Reflections: Numbers 21

Numbers 21

THE FIRST BATTLE: (vv. 1-3). 
 
Chapter 21 opens with what we can presume must be the second generation of Israelites (probably because just about everyone from the previous generation has already died) moving out towards the promised land. The geographical description of where the people of God are moving through has them moving to the east of the Jordan River, just southeast of the Dead Sea, 
 
Here, the Israelites face their first hostile army. The nation of Arad is identified as “Canaanite,” using the generic Hebrew word for the pre-Israelite inhabitants of the Promised Land. The king of Arad launches a surprise attack, and Israel loses some of its people as captives. This was highly offensive to the Israelites, as kidnapping was a capital offense under the law of Moses (see Exodus 21:16 and Deuteronomy 24:7). Israel’s sense of unity and bonding as a nation evidently took hold, and in what can only be interpreted as a burst of patriotic zeal, the Israelites vowed to carry out the sentence for violating the law by promising if the Lord would give them victory, they would “totally destroy” the cities of Arad. The text simply says the Lord “listened to their plea,” gave the Israelites victory over Arad, and they “completely destroyed them.” 
 
Because the author of Numbers offers no further comment, it would appear the truth of the matter is this battle was an expression of God’s judgment. Israel had vowed to utterly destroy everything, and God, without further comment, paved the way to allow them to do this. The refusal of Israel to take any spoils showed that, in their battle against Arad, God did not want His people to rejoice over what they would gain, because God had brought His judgment to others. This same principle would be applied in the future, when Israel conquered Jericho (see Joshua 6: 18-21). 
 
Ironically, it was at this same place (Hormah) that Israel had been defeated in an ill-advised attempt to enter the Promised Land by force after refusing to enter it by faith. (see Numbers 14:45). Now God had brought them back to the same place and given them victory. Several Bible commentators view this victory as providing the new generation a foretaste of great things to come when they would enter the Promised Land under the power of God and the leadership of the next generation in Joshua.
 
THE BRONZE SNAKE: (vv. 4-9)
 
This is one of the most strange and perplexing passages of scripture. But, because Jesus himself makes an important direct reference to what happens here in the Gospel of John, it turns out to be one of most important and compelling concepts presented in the entire Bible. 
 
Verse 4 describes the company of Israel setting out from Mount Hor, where Aaron had died. 
Verse 4 states, “They traveled from Mount Hor along the route to the Red Sea, to go around Edom. But the people grew impatient on the way.” The Israelites were forced to go far out of their way because the Edomites had refused them passage (see Numbers 20:14-21). To go around the land of Edom, they had to turn back into the wilderness they had just come from (it says, “along the route to the Red Sea,” they were literally retracing their steps). It would have been easy for the people to conclude that they were going in the wrong direction. It is therefore easier to understand why the people grew impatient and discouraged. But while it was a discouraging situation, the people also had an opportunity to put their trust in God. The same God who had just given them victory over Arad and provided all their needs would also guide them around this setback.
 
Verse 5 brings us more of what Moses has to deal with time and time again. More complaining. “The people spoke against God and against Moses.” It's important to note that the complaint is aimed at God first, and then against Moses. This "next generation" of Israelites appears to be an awful lot like the old generation that has died in the wilderness. In fact, this may indicate that they are worse. Eight times before (Exodus 15:24, 16:2, 17:3; Numbers 12:1, 14:2, 16:3, 16:41, and 20:2), the Israelites were described as speaking against Moses. Of course, Moses knew (Exodus 16:7-8) and obviously the Lord knew (Numbers 14:27) that they were really speaking against God. But until this point, the people were not shameless enough to do so directly. Just like it feels in modern times, the younger generation feels bold enough to speak its mind where the older generation was not. 
 
And this is a major problem. They were on the threshold of moving into Canaan. Closer to achieving the goal and fulfilling the promise God had made to them than ever before, particularly closer than the previous generation of “unbelievers” had ever been. Now, they seem to be acting just like their parents with regard to unbelief, or perhaps worse. 
 
This is particularly true in their characterization of the miracle of Manna in at the end of verse 5, given almost as an afterthought, as in a “by the way” type footnote, “And we detest this miserable food!” Recall the discussion of Numbers chapter 11, when the prior generation made their first complaint about the Manna, and desired meat instead. By rejecting manna, the “bread from heaven” (See Exodus 16:4) that God graciously supplied them, the Israelites caused God to become “exceedingly angry.” This was because rejecting the manna was the equivalent of rejecting the Lord. And as we shall see in the discussion that follows, this was the primary problem, the most obvious symptom, of the issue the Lord was about to deal with. 
 
In short summary, God sent poisonous snakes to infect the camp. Many Israelites suffered snakebites, many of them died. The people turned back to Moses, admitting that they had sinned “we spoke against the Lord and against you.” They begged Moses to pray that God would take the snakes away. 
 
Moses prays, but God gives him a most puzzling set of instructions. He is to fashion the image of a snake made of bronze and put it up on a pole for all to see. Moses did this, and anyone who had suffered snakebite who looked upon this bronze statute displayed high in the air were all healed. 
 
What in the world was this all about? 
 
First, let’s consider the significance of the image of a serpent coiled around a pole. We see this sort of thing all the time. It’s everywhere: on hospitals, doctor’s offices, medical insurance companies, the sides of ambulances. This symbol has come to be synonymous with the concept of medicine, doctoring, and healing in the western world. 
 
Officially, it is known as the “caduceus.” It is usually portrayed as  a staff with two snakes and wings surrounding a central staff or pole. This image originated from Greek mythology as the herald’s wand/rod/staff belonging to the Greek god Hermes, the messenger of the gods, who was also a patron of travelers, merchants, and thieves. The caduceus, as wielded by Hermes, came to symbolize commerce, eloquence, and negotiation. 
 
The origin of the caduceus is found in a mythical story where Hermes found two snakes fighting and threw his wand between them; they immediately stopped and wrapped themselves around it, making the wand a symbol of neutrality and conflict resolution.
 
The use of the caduceus as applied to the medical industry today is therefore a bit of an error. While widely used for hospitals, pharmacies, and medical supplies in the United States, it was actually the official symbol of the U.S. Army Medical Corps. (adopted in 1902) and came to be adopted and commonly associated with medicine generally. 
 
However, this was not without the best of intentions. That is because in the ancient world, there was a similar image that was accepted as being associated with medicine and healing. This consisted of a single snake (no wings) wrapped around a pole, known as the Rod of Asclepius. 
 
Asclepius is the ancient Greek god of medicine, healing, and rejuvenation, symbolized by the  serpent-entwined staff I just described. He was the son of the Greek god Apollo, and he learned his healing skill from Chiron the centaur, who supplied him with the divinely empowered blood of the Gorgon Medusa, which was able to raise the dead. It was for this skill that he was executed by Zeus, because  resurrecting the dead was too great an interruption to the natural order. Asclepius later become a deity honored in temples all over the middle east known as “Asclepieia.”
 
These temples would provide healing for people who paid the proper fee and then would spend the night in the temple (sleeping “incubatio”) in order to receive “healing dreams.” Even in his mythical form, Asclepius has an enduring influence on modern medicine, as the Hippocratic oath every medical school graduate speaks originally began with an invocation to both him and his father, Apollo.
 
(There was probably a connection between two gospel narratives and the temples of Asclepius. In Mark 5: 25-35, there is the story of the woman sick for 12 years who touched the hem of Christ’s garment. In v. 26 it says she had “suffered a great deal under the care of many doctors and had spent all she had, yet instead of getting better, she grew worse.” While this woman may have not consulted Greek physicians exclusively, it is likely she did consult them at least for some of her treatment, because this was the common practice in Palestine at that time. Also, in Matthew 15:21-28, Jesus is approached by a woman identified as “Canaanite” (“Syrophoenician” in Mark 5, where she is specifically identified as being of Greek descent), begging him to heal her daughter. In the famous exchange involving the “little dogs” eating the crumbs from the master’s table, it is highly likely this woman would have availed herself of the Asclepieian temples.)
 
Because of the similarity of the bronze serpent on a pole, and its healing qualities, this passage of scripture came to be associated with the Rod of Asclepius during the time of Jesus. And because Christ referenced Numbers 21 in his encounter with Nicodemus in John 3, it has become associated with Christ’s healing power and has inspired many a Christian healthcare worker to devote themselves wholeheartedly to their profession. 
 
Indeed, I believe it’s because we have the help of Jesus explaining his connection to this story in Numbers 21 that we can unwind and understand this very, very confusing story. 
 
God looks vindictive and harsh. He sends a plague of venomous snakes to kill people because they complained about the food. But then, God looks impulsive and indecisive – he appears to suddenly change his mind. “Sorry about the snakes, I’ll just go ahead and heal you.” Then, God seems petty and idiosyncratic – the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob appear to behave like one of the Greek Gods described earlier – He doesn’t just heal them, he requires a bronze serpent. 
 
It doesn’t make sense – but then Jesus points back to this story. Because Jesus made this connection, that is why the caduceus is the symbol of healing in the world. “Just as Moses lifted up the snake, so the son of man must be lifted up.” Then we get probably the most famous verse in the bible – John 3:16:  
 
So, when we see the symbol of the snake wrapped around the pole in our review mirrors as an ambulance approaches, it should remind us of John 3:16. Because I believe that is what the rod of Asclepius and the Caduceus we see in the medical industry are meant to represent. 
 
How? What this is saying is that there is only one disease that can kill you, and only one remedy. 
 
The disease is sin – the cure is the son of man, lifted up. 
 
While it seems cruel and vindictive to send the snakes -- the punishment appears to be overkill – it’s really not. God is trying to show us the nature of the real disease that is killing us all: the seriousness and character of sin. 
 
The popular concept in late 19th and early 20th century society was to believe that people were basically good, and that the reason for crime, racism, poverty, etc. was bad social conditioning. The leaders of society at that time thought that humankind was ultimately perfectible and was actually getting better all the time. Social science through bureaucratic organization (like churches, schools, family, or even the government) could eventually work out all our societal ills
 
But by 1945, this was a difficult belief system to maintain. As World War II was coming to an end, and the Allied troops were capturing more and more German territory, the horror of the concentration camps was discovered. The world was mortified. How could anybody be capable of the kind of evil exhibited by what happened in the death camps? 
 
One conclusion would be that there is something in some people (but not all people) that could cause this – but who? It must be the Germans, or the Japanese. Americans wouldn’t do this. I, as a committed Christian and American citizen could never do this! There is something evil that exists in those other people! 
 
But if I take that view, which is to say “they” are evil and subhuman, and I am virtuous, I open myself up to the possibility that I will do unto them what they did to their prisoners. If I conclude that “they” are so far below me, I risk treating “them” as less than fully human. To conclude that only some people are capable of committing the evils that happened in the death camps, is the same kind of stereotyping and racism that made the death camps possible. Are some people wicked by nationality or culture? Are they, by nature, more inferior? This argument fails under the weight of its faulty logic (And history must cause us to have a certain level of self-reflection in that the United States used nuclear weapons on non-military targets, killing over 200,000 people.). 
 
The only logical alternative answer is “There is something in all people that could cause this.” It may seem innocuous, but there is something in all of us that, under the right circumstances, can turn us into monsters. 
 
That is the definition of sin. 
 
Which is why we need to take it seriously when it rears its ugly head, even in situations that seem harmless or inoffensive. 
 
I noted this in my discussion of Numbers chapter 19 (where the red heifer/water of purification concept was introduced). This is what my Roman Catholic upbringing called “original sin.”  It is what the reformers refer to as the “sin nature.” In the earlier discussion, I noted that a simple headache is often nothing to worry about, but it could be a sign of some deeper medical problem, perhaps even something that could be fatal, like a cancerous tumor. In Chapter 19, God was using the concept of ceremonial uncleanness to help convey a framework of the seriousness of sin. Here, it’s much deeper. God wants us to truly understand the immediate seriousness of sin. How serious? It can destroy us! 
 
Really? All the people did was complain about the food, and God sent venomous snakes? Isn’t that a bit harsh? But we’ve already seen what complaining and rebellion so far has resulted in. Even the concept of the Israelites complaining about the Manna – was that really so bad? Back in our school days, we all complained about the cafeteria food. But the Manna was different. God’s people were traveling through a desert – where finding the provisions to make daily meals for one family would be impossible, let alone for 2 million people (see Numbers chapter 1). God miraculously provided the Manna to meet the needs of those 2 million people. But it was never good enough. 
 
The people grew tired of eating the same thing every day. They got sick of collecting it. They yearned for something different. And they let God know about it in no uncertain terms. What’s so bad about that? Well, to continue the medical analogy, it was like a headache. A doctor who understood the symptoms would take radical action – send you to the emergency room, arrange for a battery of tests, begin some invasive procedures – because the doctor understands. This is exactly what God did for the Israelites. The complaining/unbelieving spirit in His people, which always seemed to cripple them, and eventually led to an entire generation being deprived of the ability to enter the promised land, was a sign of something much deeper, and much worse, that will ultimately lead to the entire nation’s destruction. 
 
I have to believe at this point, most of the first generation was dead and gone – Moses is primarily dealing with the children of the first generation, the “next generation,” now grown to adults. This pervasive disease of sin is still rampant in them, and they all think they just have a headache. God must have perceived the need to do something radical. 
 
Not only is God showing his people how serious sin is, but he is also showing them the depth of the character of sin. While Manna was the very thing the people needed, they rejected it, because it wasn’t good enough. We see this in the way people basically relate to each other. Some people are extreme in these concepts. A guy may be searching for a companion, a soulmate, a wife. But it turns out that even that pretty, smart, sociable girl with a great personality isn’t good enough because he discovers she has dirty elbows, or is just a tad overweight, or mispronounces “Illinois” (she says “Illinoize” and pronounces the “s”), or, heaven forbid, it turns out she’s a PACKERS FAN! A girl who otherwise would be an ideal candidate to bring home to meet his mother, he rejects. Many people discover this later about the person the marry – after years of living together, the things we think aren’t good enough (that actually remind us of ourselves) turn out not to anger us, frustrate us, and disappoint us. This happens as people raise their children. The cute, angelic little girl who was the apple of her daddy’s eyes is a whole lot different when she’s a tween or teenager. 
 
The nature of sin makes us conclude that NOTHING is good enough. Our job, our spouse, our church, even our everyday situation – none of it is good enough. The most obvious example of this is seen in the story of the garden of Eden, and the first sin. And what was that first sin? Adam and Eve disobeyed God. Why? It was a serpent who deceived them! 
 
How did this happen? Essentially the serpent asked, “What’s happening?” and they both declared, “Nothing! It’s perfect here! No sickness or disease. No sadness. We can do anything we want. We are living in paradise!” The serpent impliedly suggests, “Is that true? You can do ANYTHING you want?” Eve replies, “There is ONE thing we can’t do. There’s one tree we cannot eat from.” The serpent then suggests, “And you are satisfied with this situation?” The serpent focused on that “one thing,” with the implication being – “that tree is the best tree in the garden. The fruit of that tree will make you as wise as God, and that’s why he doesn’t want you to eat it.” 
 
The ultimate result wasn’t just that Adam and Eve disobeyed God’s command. Through the manipulation of the serpent, they found a way to be dissatisfied with the Garden of Eden. They were dissatisfied with living in Paradise!  
 
So, the character of sin causes this ultimate dissatisfaction. I go to work; I’m dissatisfied with my job. I wake up, and I’m dissatisfied with the spouse sleeping beside me. I look in the mirror; I’m dissatisfied with myself. We spend our lives chasing after things – I’m after the perfect job, and now I have it! I’ve married the girl of my dreams! But it all still doesn’t “do it.” It’s never good enough!
 
Where does this come from? At the beginning of time, a serpent taught us to be dissatisfied with life in Paradise. The nature of sin is to cause us to never be satisfied. The root of sin is to cause me to always find fault with whatever I am making central to my life. Sin is a disease that distorts everything. The Israelites wished they could go back to Egypt, where they were slaves! 
 
Our sin nature deceives us into believing that we can’t have or be what we want to have or be in the NOW. The past was always better. The future will always be better. ANYTHING is better than here. Disobedience grows out the delusion that nothing is good enough, which comes from the root of what sin is all about. 
 
And what it that root? It’s what the serpent told Adam and Eve  – that God was really out to get them. God didn’t want what was best for them; God wanted to deprive them of what they deserved. God doesn’t want them to have that tree, because if they had that tree, they’d be like God. Therefore, the real root of sin is not believing in the love of God, not trusting in God, not believing that God is good. This all leached into the hearts of humanity through the serpent. 
 
This is the cancer of sin: it causes us to want to stay in control of our lives and refuse to trust God. 
 
This is seen in what the Israelites say to God in Numbers 21:8-9; the people were not simply complaining about their circumstances. Besides ending their diatribe with “we detest this miserable food,” they start with “Why did you bring us out of Egypt into the desert to die?” They weren’t just complaining about the quality of the food. They ultimately didn’t trust God. 
 
This concept produces three kinds of people: 
 
1.     The “bad” people: they simply refuse to obey God, to follow the commandments. Perhaps atheists (but not necessarily), they want to do their own thing. Why? Because they do not believe in the goodness of God. They feel they will miss out if they obey. 
 
2.     The “sad” people: These people believe in God and are very religious, but they are under a cloud, feeling guilty because they believe they are never good enough. They don’t believe in the grace of God. They don’t believe in the forgiveness of God. They can’t believe that God can love them in spite of their sin. 
 
3.     Finally, there’s the “mad” people: The primary question for these people is, “Why has everything gone wrong in my life?” They are angry over all their disappointments. They can’t accept the fact that the circumstances in their lives have been set in motion so God could teach them, or protect them, or guide them to a place that’s best for them. They can’t believe in the goodness of God, because they can’t accept that their own definition of what is good is not the same as God’s. (Sadly, this is the group I most identify with). 
 
The conclusion for all three types is “I must stay in control of my own life.” But they will never satisfy their thirst. Nothing will ever be good enough. 
 
But the narrative that culminates in the brass serpent not only conveys the reality of the seriousness and character of sin, but it also provides the remedy for the disease that is sin. 
 
The first part of the remedy is to understand the need for repentance. For the Israelites, God sent the snakes for this purpose. The Hebrew words in verse 6 translated in the NIV as “venomous snakes” literally mean “fiery serpents,” and are at the root for the word “seraphim.” We’re familiar with that word as applied to angelic beings in the Old Testament, but even there, it refers to the flaming appearance of these beings. Because of the potency of the poison inflicted by these snakes, they were known as “seraphim, or “flaming ones.” The bite from these snakes produced a raging fever and a feeling of inner burning, as well as an unquenchable thirst. In death, the victim sensed they were literally burning up. 
 
In this instance, God is trying to help his people. He is showing them a physical manifestation of the reality of what they are doing to themselves spiritually. The manifestation of their grumbling and rebellion shows they have a spiritual thirst that cannot be quenched, a spiritual fever raged in them, which leads to destruction far beyond physical pain or death. Sin is a real disease that is burning them up. 
 
This is evidenced by how they have imputed bad motives to God. The people believed they were wiser and better than God, or at least that their plan was better than God’s. This delusion would cause them to have a raging thirst that could not be satisfied, because (as we’ve discussed) nothing God would do for them would satisfy them. God sends the snakes as a physical manifestation of their spiritual problem. 
 
To their credit, the Israelites immediately understand this. In verse 7, they come to Moses recognizing they were wrong, and the seriousness of their sin. A lot of commentators note that God sending the snakes seems like an overreaction. But here, the people don’t complain about how unfair God has been. They recognized that God was justified to be so severe in order to shake them up and understand the seriousness of their sin. This was evidence of true repentance. 
 
After the people had truly repented, the next step in this remedy is for God to make “provision.” God instructs Moses to make a bronze snake and put it up on a pole. In a sense, this is to represent that God has defeated the snakes. If there had been only one snake causing all this calamity, the way the people could put the problem to rest would be have a snake hunter enter the camp, kill the snake (crush its head, perhaps, in the imagery of Genesis), and then, to provide relief and hope to the people and assure them the danger had passed, the hunter would literally “lift up” the snake – put the carcass up on a pole to prove it was dead. 
 
What God was saying to the Israelites in this instance by having a replica of the snakes “lifted up,” was that He himself was the healer. Only God could truly stop the snakes and heal the people of the poison. So, God, in his infinite mercy, provided a way for that healing. All they had to do was look to Him as the healer. He made what he wanted them to look to as something finite that they could see, but the healing itself was still supernatural; because God was still the healer. 
 
This part of the story has always been troubling to Jewish people trying to interpret this passage. Fortunately for us, we have another means of figuring out what this all means, because Jesus explained what this passage meant. In John 3:14-17, in Christ’s famous conversation with Nicodemus, he said: 
“Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.  For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.  For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.”  

Jesus is therefore identifying himself with the snakes of Numbers 21, and also with God’s remedy for the Israelites at that time. The bronze snake, in being displayed as “lifted up,” showed the people an image of a snake that had been crushed and destroyed. A snake that was dead.  Christ’s reference to him being lifted up is not just a figure of speech (the Greek word for “lifted up” can also mean “exalted,” which has caused some confusion) – Jesus is saying that hehad to die. 
 
But there’s even more. Not only will Jesus die, but he will die in the same manner as what was depicted by the bronze serpent. In John 12:32, Jesus said “ And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself”  (This is the same word for “lifted up” used in John 3:14.). The gospel’s author adds a note in the following verse, “He said this to show the kind of death he was going to die.” Many scholars interpret that to mean Jesus was indicating he would be crucified. But in the context of Numbers 21, Jesus is declaring in John 3 that he will die as the serpent!! 
 
As we’ve been discussing all along, the concept of the serpent itself is central to everything that is happening here. But what IS the serpent? What does it mean? It is itself representative of sin. Indeed, as represented in the story of the fall of humanity in the garden of Eden, the serpent is Satan. The serpent IS sin itself! It represents all that is sin, all that is evil. It represents the seed of sin that started in Adam and Eve and is present in each one of us (the concept of “original sin”). It represents all we’ve discussed here about our mistrust of God, our rebelliousness, and (ultimately) that insatiable thirst. It represents all the things that sin is and all the concepts that sin deserves. 
 
When Jesus says that he will be lifted up like the serpent, he is saying that he will die as the serpent died. Not “like” the serpent, but AS the serpent. In 2 Corinthians 5:21, Paul says, “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” Of course, this doesn’t mean that God made Jesus “sinful,” that was impossible. Jesus never sinned. Jesus doesn’t become “the serpent,” but God made Him AS a serpent. God treated Jesus as the serpent should be treated. God treated Jesus as sin should be treated. 
 
This therefore allows us to make another connection – when Jesus died on the cross, he said, “I thirst.” This wasn’t just physical thirst. Jesus was taking Hell upon himself. In Luke 16:19-31, Jesus tells the story of Lazurus and the rich man. In that story, the rich man died, and his spirit was sent to “Hades, where he was in torment” and in agonizing fire (Luke 16:22-23). While Hell is usually depicted as having everlasting fire, the thirst that comes from it is not necessarily caused by the heat.  The spiritual thirst that begins while we are alive on earth, that nit-picky concept we’ve discussed already where nothing ever brings us satisfaction, and we find fault with everything, the insatiable thirst that originated inside of us there -- in eternity, this thirst becomes a raging inferno. The inability to find love and fulfillment that starts as thirst eventually becomes an uncontrolled forest fire, consuming everything. That, in many ways, is the definition of Hell. What starts as the unsettling sense that we aren’t getting what we want out of life, the insatiable thirst and endless emptiness that leads us to be unhappy with everything here is NOTHING compared to when we finally get our way and eventually wind up in the same place as the rich man of Christ’s parable. Sin wants to get us away from God, so we can completely be our own boss, but the thirst that begins there will eventually consume our entire being. 
 
This is what fell on Jesus. We deserve to experience the raging fires of Hell forever, and Jesus took it all on himself. He got the fever, he experienced the convulsions caused by the poison, he felt the unquenchable thirst. The eternal, tormenting fire consumed him. He said, “I thirst.” It all fell on him. 
 
Why? In Isaiah 53:5, it states that “by His wounds we are healed.” This verse also explains that “he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities.” Jesus paid the price for all our sin and our diseases. 
 
The final concept to glean from the story of the Bronze Serpent is how we receive the provision. How do we find our salvation? Well, all we have to do is “look.” There is no need to touch the snake. No need to bow down to it, or march around it seven times, or to even recite a sinner’s prayer in front of it. All any of has to do is “look” to the one lifted up. 
 
In Isaiah 45:22, God says “Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is no other.” We just need to turn to God. We just need to look. No need to work up to it. To require only a “look” means there are no prerequisites, no preconceived loyalty or love, no need to jump through any hoops, no legal formalities.  All we have to do is look and see that Jesus has saved us. 
 
We need to realize and admit that there is nothing we can do to save ourselves. This goes right to the heart of the lie of the serpent in the garden. Jesus died in place of the serpent – in the place of that lie. That’s how sin is remedied. 
 
And for those of us who already know Jesus, who have been walking with Him for years and years, we still experience struggles with these issues of sin. We find ourselves falling into the nit-picky problems, the disappointments, the inability to believe in the goodness of God. Some of us try to use our own willpower, but that always fails. The reality is, we just need to “look.” Look at Jesus, lifted up. If I’m unhappy today, if my frustration has led to despair, it’s because, at least in the moment, I do not trust God. If I feel meaningless, it’s because I don’t believe He’s really good. But Jesus is the healer. Jesus is always there – we only need to look upon the son of man, lifted up! 
 
THE JOURNEY TO MOAB: (vv. 10-20)
 
This passage summarizes Israel’s route through the Transjordan. A more detailed description appears in Num 33:41–49. This section and the next (vv. 21–35) do not appear to be in chronological order, since the battle with the Amorites (vv. 21–35) would have likely been before Israel entered the Jordan Valley (arguably the same can be said of vv. 1-3 in this chapter). As with many Old Testament passages that list numerous locations, many of the locations of these sites are unknown today. Of course, relating the stories in an order different than a calendar chronology does not affect the veracity or applicability of the scriptures. 
 
Besides the names of the places Israel passes through on their way towards the Promised Land, these brief passages of poetry are also recorded, giving the sense of elation they must have felt. There was thankful joy for the ways God provided water for the people (see vv. 14-18). Israel appears to have had a breakthrough, at last trusting God, and experiencing what God provided for them. 
 
Verse 17 notes that “Israel sang this song.” As far as I can tell, the last time the entire nation of Israel sang a song together was back at the Red Sea in Exodus 15. That was a long time passed, some 40 years, but once again, the people were singing joyful songs. 
 
The song sung here begins with “Spring up, O well!” The lyrics describe an historic occasion from the past, where the nation's leaders helped dig wells, even using their own shepherd's staffs (not necessarily the best tools to use to dig). The implication here is the need to take what we have, the gifts and provision God has given us, and “dig” where we can. The purpose for digging is water – provision from God for life itself; water that is produced in a place where it hasn’t been available before. 
 
This calls to mind the recent message Tim Harlow presented to Spirit of God Fellowship. He relayed the story told in 2 Kings 3, where the allied armies of Israel, Judah, and Edom, while battling Moab, face a crisis with no water in the desert. The prophet Elisha tells them to "make this valley full of ditches" (2 Kings 3:16), promising water without wind or rain. They obey, and the trenches fill with water, saving them leading to their victory over Moab.
 
It all seems to have to do with digging – and digging for water. And in both 2 Kings 3, and Numbers 21, the well that springs up is supernatural, the provision of God in a place where there is otherwise no water. The digging beforehand is necessary – God instructs us where and when to prepare – but the result is joy in the victory and fulfillment of His kingdom. 
 
The phrase “Spring Up, O well” is central to many hymns and worship choruses. There was one we used to sing at Spirit of God that was very meaningful back in the Legion Hall days, when I was still a teenager. I haven’t been able to pinpoint it yet. 
 
SIHON AND OG: (vv. 21-35) 
 
Moving north along the eastern edge of Moab, Israel requests passage through the Amorite kingdom of Sihon. As with Edom, the king refuses and meets Israel with an army (compare Num 20:20; 21:23). However, while Israel turned away and avoided armed conflict with Edom (20:21), they engage the Amorites and conquer their territory (vv. 24–26). Israel’s request for safe passage indicates they initially had no interest in possessing any territory in the Transjordan. This region was not part of the land originally promised to Abraham (Gen 12:1–3; 15:1–6, 18). 
 
The book of Deuteronomy has Moses retelling the history of the Exodus in the forms of a series of “farewell speeches” before his death. This episode with Sihon is retold there, in chapter 2:30-31, with some additional information:
 
But Sihon king of Heshbon refused to let us pass through. For the Lord your God had made his spirit stubborn and his heart obstinate in order to give him into your hands, as he has now done. The Lord said to me, “See, I have begun to deliver Sihon and his country over to you. Now begin to conquer and possess his land.” 
 
Apparently, God made sure the Israelites would win this battle. He hardened the heart of Sihon, so the Amorite King would provoke the battle and lose, so Israel could take over his land. While the casual reader might interpret this as showing God to be manipulative, it really wasn’t unjust or unrighteous for God to harden this evil king’s heart. Sihon was obviously not favorable towards Israel in the first place. God really didn’t change Sihon’s character or attitude. God didn’t force the king to attack Israel. God simply gave Sihon over to what his evil heart desired. 
 
Verse 31 states that “Israel settled in the land of the Amorites.” Though this was still on the eastern side of the Jordan River, this was the first land Israel possessed after coming out of Egypt. For the first time, the people of God could dwell in cities. Later, this territory became part of the allotment to the tribes of Rueben, Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh (see Numbers 32). 
 
As the people of Israel continued their journey, Og, King of Bashan sends out his forces to face the Israelites. While another battle that Israel had not provoked, they were up to the challenge and were able to win a glorious victory. 
 
In verse 34, Moses is commanded not to fear Og, for “I have delivered him into your hands.” This encouragement may have been necessary because Og of Bashan was noted for his si

ze and strength. Deuteronomy chapter 3 indicates that Og was the last of a legendary clan of giants.

- John Russell