That corruption of human nature creates an internal conflict
against being fully human (as the Creator God intended for the divine
image-bearers), and thus causing a falling short of the glory of God. Of
course, that conflict is inward but expresses itself outward, and shows itself
through human interaction with this world and with other divine image-bearers.
It would appear that Scripture is insistent that victory in
this conflict, in which the original intention for the human being wins out, is
somehow made through the operation of the Spirit of God through the very power
of the Gospel, as like that which was experienced by Joshua and Israel as they
attempted to subdue the promised land, none of the corrupted parts of human
nature want to make peace via submission to Jesus and His claim to Lordship.
As it stands, just as Adam and Eve are reported to have been
successfully tempted with the idea that they could be like “divine beings,” human,
and understandably because they are made as the image of their Creator, seem to
have a desire to rule and worship themselves.
However, all must be conquered. The analogy that is here being
drawn thus raises a question, especially in light of the Gospel declaration
that Jesus is Lord.
On the surface, it is then easy to understand the need for
Israel to enter the land and conquer. Or is it? Israel had promises. Joshua had
promises. After the death of Moses, the God of Israel is said to have spoken
to Joshua and said, “No one will be able to resist you all the days of your
life. As I was with Moses, so I will be with you. I will not abandon you
or leave you alone” (1:5). Joshua was promised that none would be able to
resist, but as can be seen, that didn’t stop many from attempting.
The Creator God continued His words to Joshua, saying “Be
strong and brave! You must lead these people in the conquest of the land
that I solemnly promised their ancestors I would hand over to them” (1:6). So
here Israel has the promise that their God would “hand over” the land to
them, but as one traverses the book of Joshua, and if the obvious supernatural
intervention is stripped from the tale, the story that is left does not seem
like much of a handover.
Quite to the contrary, the handover of the promised land is
presented as a near-constant battle. As has already been noted, nobody was
making peace with Israel (except one by stealth means, and it was a very
tentative “peace”), and the covenant people were required to carry out a
lengthy campaign in the land. This stand against Israel was the case even
in the face of what seemed to be well-known (at least as far as is communicated
within the narrative itself), as Rahab, the famous harlot from Jericho, who
must have had “contact” with a diverse group of people from the whole of what
was the promised land, is shown to speak with a knowledge of the covenant God
of Israel as she says “I know the Lord is handing this land over to you.
We are absolutely terrified of you, and all who live in the land are cringing
before you” (2:9).
So in looking at this situation with Israel, with their
promises and with the supposed existence of the terror of Israel of which Rahab
speaks, one is then forced to consider a thought: “If Jesus’ kingdom has been
established, and He is reigning at this very moment, then why does it continue
to be necessary to fight? Why must there be a battle? Why does
death continue?”
No comments:
Post a Comment