On Cloak And Dagger Missions…

So what does a spy do? To my (frankly Alistair-Maclean-James-Bond-ish) knowledge, a spy is a person who gathers facts and useful information regarding an enemy and reports it to his superiors.

So going by that, the spies Moses sent, did a pretty good job. They were asked to gather specifics – which they did. In truth, they went a step further and brought along some fruity proof as well! Speaks a lot for their initiative. Listen to their report – “…the land…truly flows with milk and honey…the people are strong; the cities are fortified and very large…the Amalekites dwell in the…South; the Hittites, the Jebusites and the Amorites dwell in the mountains; and the Canaanites dwell by the sea and along the banks of the Jordan.” Top marks on the spying job wouldn’t you say? They had their facts straight and were logical, reasonable and rational.

However, Caleb’s impassioned appeal to go up at once and take possession of the land was met with a lukewarm response. Logic and cold, hard reason made the others realise that it would be impossible for them to win this war. They didn’t have the military strength or know-how. The final verse of the 13th chapter of Numbers, spells out the thoughts of the Israelites – “…we were like grasshoppers in our own sight, and so we were in their sight.”

Actually, the people weren’t wrong about that fact! They, very properly, realised their weakness. Unfortunately, they forgot about God’s strength.
Many times, I do the same. I get all my facts straight and realise my own limitations and lack of strength and expertise, in tackling a particular problem. That’s when the road forks. I can either choose to harp about my failings and shortcomings (which would fill several books, no doubt!) and go back, or hold my weaknesses in one hand and reach out for His strength with the other. And hand-in-hand, move forward.

Comments

Unknown said…
The context of this is the genocide of a nation. Horrific. Is that what being hand-in-hand with God means I can accomplish, because that is what is being implied.

I know you're not planning genocide, but a similar take on this passage can lead to that. How else does Bush justify the murder of non-combatants in Iraq and elsewhere? Because by this 'holy' book, God approves of genocide.

No wonder Richard Dawkins is calling for the banning of the Bible as a hate-inducing, genocide-legitimating book.

We must be very careful when taking insight from this text, as genocide far too real for us to take it lightly.
inkhorn said…
Yes I agree that genocide is not something to be taken lightly! However the lesson I learned from that passage has nothing to do with genocide. I was talking about personal application in terms of trusting in God’s strength while facing a problem (not genocide!).

I believe that the Bible is God’s Word and definitely holy. I don’t always understand it but I believe He is supreme and He knows best.
Unknown said…
This is in response to what thugsb has said, the connection between the war being discussed in the text and the war being waged by Bush is a little extreme, because the reasons for the both wars are completely different.
Every holy book talks about wars and large scale ones at that....the 'mahabharat'- a hindu holy book also talks about a epic war but u don't find people making connections between that war and the 'war of terrorism'....placing the blame wholely on the bible seems rather extreme don't u think.
Also if u say that reading the bible has the power to cause large scale genocides, are u also acknowledging the power of the bible?
Unknown said…
Inkhorn, I know you weren't talking about genocide, but the passage you took guidance from was. The parallel is that just are you were about to gain strength from God, the Israelites were able to gain strength that same strength from God to cause genocide. One of the ways I find it important to think is to ask what isn't being said by people, especially when they're drawing from other things: What was the result the first time? Genocide. So will that pattern repeat by taking inspiration from that? With you Ruth, probably not, but in some way you legitimate the original genocide by saying the very strength that the Israelites originally took was a good thing.

Becks, I've never doubted the power of the Bible. It's a book that people invest with a great deal of authority, and those people happen to be some of the most powerful people on earth right now. As it is their authority, they go to it for guidance and mimic it, and so Iraqi genocide ensues.

There are so many connections between the Canaanite genocide and the Iraqi war. OK, Bush hasn't yet wiped out the entire nation, but that isn't his purpose (he wants control of oil, and continued war so that profits can be made by arms manufacturers). But women and children and animals are being killed (called "Collateral damage" to make it sound like it's OK), just as they were killed by the Israelites.

The connection between the Mahābhārata and Bush hasn't been made because Bush is a so-called Christian, not a Hindu. He reads the Bible, not the Mahābhārata.

I don't place the blame solely on the Bible. (In fact, I find blame a rather silly concept.) But I certainly have to admit that the Bible is having a huge influence on Bush, and so on US policy and foreign relations right now. Bush echoes the language from Revelations when talking about his invasion, and Revelations just happens to talk about genocides and entire countries running red with blood. It's extreme (blindness) to not make the connections.

But remember, all I'm really trying to say is that genocide is bad (we can agree on that?), and we should be a lot more careful about how we use Biblical passages (or any other passages) that talk about genocide as God's (good?!?) command.

And that Bush is evil incarnate. ;)

Popular posts from this blog

On Waiting…Again…

On Father’s Day...Belatedly...

On Waiting...