The Conversation on the Other Side of the Red Sea

There is a midrash story told about the splitting of the Red Sea. Specifically about who will go into the sea first. I collected this translation from Conservative Yeshiva Online. I hope you might read the original writing as it is very good.

(Exodus 14:22) "And the children of Israel came in the midst of the sea on the dry land": Rabbi Meir said one interpretation. When the tribes stood at the sea, this one said: ‘I will descend first into the sea’ and the other said: I will descend first into the sea’. In the midst of their argument, the tribe of Benjamin jumped and descended into the sea first, as it is written: ‘There is little Benjamin who went into the sea (rodem), the princes of Judah who stoned them, the princes of Zebulun and Naphtali. Your God has ordained strength for you, the strength, O God, which you displayed for us on high.’ (Psalms 68:28-9) Do not read “rodem – ruling them” but “rad yam – descended into the sea” Then the princes of Judah threw stones at them, as it says: ‘The princes of Judah stoned them’

A parable. To what can this be compared? To a king who had two sons, one older and one younger. The king said to the younger one: ‘Wake me up at sunrise’ and he told his older son: ‘Wake me up at the third hour of the day‘. When the younger son went to wake his father at sunrise, the older brother did not let him, saying: ‘Father told me to wake him at the third hour.’ The younger brother responded: ‘He said top me at sunrise.’ While they were standing and arguing, their father woke up and he said to them: ‘My sons, in any case, both of you only had my honor in mind. So, too, I will not withhold my reward from you.

Here the ironic part of the story that the tribes who wanted to prove that they were the most faithful to God were the ones who attempted harm. One might think that God would reward the tribe of Benjamin for their faithfulness and also punish the other tribes for their attempted harm towards Benjamin. And yet, the midrash calls that into question with the parable in which neither son fulfils the commandment of the king. It is also worth noting that each son attempts to stop his brother in the attempt to accomplish the commandment the other was given. Then the king wakes up and does not punish either son for their failure to follow either commandment nor for being an obstacle to the other.

Be it the LMC, the GMC, (both of which have an image of communion on the homepages) or the UMC (with an image of serving those in need on the homepage), or any other movement/denomination that ends in “MC”, there is a strong temptation to pick up stones and take aim at the other we see being “irresponsible” while our side is “faithful”.

The current UMC stands at the edge of the sea. We are stuck between the fear of being powerless to stop the coming armies of change, and the frustration as we face a legislative sea we cannot navigate. Some are arguing, others are quite, still others are jumping in.

The parable suggests that God can give contradicting commandments to the children. This parable suggests to me that it is our unease with contradiction that is the problem, not the commandments. Until we come to peace with the contradictions we find in the Bible, the contradictions we find in ourselves, the contradictions of being a church, we will be tempted to thwart and stone one another. Rather than try to eradicate the contradiction by splitting and breaking and “othering”, the contradictions give us a chance to practice living with one another - even as we disagree - so that we can learn to love fully.

We spend a lot of time focusing on the conversations we are having on this side of the sea. However, one day we will get to the other side of the sea. The crisis will subside. The threat will be gone. And then we will have to turn to one another and realize God did not leave anyone behind.

I wonder what the conversation was like on the other side of the sea between the tribes? I doubt they argued about who was the most faithful, but turned their attention to thanksgiving and praise for God’s faithfulness. I wonder what the conversation of the sons were after the king rewarded them both, even in their failures? I bet it was less about who was the better son and more about how can they mirror the king.

Jesus as the Means

In the first month, the entire Israelite community entered the Zin desert and the people stayed at Kadesh. Miriam died and was buried there. Now there was no water for the community, and they assembled against Moses and Aaron. Then the people confronted Moses and said to him, “If only we too had died when our brothers perished in the Lord’s presence! Why have you brought the Lord’s assembly into this desert to kill us and our animals here? Why have you led us up from Egypt to bring us to this evil place without grain, figs, vines, or pomegranates? And there’s no water to drink!”

Moses and Aaron went away from the assembly to the entrance of the meeting tent and they fell on their faces. Then the Lord’s glory appeared to them. The Lord spoke to Moses: “You and Aaron your brother, take the staff and assemble the community. In their presence, tell the rock to provide water. You will produce water from the rock for them and allow the community and their animals to drink.”

Moses took the staff from the Lord’s presence, as the Lord had commanded him. Moses and Aaron gathered the assembly before the rock. He said to them, “Listen, you rebels! Should we produce water from the rock for you?” Then Moses raised his hand and struck the rock with his staff twice. Out flooded water so that the community and their animals could drink.

The Lord said to Moses and Aaron, “Because you didn’t trust me to show my holiness before the Israelites, you will not bring this assembly into the land that I am giving them.” These were the waters of Meribah, where the Israelites confronted the Lord with controversy and he showed his holiness to them. - Numbers 20:1-13

You read that correctly. Moses cannot enter the Promised Land because he hit a rock two times rather than just speaking to the rock. Which of course seems crazy. Moses did a lot of things that seemed a bit more “out of line” than hitting a rock in order to provide water. The time he murdered a man (Exodus 2:12). There was that time he smashed the ten commandments (Exodus 32:19). The time he ordered the killing of 3,000 fellow Israelites (Exodus 32:27-29). We do not call these actions “the sin of Moses”, that title is reserved for when he hit a rock to provide water for the people. 

It is easy (and lazy if you ask me) to chalk this story up to some moral or ethical imperative for leaders. Something like, “leaders are held to a higher standard” or “Moses should have had faith” are found all over the internet. And maybe those are true, but these suggest that previous actions of Moses were less important than this one act. 

It is interesting to me that those who told this story of Moses were willing to justify the violence of Moses as though he had a sort of divine permission. Those who told this story suggest that the most important thing is “following orders” - even if they are violent to another sister or brother. We live in a time where we are prone to think that the ends justify the means, but perhaps it is worth considering that God cares about the means just as much (or even more so) than the ends they produce. Maybe Moses could not enter the Promised Land not because the rock was struck, but because Moses fell prey to the idea that the ends justify the means - even violent means. Maybe God forbids Moses from entering the Promised Land because God desires that we pay attention to the means (the way) we use to bring about healing in the world? 

This may be why Jesus says that he is “the Way” and not “the end”. The Way (the means) matters.

Racism - "My sins run out behind me, and I do not see them..."

Princeton professor Eddie S. Glaude Jr. gave an interview to Krys Boyd of KERA Think on February 6, 2017 that was worth listening to for a number of reasons. Within in the interview was a metaphor offered up by Dr. Glaude that struck a chord with me about racism. 

Dr. Glaude stated that he was not a climate change denier and he believes that the climate is warming and that we are in a climate crisis. However, he notes, that if you look at the actions of his life, you might think otherwise. He lives his life as though he believes the world's climate is just fine although he intellectually believes otherwise. 

I do not think that I am a racist. I firmly believe in equality and I abhor acts of hate and injustice between people. However, if you look at the actions of my life you could string together a case that I don't care that much about injustice. For instance, I purchase things that I know are built by people living in inhumane conditions.

I do not believe that I am a racist, however (as this little video highlights) not being racist is different from being anti-racist.

I am beginning to come to terms that just because I do not believe that I am a racist or do things that are traditionally thought of as racists actions, I unknowingly do things that cause harm. I am reminded of the great story of Abba Moses that goes like this:

One of the brothers committed a sin. Moses was invited to attend a council about this, but he refused to go. Then a priest sent someone to say to him, “Come, for everyone is waiting for you.” So he got up and went. He took a leaking jug, filled it with water and carried it with him. The others came out to meet him and said to him, “What is this, Father?” The old man said to them, “My sins run out behind me, and I do not see them, and today I am coming to judge the errors of another.” When they heard that they said no more to the brother, but forgave him.

I live unaware of the sin that runs out behind me. I am unaware of the messes that I make. This does not mean I am an evil person only that I am human and ought to strike a more humble posture in my life.

Moses kills a bunch of people in the name of God?

Participating in a Bible study this week and these verses came into the conversation:

25 When Moses saw that the people were running wild (for Aaron had let them run wild, to the derision of their enemies), 26 then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, ‘Who is on the Lord’s side? Come to me!’ And all the sons of Levi gathered around him. 27 He said to them, ‘Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, “Put your sword on your side, each of you! Go back and forth from gate to gate throughout the camp, and each of you kill your brother, your friend, and your neighbor.” ’28 The sons of Levi did as Moses commanded, and about three thousand of the people fell on that day. 29 Moses said, ‘Today you have ordained yourselves for the service of the Lord, each one at the cost of a son or a brother, and so have brought a blessing on yourselves this day.’ 30 On the next day Moses said to the people, ‘You have sinned a great sin. But now I will go up to the Lord; perhaps I can make atonement for your sin.’ 31 So Moses returned to the Lord and said, ‘Alas, this people has sinned a great sin; they have made for themselves gods of gold. 32 But now, if you will only forgive their sin—but if not, blot me out of the book that you have written.’ 33 But the Lord said to Moses, ‘Whoever has sinned against me I will blot out of my book. 34 But now go, lead the people to the place about which I have spoken to you; see, my angel shall go in front of you. Nevertheless, when the day comes for punishment, I will punish them for their sin.’ 35 Then the Lord sent a plague on the people, because they made the calf—the one that Aaron made.

Kinda messed up. 

First off, it is worth noting in previous verses God wanted to destroy the people but then Moses talks God into changing God's mind. And so in verse 14 God changes God's mind and does not consume the people. 

But then you get Moses coming down the mountain and seeing all this "running wild" and gets those who are on "God's side" to kill those who are not on "God's side". Of course Moses commands all this under the declaration of "Thus says the Lord." Again, God just changed God's mind, God will not destroy the people. 

Could it be that this action, is the sin of Moses? Moses calls for a killing of people in order to purify the ranks and then tells the now 'pure' people, "Hey the sin we saw happen was rather big and we destroyed the people who were the problem. I will go up and talk with God to make an atonement and set all this right again. Just wait here." 

Moses goes up and says to God - please forgive us as we sat by and allowed this golden calf to be created. If you would not forgive us, then kill me as a way to appease your anger. 

God says - Moses, I will take care of those who sin against me in my own way (whatever it means to be blotted from the book), I will punish them through a plague. In case you forgot I said I did not want to destroy the people then you go down and kill all these people! What the heck are you doing?! This is not what I said and here you go putting my seal on your actions. I do not desire these people to die, but it seems you did.  

I know I am taking some artistic licence here, but I struggle with the idea that God says God will not destroy then Moses goes down and kills 3000 people in the name of God. Did Moses sin and kill a bunch of people in the name of God?