A Tradition Of Wells (part 4)

Leaving Abraham, this study moves on to the next of Israel’s patriarchs, whose story will be part of the grand tale told by Israel about itself, and comes face to face with Isaac.  Not only is his wife discovered in connection with a well, but Isaac has his own well dealings.  Not surprisingly, since his life mimics that of his father in a number of ways (movements based on famine, deceptions about his wife, growing wealthy based on these deceptions, a wife that was initially childless, etc…), it is discovered that Isaac, like his father, is involved in disputes concerning wells. 

There is no need to retrace the exact course of the disputation found in the twenty-sixth chapter of Genesis, as it shall suffice to say that it looks quite similar to that which was experienced by Abraham.  Surely these disputes play into and informs the historic sensibilities that must be brought to any attempt to enter into the mindset of Jesus and that of the Samaritan woman when they engage in a partially disputative conversation at the well. 

This may prove to be especially so when considering what took place once Isaac was able to dig a well over which there was no dispute.  Isaac’s response to the digging of this undisputed well was “now the Lord has made room for us, and we will prosper in the land” (26:22b).  “From there Isaac went up to Beer Sheba.  The Lord appeared to him that night and said, ‘I am the God of your father Abraham.  Do not be afraid, for I am with you.  I will bless you and multiply your descendants for the sake of My servant Abraham.’  Then Isaac built an altar there and worshiped the Lord” (26:23-25a).  This is rounded out in a not unexpected way, as the story goes on to say that “He pitched his tent there, and his servants dug a well” (26:25b). 

Here, a well (actually two wells) is connected with a place of worship, prompting thoughts of worship and the act of worship itself.  Of course, hearkening back to yet another connection to his father, one must consider that Beer Sheba is also the place that Abraham dug a well and the place at which he made the treaty with Abimelech (Isaac also deals with an Abimelech) following the initial disputes about a well.  So naturally, Isaac’s venturing to that place is an explicit reminder of Abraham’s story (as is much of Isaac’s story in and of itself), and by extension the Creator God’s covenant with Abraham.  So perhaps one should not think of wells, especially in Scripture, without also retaining the idea of the Creator God’s covenant and His covenant faithfulness to go along with it? 

Staying with Abraham, it is recorded that he “planted a tamarisk tree in Beer Sheba” (21:33a), which was the place that he dug the well, and “There he worshiped the Lord, the eternal God” (21:33b).  Why go back to Abraham after having moved on to Isaac?  Why mention the covenant that was begun with Abraham, which would be extended to Isaac, to Jacob/Israel, and then on to the nation of Israel?  Why speak here of worship?  Because it attunes an observer to the words of the Samaritan woman, as she responds to Jesus.  “The woman said to Him, ‘Sir, I see that you are a prophet.  Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, and you people say that the place where people must worship is in Jerusalem” (4:19-20).  Here is a well, a dispute, and talk of worship, which accords nicely with the well stories that participate in shaping and defining the collective mindset of the people of Israel.   

Isaac's Life Of Exodus (part 6 of 6)

So as has been said, this quarreling over wells that went on between the herdsmen of Gerar and Isaac’s herdsmen are a reminder of a quarrel that took place in the life of Abraham.  In the thirteenth chapter of Genesis, we read that “Lot, who was traveling with Abram, also had flocks, herds, and tents” (13:5).  Lot could be said to be “riding the coattails of Abraham’s blessings.  However, this created a problem, in that “the land could not support them while they were living side by side.  Because their possessions were so great, they were not able to live alongside one another” (13:6).  As a result, “there were quarrels between Abram’s herdsmen and Lot’s herdsmen” (13:7a).  Isaac’s solution, as we saw, was to continue his movements until there was no reason for quarreling; and if there was strife over wells and water, then it is likely that this was one of the sources of the strife between the servants of Abram and Lot as well. 

Isaac’s solution was certainly predicated on that which had been taken up by his father.  “Abram said to Lot, ‘Let there be no quarreling between me and you, and between my herdsmen and your herdsmen, for we are close relatives.  Is not the whole land before you?  Separate yourself now from me.  If you go to the left, then I’ll go to the right, but if you go to the right, then I’ll go to the left’” (13:8-9).  So the decision is made, lands are chosen, and “the relatives separated from each other” (13:11b); and as we have previously noted, Isaac marks his movement of separation by saying, “For now the Lord has made room for us, and we will prosper in the land” (26:22b). 

From there, the Scriptural record has Isaac moving again, this time to Beer Sheba.  While there, “The Lord appeared to him… and said, ‘I am the God of your father Abraham.  Do not be afraid, for I am with you, I will bless you and multiply your descendants for the sake of My servant Abraham” (26:24).  We note that Beer Sheba is also mentioned in connection with Abraham, as one of the places where he had settled.  Just before we learn that little fact, we have a record of God speaking to Abraham and saying, “I will indeed bless you, and I will greatly multiply your descendants so that they will be as countless as the stars in the sky or the grains of sand on the seashore.  Your descendants will take possession of the strongholds of their enemies.  Because you have obeyed Me, all the nations of the earth will pronounce blessings on one another using the name of your descendants” (22:17-18).  For sake of a chronological reminder, this word from the Lord comes in the wake of the near sacrifice of Isaac. 

Returning to the separation of Abram and Lot, we have the Lord speaking to Abram and saying, “Look from the place where you stand to the north, south, east, and west.  I will give all the land that you see to you and your descendants forever.  And I will make your descendants like the dust of the earth, so that if anyone is able to count the dust of the earth, then your descendants can also be counted.  Get up and walk throughout the land, for I will give it to you” (13:14b-17).  As for Abraham, so for Isaac, in that the words that he heard from the Lord, following his time of quarreling and separation (like that experienced by Abram), are a communication of the Lord’s covenant to him.  Isaac, quite rightly, reacts to this second hearing of the divine covenant, and does so in a way that reflects the knowledge of the covenant God that has been passed on to him by his father.  We read, that “Isaac built an altar there and worshiped the Lord.  He pitched his tent there, and his servants dug a well” (26:25).  The one that was now the bearer of the covenant and the representative of God in the world, built an altar and pitched a tent.  This is also the pattern that would be followed by Israel after exodus-ing Egypt. 

The nation that bore the divine covenant to represent God in the world and to be a blessing, pitched a tent (the tabernacle).  This tent would contain both an altar, as well as the ark that represented the covenant God.  It could be said that this took place following a quarrel with the Egyptians.  Though the relationship between the Egyptians and the Israelites started off well, with Joseph, Jacob and his brothers receiving honor and welcome in the land of Egypt, it deteriorated with the growth in the numbers and power (and presumably wealth) of the growing nation of Israel in Egypt, much like as happened with Abraham (in Egypt and the land of the Philistines) and Isaac (in the land of the Philistines).  In that case, the quarreling did not result in the stopping of wells, but rather, took an entirely different form, in that the Egyptians “put foremen over the Israelites to oppress them with hard labor… But the more the Egyptians oppressed them, the more they multiplied and spread.  As a result the Egyptians loathed the Israelites, and they made the Israelites serve rigorously” (Exodus 1:11a,12-13). 

Eventually a separation would come.  The separation that came, which resulted in the construction of a tent, as well as an altar (along with detailed instructions as to how to go about utilizing that altar in proper worship), followed the pattern of Isaac, which, not unexpectedly, followed the pattern of Abraham.  Yes, when Abram and Lot went their separate ways, and when Abram was reminded of the covenant promise that had already been given to him (as Isaac would be reminded, and as Israel would be reminded), “Abram moved his tents and went to live by the oaks of Mamre in Hebron, and he built an altar to the Lord there” (13:18).  It seems that wherever we find mention being made of covenant, it is connection with some type of exodus movement, and we find the covenant bearers connected to a tent.  Truly, this God of exodus is a God of tents.  

David's Idolatry (part 1 of 3)

The twenty-fourth chapter of second Samuel begins by stating that “The Lord’s anger again raged against Israel, and He incited David against them, saying, ‘Go count Israel and Judah.’” (24:1)  So David gives an order to his general, Joab, telling him to “Go through all the tribes of Israel from Dan to Beer Sheba and muster the army, so I may know the size of the army” (24:2b).  Now, this is not precisely what David had been commanded to do, which is somewhat telling when it comes to an overall analysis of David’s character, which was seriously flawed.  Yes, David, as the Apostle Paul would say, “served God’s purpose in his own generation” (Acts 13:36a), but this statement is removed quite a distance from the initial report of David before he was anointed to be king, in which Paul presents David as “a man after My (God’s) heart” (13:22).  With this, Paul borrows from the first book of Samuel, where we read about the Lord having sought out, what is perhaps a better translation, “a man who is loyal to Him” (13:14b). 

God instructed David to number Israel and Judah.  In and of itself, this is not a problem.  God has no problem with a census of His people.  In fact, in His law as given through Moses, the Lord gave instructions as to how it was that the census was to be carried out, and what it was that must occur along with the census.  In fact, the book of Numbers, for the most part, is itself a census.  However, we know that the Lord’s anger was raging against Israel, which is an indication that there was a problem with which God intended to deal.  It seems as if God knew that David would not follow the directive that had been given, which might very well be the implication of the author’s record of inciting David against Israel.  Rather than direct a numbering of the whole of the people, David instead asks for a numbering of the army. 

It seems that Joab better understood the Lord’s command than did David, as he replies to the order that has been given, saying “May the Lord your God make the army a hundred times larger right before the eyes of my lord the king!  But why does my master the king want to do this?” (24:3)  It is worth repeating that the Lord wanted His people numbered, whereas David asked for a numbering of his army.  By all appearances here, Joab is aghast at the king’s command.  However, “the king’s edict stood, despite the objections of Joab and the leaders of the army” (24:4a).  So not only did Joab have a grasp of what it was that the Lord wanted, but so too did the leaders of the army, who were likely influenced by Joab to offer their objections to the king.  Ultimately, the record indicates that “Joab and the leaders of the army left the king’s presence in order to muster the Israelite army” (24:4b), so that David, as he said, could know its size.  After a period of time, “Joab reported the number of warriors to the king” (24:9a).  The given report stated that “In Israel there were 800,000 sword-wielding warriors, and in Judah there were 500,000 soldiers” (24:9b). 

David’s response to the report of more than a million soldiers at his disposal is not what one might expect.  Rather than exulting in the power that such a count represented, “David felt guilty after he had numbered the army” (24:10a).  Why would David feel guilty?  Was it because numbering the people was wrong?  Not at all.  Rather, David felt guilty because he commanded something to be done that was not what the Lord commanded him to do, which also served to give him an insight into his own mindset.  As a result, “David said to the Lord, ‘I have sinned greatly by doing this!  Now, O Lord, please remove the guilt of your servant, for I have acted very foolishly.’” (24:10b)  What was David’s sin?  Naturally, we can easily make the case that it was disobedience.  God asked for one thing, and David did something different.  This is not difficult to ascertain.  However, there was something more substantial than disobedience.  It was the same problem that we saw with Saul and the situation with the Amalekites. 

God, through Samuel, had given specific instruction to Saul as to how he was to deal with the Amalekites.  Saul only partially carried out the Lord’s command.  This resulted in Saul being rejected by God as king over His people.  So in David’s actions, we see hints of the same thing.  Saul was given a specific instruction, as was David.  Saul followed the instruction to an extent, as did David.  Saul is rejected as king, and David, knowing this story of Saul and perhaps coming to his senses a bit, feels guilty, offering his plea to the Lord for the removal of guilt.  He did not want to be rejected as king (which would be the second time if this occurs after the Absalom situation), and he did not want to be overtaken by the same fate as that which was experienced by Saul.  In connection with what brought about his downfall, Saul was said to have been setting up a monument for himself (1 Samuel 15:12).  In our exploration of Saul’s life in the course of this study, we determined that this was the beginning of idolatry for Saul.  This idolatry is what would result in Saul being exiled from the throne of Israel, as Saul began to operate outside of God’s purposes for him, though he would remain king until his death.  His idolatry led to exile. 

So what was David’s sin---his great sin, as he said?  Of what was he guilty?  Into what had he entered which he now regarded as foolishness?  What did the numbering of the army rather than the people represent?  Plainly and simply, it was idolatry.  His army, which represented his power and his kingdom, had become his idol.  It seems as though Joab and the leaders of the army had a sense of this, but that David was blinded to this fact.  The fact of his own idolatry appears to have dawned upon him when he received Joab’s count.  As we understand this about David, we are now better positioned to understand what it was that caused the Lord’s anger to rage against Israel.