according to that tupos. The tupos, the pattern was shown him up in the mountain. The tabernacle wasn't a type in the New Testament use of the term. Well, what was it then, you say? It was an antitype. The tabernacle was the antitype. The sacrifices were the antitypes. It was necessary that the, uh, pictures, the antitypes of the true thing should be purged with the sacrifices of animals, but the reality itself, with greater sacrifices than these. So I, I don't want to, um, chain you down, of course not, to all sorts of civil service rules and regulations. Continue to use the word type, if you will, but do please understand what, according to the New Testament, it means, and that if we use the term differently from what the New Testament uses it, then we must be prepared to justify ourselves. That brings me around, therefore, to explain why I use the term prototype of many of these stories and incidents in the Old Testament. In what sense do I use the word prototype? Well, yes, if you like, but in the same sense that, uh, we, at least in England, would have used it and use it still, for instance, when we're thinking about aeroplanes. I am so ancient that I can report to you that when I was a boy in school, if an aeroplane flew overhead, which occasionally they did, we all ran out of school to see the phenomenon. It was so rare. They were funny things put together with wood and brown paper and a few elastic bands, do you see? But they managed to fly at least for an hour or two, uh, do you see? Because even in those early models, there was incorporated certain aeronautical principles, such as the shape of the wing, with the top of the wing being curved and the bottom being flat to allow the air over the top to be parted somewhat and thinned out and give a- automatic rise to the wing and therefore to the plane. That same principle is embodied in the very latest super jet that flies over at th- thirty five thousand feet and more. That super jet is a very different machine from those early airplanes. And yet, the early thing was a, as we call it, a prototype, an early example, embodying that basic principle at that lowly level. Whereas the superjet, in that, that early principle is now embodied and expressed at a far higher level of sophistication. The early thing being, therefore, a prototype of the bigger thing, an early example, if you will, of the same principle to be found in the bigger thing. Let me choose an example of what I mean now in scripture. When our Lord sat down at the Last Supper with his apostles, he said, with desire have I desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. I shall not anymore drink of the fruit of the vine until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. What exactly could he mean? Because the Passover as a whole wasn't a prophecy. It wasn't a prediction. It was a record of the past? What does he mean? Until it be fulfilled. If it had been a prediction, for instance, that thou Bethlehem Ephrata, out of thee shall come forth the Messiah, that's a prediction, and a prediction we can readily understand, a prediction can be fulfilled. But the Passover was never a prediction. How could that be fulfilled? That introduces us to the meaning of the verb fulfill as is used in the New Testament. It can be used in another sense, as you see in this example of Passover. In the actual literal Passover, first celebrated in Egypt and then many, uh, for many centuries since every year, there was a principle expressed of redemption from the wrath of God and from the power of Pharaoh through the blood of a lamb. That was its basic inner principle. It was that principle that was subsequently expressed at the infinitely high level, when our blessed Lord acted as the Lamb of God, and his blood was shed to deliver us from the wrath of God and from the power of Satan. Then I have made my point, it is that, uh, the reason why I use the term prototype, the Old Testament Passover embodied a principle that was later expressed at an infinitely higher level. You say, why should God bother to do that kind of thing? Oh well, because, do you see, sometimes studying a prototype can give you insight into the reality. So, do you see, if you're going to explain aeronautics to a child of five years old, or six or seven, you might make a little model of an airplane and show him the shape of the wing and such like things, and then the other things that are incorporated into the model that point forward to the actual reality, the much bigger thing. Now it is not only institutions and ceremonies that are used like that in the Old Testament, but whole series of incidents. And all of us sitting here will know that in the gospel by John, John has allusions to the Old Testament, and very often doesn't trouble to tell you that he's alluding to the Old Testament. So if you don't realize he is, well, you don't realize it, do you? You see what he means, and that's very good, you'll see. Uh, should you happen to realize it, his allusions to the Old Testament will use the Old Testament stories as prototypes that help you to analyze what the New Testament now talks of at the higher level. For instance, it is John the Evangelist in his gospel, as distinct from the other three, that talks about the prince of this world coming. It is John among the evangelists that uses the term world, the prince of this world. It is John who, at the crucifixion, tells us that no bone of Christ was broken, that the scripture might be fulfilled. And the scripture he has in mind, of course, is the regulation for the Passover, no bone of which might be broken. To go no further than that, it becomes obvious that he is referring to the Exodus story. And then if we go back and look at the Exodus story, we shall see other coincidences between it and the story given us in the Gospel of John. For instance, Moses was in the desert looking after his father-in-law's sheep, when his attention was caught by a bush burning with fire and yet not consumed. And so Moses went across to have a look at this thing, and a voice from the bush warned him, don't come too near and take off your shoes from off your feet. Place whereon you stand is holy ground. This was a self-revelation of God to Moses. And God said to Moses, I'm going to send you to Pharaoh and to your brothers, the Israelites in Egypt, to ma- to demand that Pharaoh let them go. I'm going to send you. And Moses replied, amongst other things, well, when I come to my brothers in Egypt and I say, the God of your fathers has sent me, and they say to me, what is his name? What am I to say? So God told him what to say. My name, I am that I am. Ehi asha ehi, eh eh eh ehi. Say, I am has sent me. And Moses went eventually and declared the name of God to the people as one of the means he used to get them out of the domination of Pharaoh. Mm-hmm, said Moses. Canny Moses. Yes, Lord, he said, I, I, I do that, of course I will. But you know, hmm, suppose they don't believe me. What I do then? So God gave Moses signs to do, so that the people might believe him. And so we come to the gospel of John, don't we? And one of the favorite expressions that our Lord uses of himself is, the Father sent me. Say ye of him whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world. He told the blind man to go and wash in the pool, whose name means sent, S-E-N-T. It runs right through John. He is the sent one. How would he deliver people from the world? In converse with his father in chapter seventeen, he says, I have declared thy name unto the men that thou has given me out of the world. What do you mean by world? Well, in the prototype, deliverance from, was from Egypt and from the Prince of Egypt, and from a kind of situation that the Prince of Egypt held the Israelites in, in their, in the land of Egypt. And further study of that would give us one model of what the New Testament means by the term world. And the example of our Lord, as of Moses, coming to deliver the people, being sent by God, and being given signs to do. The example of Moses, who saw it was crucial to tell the Israelites the name of God, that they might come to believe and in the strength of their faith be willing to defy Pharaoh and leave Egypt. So with us, if we follow our Lord's example, who to get us out of the world has declared the name of the Father, providing us with an example that if you find fellow believers and you feel in your heart, without going blabbing about it around the place, that they are in danger of being worldly, and you wanted to correct that tendency, you might do worse than declare to them the name of the Father. You say, how would that help? Well, read the Gospel of John anyway, you'll find out, and, and read Exodus alongside of it. I'm simply making the point that the prototype in Exodus is very extensive, of course, and acts not merely as a prophecy of what is to come, but as a thought model by which to understand the big reality. When scientists are trying to explain the insides of an atom, for us lesser mortals, they come up with models. You know, with a fine circle or something and a bit of a speck in the middle and all sorts of circles and lines are going around and this, that, and the other. They tell us, of course, that the inside of the atom might not be like that at all, really. This is just a model, but the model helps us to in- helps them to, to investigate the insides of the atom and helps us to begin to perceive the wonder and mysteries of the inside of that minimal part of nature. So does God's inspired word. Forgive all this preamble. It's the wanderings of an old man. But you see, it would be of practical benefit in studying a book like Joshua to distinguish, as we have said before, the different levels of application. To distinguish also the historical in and of itself, and then the historical incidents as a prototype of the bigger thing. And in this third section of justice, uh, of of Joshua, yes, historically, it was part of the conquest of Canaan that if ever the Israelites were to be able to settle down in Canaan and enter their individual inheritance, first there would be necessary that the principalities and powers in Canaan should be overcome and And defeated. defeated. Now we notice as we finish that study, or come towards the end of the study, that the putting down of principalities and powers in the time of Joshua was in two parts. There was the first one, with the victory over the southern Confederacy. Then, after systematic exploitation of that victory, there was the second one, putting down of the principalities and powers of the Northern Confederacy. Which, if we take the things as a prototype, might point us to the fact that the putting down of the principalities and powers now at the higher level, which our Lord came to do, to bring to naught the works of the devil, happened in part, did it not, at Calvary. We thought of that this morning. Of the evil forces that not only accosted him in the synagogue and elsewhere as he preached the word of God, but surrounded his cross, and there he stripped them. Meaning either that he stripped them off himself, he broke their siege, or that he stripped them of their armaments and their artillery, so to speak. Triumphed over them in the tactics and strategy of the cross, and made a show of them openly. The victory is ours, my brothers, as the hymn puts it. For us came forth the mighty one. For us he fought the fight. The battle won. The victory is ours. Put your feet on the neck of those kings, for as the Lord did to them, he will do in another coming day. For there yet come big battles, do there not? The Thessalonian epistles, the book of the Revelation, tell us of those coming battles when satanic forces shall coalesce to fight the Lamb of God, or attempt to, as he returns. And it is said in one Corinthians fifteen, he must reign until he has put down all rule and authority. The last enemy to be put down will be death itself. The prototype, of course, is reliable in this respect. There were two major campaigns to put down the rule and authority in the land of Canaan. So let us now notice what is said about the, uh, second of the two campaigns. That is in chapter eleven. You You will will notice, please, that when the first campaign was finished, the systematic reduction of the kings and cities in the south. Chapter ten verse eleven tells us that Joshua returned, and all Israel with him, unto the camp, to Gilgal, back at base, the base camp, once more. That is chapter ten and verse forty three. After the systematic campaign described in the end of chapter ten, reducing these cities in the south. Summed up in verse forty of chapter ten: so Joshua smote all the land, the hill country, and the south, and the lowland, and the slopes, and all their kings, he left none remaining, but he utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the Lord, the God of Israel, commanded. And Joshua smote them from Kadesh Barnea, and you remember where that was, even to Gaza, all the country of Goshen, even unto Gibeon. We have been given the geographical, uh, limits of the conquest at that time. From south, Kadesh Barnea, to the north port point, go- uh, uh, Gibeon. And all these kings and their land did Joshua take at one time, or at one, at one campaign, because the Lord, the God of Israel, fought for Israel. And with that, Joshua returned, and all Israel with him, unto the camp at Gilgal. That is the basic camp. The first attack on the kings was over. It came to pass, says chapter eleven, when Jabin king of Hazor heard thereof, that he sent to Jobab king of Madon, and to the king of Shimron, and to the king of Achshaph, and sundry other kings. Verse four, and they went out, they and all their hosts with them, much people, even as the sand that is upon the seashore, in multitude, with horses and chariots very many. All these kings met together, and they came and pitched together at the waters of Merom to fight with Israel. And now God sends Joshua and his armies against this northern confederacy. There is one striking difference between the conquest of the Southern Confederacy and the conquest of the Northern. With the Southerners, we have been treated to a magnificent description of the salvation of Gibeon and the mercy showed by God to those people. So that instead of God fighting against them, he fought for them. Instead of Israel, the executors of God's wrath, fighting against the Gibeonites, Israel fought under God's command to save them from their enemies. And if you'll allow a little aside, gentlemen, what honor it is to be allowed to come in the spiritual warfare that we have to conduct in heavenly places and elsewhere, even today, to fight against principalities and powers on behalf of new converts and the people of God, surrounded by all sorts of destructive ideologies and theories. We need warriors, my dear brothers. It's one thing to talk in a Sunday school to children of believers. That's marvelous. Don't give it up. Build in a marvelous foundation of the knowledge of the word of God to prepare them to go out into the big world. Another thing, to come to children of believers in atheistic countries, where they're indoctrinated in atheism, and come and fight for them, that they be delivered from their spiritual enemies. You need warriors that know how to battle at that level of the opposition. But as I say, there's one distinctive thing about the fight against the Northern Confederacy. There is no mercy shown. Indeed, the opposite is the case. We are told that, uh, God hardened them. Look at eleven verse twenty. It was of the Lord to harden their hearts, to come against Israel in battle, that he might utterly destroy them, that they might have no favor, but that he might destroy them, as the Lord commanded Moses. God's hardening of the impenitent is not arbitrary. God hardened Pharaoh. Be careful how you interpret the fact. God told Moses in advance that he would harden Pharaoh. But the point at which he actually hardened him. Now that has to be carefully pondered. When Moses first went to Pharaoh, Moses did a sign, threw down his rod upon the ground, you remember. And Pharaoh said, Moses, my boy, what's that meant to be? Oh, Moses said, your majesty, it's a miracle. Oh, come off it, says Pharaoh. My scientists can reproduce that effect in their laboratories, you know. So he rang the bell, and then came the scientists, dressed doubtless in white coats. How could they be scientists if they weren't? And, and, uh, and, uh, Pharaoh says, this man thinks he's done a miracle here, you see, he cast this rod down to become a serpent, you see. Just show him it's no miracle. You can do it. So they obliged his majesty and did it. Mm, we'll have to do better than that, says God, said Pharaoh to Moses. Do you want me to believe this evidence? What do you say your God's name is? Jover or something? Well, yeah, anyway, I don't know him, don't believe in him anyway, but you'll ha- if you want to give me evidence, you'll have to have bigger evidence than that. So, yeah. So God gave Moses to do three signs, so the story goes, doesn't it? The first sign, to turn the water into blood. The Egyptian scientists were able to do it. Any old fool can pollute the waters, we know that, don't we, nowadays? We'll have to do better than that, said Pharaoh. My scientists can do it too. So he did a second miracle. I told you, says Pharaoh, my men can do it. Mm. Moses did a third sign. Isn't God gracious? When people ask for evidence, he gives them evidence. When it came to the third sign, the aforesaid scientist said, Your Majesty, this is the finger of God. We can't do it. Pharaoh asked for evidence. God will give him evidence. You say, and Pharaoh believed. No, he didn't. Didn't want to believe. Say, with the rich. Now God has given him evidence. And he's refused the evidence. God will cut him off. No, he didn't. He gave him three more signs. Isn't God magnificent? Don't you, you don't you all the view? People need evidence. God gives them evidence. Some people represent faith as a leap in the dark, you know. It's not so. The very Gospel of John we've been thinking about tells us these signs are written, they are signs that you might believe, evidence to call forth your faith. Not a leap in the dark. God gave Pharaoh three more signs, and And extraordinary. extraordinary. Mm. Pharaoh Pharaoh. said of one of them, pray your God to take it away, it's very uncomfortable. All right, said Moses, I tell you what, I shan't pray, you pray, Pharaoh, and you set the time when God will remove it. Of course, that was some experiment, wasn't it? And Pharaoh set the time for God to remove it, and God removed it at the time Pharaoh suggested. Three more signs, overwhelming evidence, and in spite of professions of repentance that turned out to be idle and empty, Pharaoh now resisted all six signs. Do you know at the end of the sixth one, what happened to the old scientists? Well, at the end of the third one, they said to Pharaoh, this is the finger of God. At the end of the sixth one, they couldn't stand straight on their feet nor sit down comfortably. They had boils and things. And, uh, Pharaoh had to have it demonstrated to him. And then God stepped in. I had every right to destroy you, Pharaoh. Now I'm going to make you stand. That's what hardening means. I'm going to make you stand. You continue in your defiance, instead of cutting you off immediately, I'm going to make you stand. To make you a vessel of wrath, an advertisement to the whole world of what happens when men are given evidence by God and systematically deny it and refuse it. What God will do. Pharaoh was some tyrant was Pharaoh. God made him stand to endure the next three plagues. Nine plagues in all. When it ended in darkness for Pharaoh, absolute darkness, and the final judgment came in the form of the destroying angel at Passover time. God hardened his heart. Now there was no repentance or possibility of it. It served God's good purpose. Way back in Canaan, there was a prostitute, and she heard about it, of the wrath and reality of God in the deliverance of Israel from Egypt. It brought her to repentance and to faith in the living God. God hardened Pharaoh, but the point of my quoting the whole thing at length is to emphasize how important it is when we read of God hardening people's hearts, to consider at what stage and why he hardened. It is never arbitrary. Here in this case, there was a conquest of the southern kings, as we have constantly said. Among them, this shining example of what God was prepared to do, if any of those cities were prepared to humble themselves and sue for mercy. Instead of taking their cue from Gibeon, the southern kings resented it and came to attack Gibeon and suffered the result. What would the northern kings do? Gentlemen, they were afar off, weren't they? They were further off than Gibeon was, to be sure. Hatzal, they're way up the north. They would have heard of Gibeon and God's spectacular mercy. They could have come. They didn't, and they wouldn't come. God God hardened hardened their hearts, and they perished. There are some very solemn words spoken in the New Testament. We should not exaggerate their statements. They're too solemn for that. But it is said of some, wherefore God shall send them strong delusion, that they believe the lie. Why? Is that arbitrary? No, no. God will do it because they received not the love of the truth. That's why he will send them a strong delusion, that they believe the lie. What else can God do? If you know the truth, and you won't love it and receive it. What is there left? There's no middle path. If it's a question of the truth, then the only alternative is the lie. And God shall send them strong delusion, that they believe the lie, that they all may be damned, receive not the love of the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. And I beg your leave, I'm aware I stray from the subject, but sometimes the preacher gets hold of me. And here is a very important principle of God's judgment. He hardened these northern kings so that they came against Israel. This is not barbarism. This is not arbitrary selection of some and damning of others. He's had an example before them of God's mercy. They wouldn't follow it. God hardened them. I may have told you the story before, but I tell you it again. Have mercy, that is what old men do. There is a notable example of it at the end of First Kings. It is a story how Ahab, evil and wicked Ahab, with his painted wife Jezebel, uh, encouraged Jehoshaphat. Now he was a decent king, was Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, and encouraged him to join in a united campaign. And he said to Jehoshaphat, now look here, said he, Ramot Gilead, way up there in the north, really belongs to us, you know. We're Israelites, aren't we? And uh, the Syrians have got it. So why don't we join together, you know, forget our little differences, and join together, Josh, and go up and fight the Syrians to recapture Ramoth Gilead. And Joshua, who knew better, consented. So they gathered together outside Samaria, on the threshing floor outside the city, and they staged, at least Ahab staged, quite a spectacle. The kings sat in their robes upon their thrones, and there were the false prophets of Baal to prophesy. And Ahab asked the prophets of Baal, should they go up and conquer, fight and conquer Ramot Gilead? All the prophets of Baal said, yes, by all means, go up. And you will succeed. God will give them into your hand. Jehoshaphat, having a tender conscience, suggested to Ahab that he would like to hear the verdict of a prophet of the Lord. Ahab thought it was a very old-fashioned thing, that was. Said there weren't many of them left, and the only one was left was in prison anyway, because he never spoke anything good of the king. But nonetheless, if Josaphat insisted, Ahab would have him called. So he came. And the prison officer that conducted him to the presence gave him some advice, said, now, you could possibly bring yourself to say something half decent to Ahab. It might be good, you know. The food in prison here isn't very hot, bread and water, so you might be advised to say something decent or half decent so that you don't have to come back here again. So the Prophet arrived in front of their majesties, and Ahab said to him, tell us, you prophet of the Lord, shall we go up to Ramoth Gilead and take it? And the Lord's prophet said, yes, your majesty, you go up and you'll take it. And Ahab said, hear my man. How long have I told you not to tell me lies? How many times have I got it to exhort you to tell me the truth? How did Ahab know it was a lie? So he knew it was a lie then. Well, if you want the truth, said the prophet, which was unusual for Ahab. The truth is that you will fall at Ramoth-Gilead and perish. And the king, knowing what was true, knowing what was the lie, knowingly chose the lie. It is written that God shall send them a strong delusion, that they believed the lie, who had pleasure in unrighteousness. In Ahab's case, the delusion was an evil spirit through the mouth of his prophets, allowed by God to go, not to force Ahab, but to entice him. He wanted to go anyway. The evil spirit was allowed to entice him. He went, eyes open, knowing he had chosen the lie. These matters, gentlemen, I mentioned, they are germane to the question we shall discuss, God willing, tomorrow morning. The moral problems raised by Joshua's conquest of Canaan and the severe judgments that were meted out on the inhabitants of those cities. In many cases, anything that breathed was destroyed. And your modern antagonist will want to know from you, how does this consort with your Christian gospel? Is it anything better than an Islamic jihad? What would Jesus say about such ruthless destruction, even of innocent babies? And so forth, and so on. It's not our ultimate responsibility to justify the ways of God. God is his own justifier. But we do have a responsibility, don't we, to explain the ways of God, as God would help us so to do. Not to enter into wordy debates, but to remove, if possible, stumbling blocks in the path of people who find such things as these ancient stories difficult stumbling blocks in their way to coming to Christ. So then, to come back to our text. In light of what you said, may I ask something? You're sure you must. Right. In presenting it so it's not a stumbling block, and I don't disagree with the level of the New Testament church and salvation of the responsibility of faith, but at this level, the historical level, Yes. there are several scriptures I just want to throw out that appear to put this hardening of his heart before the signs he rejected, before the evidence. How do we deal with that? And I just want to read the scriptures quickly. Mm-hmm. One is Exodus four twenty one. Yes. The Lord said to Moses, when thou goest into return to Egypt, seeeth thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thy hand, but I will harden his heart that he shall not let the people go. Mm-hmm. So it seems the reason he wouldn't receive the sign is his heart was hardened. Then I want to read another one in Exodus seven three. And I will harden Pharaoh's heart and multiply my signs and wonders in the land of Egypt. And so that was before the signs were done, the hardening, in at least in the authorized version. And Pharaoh's hardening doesn't come till 8, uh, chapter eight fifteen. Mm-hmm. Now, somebody argued that way, that the hardening, at least in the authorized version, precedes the sign, even what you call evidence, and how do we deal with that? Ah, very good question, sir. One, we need to get an exact translation of the phrases. But two, we must, uh, wa- give heed, careful attention to the way that a Hebrew narrative is, uh, given us. God, in advance, knowing what's going to happen, says to Moses, I give you these signs to do. I will eventually harden Pharaoh's heart. That is God who knows the end from the beginning. Just like we had in s- the one of the passages, Joshua defeated all the kings, and he gave the land to Israel, but not there and then. That is what, uh, we call proleptic. That is the record. Joshua, uh, destroyed all those kings, captured the land, and gave it, yes, but not there and then and at once. He gave it eventually to the Israelites, as you will see from the actual history itself. So this is God telling Moses what the end result will be. The crucial thing is, in the actual narrative of the Pharaoh and the signs, at what place in that sequence did the hardening of heart actually take place? That is my argument. God, who foresaw it all, told Moses in advance that there would come a point at which God hardened his. But to repeat the, my answer at least, if you look at the actual narrative, at at what point God hardened his heart, it wasn't before the first sign, you are told exactly when God hardened his heart explicitly in the sequence, and that, it seems to me, is exceedingly important. Thank you. Yes. Brother, can we say that sometimes in the way we speak, we do the same thing? In the sense that in the middle of the story, you go ahead and give a capsule of what the whole thing is. That's right, yes. But then you just go on in the process of the development of the story from point A. Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. Mm-hmm. That is true. You see. That is a natural way of telling a story, but Hebrew is much given to it, you see, to take a story and take it to its final conclusion without filling in the immediate details, which he then will fill in later on, of course. In your translation, brother, where is that exact point in the narrative? Uh, I'm showing seven thirteen after the first, uh, Aaron draw. Just after one of them. Is that correct? Mm-hmm. Well, now, what, pardon, what did you say? You quoted a verse? James reads in in seven thirteen and he hardened Pharaoh's heart. I realize you might say still his heart was hardened. Where is the exact verse where God first hardened his heart in your translation? Oh, well, the prophecy that I will harden Pharaoh's heart and multiply my signs is at seven three. In the actual, uh, um, uh, story itself, when Pharaoh, uh, called in his wise men and this, that, and the other, they threw down their rods. The text actually says, and Pharaoh's heart was hardened, and he hearkened not unto them as the Lord had spoken. That passive tense was hardened. Some people want to say that that tacitly implies it was God who did the hardening. Authorized says he. Yes, the passive doesn't necessarily, in my understanding, imply that it was God that hardened. Pharaoh's heart was hardened, and he not hardened not un- uh, unto them, as the Lord had spoken, it prophesied this would happen, but it's not at that point said that God hardened his heart. Then again in seven twenty two, and Pharaoh's heart was hardened. Notice the passive, you'll see. And, uh, chapter eight verse fifteen, but when for Pharaoh saw that there was respite, he hardened his heart. He did it, you'll see. Verse nineteen, then the magicians said unto Pharaoh, this is the finger of God, and Pharaoh's heart was hardened, and he hearkened not unto them, as the Lord had spoken. God had prophesied it so, you'll see. But then, verse thirty two of chapter eight, and Pharaoh hardened his heart this time also. Done it many times before, and he did not let the people go. But now look at nine twelve, and now there's no disputing it, and the Lord hardened the heart of Pharaoh. That, as far as I know, is the first time it actually says in the actual na- narrative of the plagues that the Lord actually hardened his heart. You see, and then God gives Moses the explanation for this move. God says to Moses, verse thirteen: uh rise up early in the morning and stand before Pharaoh and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord, the God of the Hebrews, let my people go that they may serve me. For I will this time send all my plagues upon thine heart and upon thy servants and upon thy people, that thou mayest know that there is none like me in the earth. For now I had put forth my hand and smitten thee and thy people with pestilence, and thou hadst been cut off from the earth, but in very deed, for this cause have I made thee to stand. And God is arguing, look here, Pharaoh, at this point, I could extinguish you. You deserve it. Instead of it, I'm going to make you stand. To bear these coming plagues. And I do it to make an example of you, a vessel of wrath, that all the world may know the almightiness of God. The coming of the exact phrase, therefore, that the Lord hardened his heart in verse twelve seems to me to be exceedingly significant in the actual sequence. I, I was asked, are you ready to close? Do you have more to say? I was asked to make an announcement. Well, now I just consult the authorities, sir, and I tell you what the authorities say, that this thing should go till four forty five, and it's now four forty five, and uh, uh, we are at an end. So by all means, sir, please make the announcement. Thank you. Uh, before we take our ten-minute break, Larry had to step out. The policy.