Author Topic: Moses is a priest? Try 2! Now with scriptual backing! (Judge?) (Read 32981 times)

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #200 on:** March 11, 2010, 11:55:30 PM »

Quote from: STAMP on March 11, 2010, 06:44:33 PM

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on March 11, 2010, 06:04:40 PM
Quote from: STAMP on March 11, 2010, 05:03:28 PM
There's a tendency for any reader to read these lines and feel it's a direct result of the lawlessness that existed right after Joshua's death.
There is a tendency to read those lines in that way because Judges 2:8-10 specifically state that all this happens after the death of Joshua. Specifically starting a generation after the generation that buried Joshua.

So how do you explain verses 1-5?

Verses 1-5 are background given to explain why the office of judge became a necessity in that that Joshua did not drive all the foreign nations out of the land. The consequences of this are discussed in verse 14 where it notes that Israel would be taken captive by the remnants of these same tribes, and in verse 16 we have "Nevertheless the LORD raised up judges, which delivered them out of the hand of those that spoiled them." The chapter concludes by pointing out that the reason God did not remove these tribes from the land was because of Israel's persistent unfaithfulness.

Quote

Disobedience, lawlessness, forsaking the Lord...the Israelites did this in the wilderness and prior to Joshua's death.

How do you reconcile this claim with verse 7, "And the people served the LORD all the days of Joshua, and all the days of the elders that outlived Joshua, who had seen all the great works of the LORD, that he did for Israel?" It is worth noting that the description of the faithful generation in this verse also stands in direct contrast to the evil generations that followed, who "knew not the LORD, nor yet the works which he had done for Israel."

Quote

Furthermore, verses 16-19 cover a period of time for all of the judges, not just the time right after Joshua's death, so it very well could have covered Moses' and Joshua's time

On what basis are you making this claim? Up until this point the book of Judges had been following a chronological narrative. We have verses 1-5 talking about Joshua not driving all foreign tribes from the land. We have the verses 6-9 that talk of an age of faithfulness to the Lord from the possession of the land through the passing of the generation following Joshua. Then verses 10-15 talk about Israel worshiping Baalim, Baal, and Astaroth (gods not of Egypt or the wilderness, but specifically of the land) and the Lord's anger leading to Israel's captivity.

I am unsure--given what unfolded in verses 1-15--why you feel verses 16-19 are unmoored in time and aren't simply meant to be read as the next phase of the saga. Do you have any commentary by other writers that supports your interpretation?

I am not saying that you can't argue that Joshua (and Moses) were both Judges. I am merely pointing out that evidence in favor of your claim would need to be found elsewhere because it is lacking in Judges chapter 2.

The Guardian · « **Reply #201 on:** March 12, 2010, 12:18:54 AM »

My thoughts...

From a gameplay standpoint, Moses should be something. For such an important figure in Biblical history to be "identifier-less" (for lack of a better term) would be silly. That being said, I'm not sure Moses should be everything (despite RR's valiant efforts). So we should ask ourselves what makes the most sense for Moses to be. Scripture clearly shows that he was a prophet and a leader of Israel (essentially a judge). It also indicates that he was at different times royalty (in Pharaoh's court), a quasi-priest who performed priestly duties on occasion and a musician (Moses' song). However these previous three roles were not something that carried through his entire life, they were temporary seasons of his life.

I believe it would make the most sense to call him a Prophet and a Judge as he is already in the Judges brigade and we have a card (Judge's Seat) that refers to him in that role. This would also mean labeling Joshua as a judge, but fortunately he is also in the Judges brigade of Gold.

STAMP · « **Reply #202 on:** March 12, 2010, 12:29:42 AM »

I'm trying to follow your first and second paragraphs but they seem to contradict each other. In the first Joshua fails to drive out all the foreign nations, and there are dire consequences in verse 14. But then in the second you describe Joshua and his generation as a faithful one.

If we read verses 16-19 as a chronological narrative we end up with God raising up all the judges at once, sort of a Superfriends group, to deliver the thankless people as they ignore their judges. Apparently, God was with only one of the judges (Superman??) because when that one judge finally dies, they all enter into lawlessness.

Doesn't sound right to me. It sounds more like a summary of how the entire judges period transpired. Thus, although the scripture is placed where intuitively one would surmise that it's in response to the perverse generation described before it, the summary notation would indeed descibe the times in the wilderness with Moses as well as with Joshua's "faithful" generation.

Either way, as I said before Moses and Joshua are joined at the hip in this issue: both judges or both not.

And as for the question of priest, I need to read some more but I am currently leaning toward Moses is a priest, and if not, then others drop out too, like Jethro and Priests of Christ. Either you go with Aaronic only, or you add in the extras.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #203 on:** March 12, 2010, 01:31:17 AM »

Quote from: STAMP on March 12, 2010, 12:29:42 AM

Thus, although the scripture is placed where intuitively one would surmise that it's in response to the perverse generation described before it, the summary notation would indeed descibe the times in the wilderness with Moses as well as with Joshua's "faithful" generation.

That's a nice thought, STAMP. Once again I ask if you can point me to any commentator who agrees with your interpretation that Judges 16-19 is talking about the Egyptian captivity, the time in the wilderness, or the taking of the land.

Once again this entire argument does not touch on the bigger question of whether or not Joshua and Moses should be considered Judges; it merely reflects on the suitability of using Judges 2 to argue that point. One passage that does seem to touch on the larger issue is Acts 13:17-21. How do people factor Paul's version of history into their arguments?

Quote from: Acts 13:17-21

The God of this people of Israel chose our fathers, and exalted the people when they dwelt as strangers in the land of Egypt, and with an high arm brought he them out of it. And about the time of forty years suffered he their manners in the wilderness. And when he had destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, he divided their land to them by lot. And after that he gave unto them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years, until Samuel the prophet. And afterward they desired a king: and God gave unto them Saul the son of Cis, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, by the space of forty years.

Young's literal translation renders Acts 13:20 as "And after these things, about four hundred and fifty years, He gave judges -- till Samuel the prophet;"

CountFount · « **Reply #204 on:** March 12, 2010, 09:22:13 AM »

And Moses chose able men out of all Israel, and made them heads over the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens. And they judged the people at all seasons: the hard causes they brought unto Moses, but every small matter they judged themselves. -Ex 18:25-26

It appears from the scriptures that Moses wasn't a fly by judge but more like a supreme court justice. Many judges were established by Moses through the inspired direction of Jethro. Moses was to be the judge of last appeals. This freed up the majority of his time to be the prophetic leader for Israel.

I would vote that he be identified as a judge and a prophet, because that was the role he fulfilled for God.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #205 on:** March 12, 2010, 10:46:19 AM »

Quote from: Da Muzik Maker on March 11, 2010, 07:53:05 PM

Quote from: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on March 11, 2010, 07:47:54 PM
Quote from: Da Muzik Maker on March 11, 2010, 03:51:39 PM
I don't think moses is a pirest.... why? you may ask? cause, the bible never said anything about him being a priest
Cept all the scripture in this thread.

uhm, who was among who's priest exactly?? it said "moses and aron where among his priests..." it never said moses was the priest, it just said where among "his priests" which doesn't have anything to do with moses being one.

"Among his priests" is the equivalent of belonging to the group.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #206 on:** March 12, 2010, 11:19:36 AM »

Quote from: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on March 12, 2010, 10:46:19 AM

Quote from: Da Muzik Maker on March 11, 2010, 07:53:05 PM
uhm, who was among who's priest exactly?? it said "moses and aron where among his priests..." it never said moses was the priest, it just said where among "his priests" which doesn't have anything to do with moses being one.
"Among his priests" is the equivalent of belonging to the group.

Yeah, it's not like Moses was just hangin' around. "What's shakin' Ithamar, mi sobrino!"

STAMP · « **Reply #207 on:** March 12, 2010, 11:41:32 AM »

Well it's a moot point now, but...

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on March 12, 2010, 01:31:17 AM

Quote from: STAMP on March 12, 2010, 12:29:42 AM
Thus, although the scripture is placed where intuitively one would surmise that it's in response to the perverse generation described before it, the summary notation would indeed descibe the times in the wilderness with Moses as well as with Joshua's "faithful" generation.
That's a nice thought, STAMP. Once again I ask if you can point me to any commentator who agrees with your interpretation that Judges 16-19 is talking about the Egyptian captivity, the time in the wilderness, or the taking of the land.

Once again this entire argument does not touch on the bigger question of whether or not Joshua and Moses should be considered Judges; it merely reflects on the suitability of using Judges 2 to argue that point.

I'll have to check eSword when I'm studying at home this weekend. I do apologize though because I had not intended on arguing Judges 2 to support Moses and Joshua as judges. Rather I was looking at that scripture as an exclusionary factor. Upon further review I don't see enough to overturn what other scripture tells us of Moses and Joshua.

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on March 12, 2010, 01:31:17 AM

One passage that does seem to touch on the larger issue is Acts 13:17-21. How do people factor Paul's version of history into their arguments?

Quote from: Acts 13:17-21
The God of this people of Israel chose our fathers, and exalted the people when they dwelt as strangers in the land of Egypt, and with an high arm brought he them out of it. And about the time of forty years suffered he their manners in the wilderness. And when he had destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, he divided their land to them by lot. And after that he gave unto them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years, until Samuel the prophet. And afterward they desired a king: and God gave unto them Saul the son of Cis, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, by the space of forty years.

Young's literal translation renders Acts 13:20 as "And after these things, about four hundred and fifty years, He gave judges -- till Samuel the prophet;"

It appears if we use Paul as the authoritative source then we throw out Samuel and his sons in addition to Moses and Joshua. Paul was tops in his Pharisee class so I would lend a lot of credence to when he refers to the time of judges.

But again, the point is moot.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #208 on:** March 12, 2010, 12:19:46 PM »

Quote from: STAMP on March 12, 2010, 11:41:32 AM

But again, the point is moot.

I think we would both agree that spending some time in the Word is rarely moot--even if Rob has made a final ruling for the game.

I find Judges to be one of the saddest and most realistic studies of human nature. After reading through the cycles of increasing lawlessness (ending with the brutal story of the Levite's concubine and the war on the Benjamites), the entire book gets summed up in its final verse.

Quote from: Judges 21:25

In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.

That's some good stuff.

STAMP · « **Reply #209 on:** March 12, 2010, 12:20:39 PM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on March 12, 2010, 12:19:46 PM

Quote from: STAMP on March 12, 2010, 11:41:32 AM
But again, the point is moot.
I think we would both agree that spending some time in the Word is rarely moot--even if Rob has made a final ruling for the game.

I find Judges to be one of the saddest and most realistic studies of human nature. After reading through the cycles of increasing lawlessness (ending with the brutal story of the Levite's concubine and the war on the Benjamites), the entire book gets summed up in its final verse.

Quote from: Judges 21:25
In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.
That's some good stuff.

I completely agree.

Cactus Game Design Message Boards

News:

Author Topic: Moses is a priest? Try 2! Now with scriptual backing! (Judge?) (Read 32981 times)

EmJayBee83

Re: Moses is a priest? Try 2! Now with scriptual backing! (Judge?)

The Guardian

Re: Moses is a priest? Try 2! Now with scriptual backing! (Judge?)

STAMP

Re: Moses is a priest? Try 2! Now with scriptual backing! (Judge?)

EmJayBee83

Re: Moses is a priest? Try 2! Now with scriptual backing! (Judge?)

CountFount

Re: Moses is a priest? Try 2! Now with scriptual backing! (Judge?)

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR

Re: Moses is a priest? Try 2! Now with scriptual backing! (Judge?)

BubbleBoy

Re: Moses is a priest? Try 2! Now with scriptual backing! (Judge?)

STAMP

Re: Moses is a priest? Try 2! Now with scriptual backing! (Judge?)

EmJayBee83

Re: Moses is a priest? Try 2! Now with scriptual backing! (Judge?)

STAMP

Re: Moses is a priest? Try 2! Now with scriptual backing! (Judge?)