“THEN CAME AMALEK.” — In the generations
of Esau (Genesis xxxvi.) we find that Esau and his descendants are the Edomites; “Esau is Edom” (verses 1 & 8). In verse 12 we learn that Amalek was the
grandson of Esau. Both Israel and Amalek
therefore could trace their descent from Abraham, and herein lies the
significance of the type. Amalek stand
for the flesh. This typical feature is
repeated. Going back no further than
Abraham we find two sons — Ishmael who stands for the flesh, and Isaac for the
spirit. The church of the Galatians
provides a commentary upon the typical character of these two sons and their
relation to the flesh and spirit.
Coming to Isaac we find that he also had
two sons — Esau and Jacob, and once again the type is clear. The epistle to the Hebrews provides
explanations of the meaning of the typical character of these two sons.
Two others must be included, viz., Moab
and Ammon, both the children of Lot, and preeminently the children of
shame. When we speak of Ishmael, Edom,
Moab, Ammon and Amalek, we enumerate those foes of Israel who sought to bar the
way and prevent their entry into the land of promise.
This is exactly what “the flesh” in a
believer endeavours to do, Israel, when bondmen in Egypt, when confronted by
the Red Sea, when in need of bread and water, were called upon neither to fight
nor to fend for themselves. In all these
experiences they typified the passive position of the believer under grace. The
believer, however, has a warfare before him, a conflict that lasts until this
life finishes, the conflict between flesh and spirit.
The word “fight”, apart from the instance
in Exod. i. 10 which voiced the fears of Pharaoh, is used in
two settings only:--
(1). OF
THE LORD. — “The Lord shall fight
for you” (Exod. xiv. 14).
“The Lord fighteth for them” (Exod. xiv.
25).
(2). OF
ISRAEL. — “Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel” (Exod. xvii. 8).
“Go out, and fight with Amalek” (Exod. xvii.
9).
“So Joshua . . . . . fought with Amalek”
(Exod. xvii. 10).
The one conflict of the believer after
redemption is with the flesh. What was
the occasion of the fight? We believe it
was twofold. The word “then” in the
sentence, “then came Amalek”, appears to be connected with:--
(1).
The provision of
water.
In a country like Arabia water is
precious, and its possession eagerly sought.
Parallel cases may be found in
Gen. xxi. 25, where we find
Abimelech’s servants violently taking away the wells of water from
Abraham. Deborah’s song includes a
reference to this perennial cause of conflict:--
“Instead of the shouting of the archers
among the wells, There they laud the righteous acts of Jehovah” (Judges v. 11,
Companion Bible).
(2).
The tempting of
the Lord.
“Then” reads impmediately after the
question, “Is the Lord among us or not?”.
The flesh takes immediate advantage of the beginnings of unbelief, of
murmuring and complaining.
Amalek was overcome by two means:--
The
intercession of Moses.
The
warfare under Joshua.
Bishop Hall’s comment here is:--
"I do not hear Moses say to this
Joshua, Amalek is come up against us, it matters not whether thou go up against
him or not; or if thou go, whether
alone or with company, or if
accompanied, whether with many or few, strong or weak; or if strong, whether they fight or no: I will
pray on the hill; but choose us out
men, and go fight."
In the conflict with the flesh the weapons
must be those of God’s appointment, and neither prayer alone, nor conflict alone
can prevail. As Moses’ hands were
raised, so Israel’s fight succeeded. As
Moses’ hands sank, so Israel’s fight failed.
Three noteworthy features close the
narrative:--
The command to write the record in a book.
The revelation of the name Jehovah-nissi.
The reason given for Amalek’s extermination.
“And the Lord said unto Moses, Write this
for a memorial in a book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua, for I will
utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven” (Exod. xvii. 14).
Joshua was the instrument in the hand of
the Lord to divide the land of promise for an inheritance to Israel. His greatest activities were spent in the
subjugation of the Canaanites, and all those who opposed the possession of the
land. This possession was not to be
considered complete until Amalek had been destroyed, Moses reminds Israel:--
“Remember what Amalek did unto thee by the
way, when ye were come forth out of the Land of Egypt: How he met thee by the way, and smote the
hindmost of thee, when thou wast faint and weary, and he feared not God. Therefore it shall be, when the Lord thy God
hath given thee rest from all thine enemies round about, in the land which the
Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance to possess it, that thou shalt blot
out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven; thou shalt not forget it” (Deut. xxv. 17-19).
The name Jehovah-nissi is the third Jehovah title revealed in
Scripture. The first is concerned with
the offering of Isaac, the great type of Christ and His redemption, Jehovah-jireh, “the Lord will
provide”. A friend, whose judgment we
hold in high esteem, says that Jehovah-jireh
means “Jehovah appeared” (Gen.xxii.14).
The second is connected with the overthrow of the Egyptians (type of the
world), Jehovah-ropheka, “the Lord
that healeth thee” (Exod.xv.26). The
third title is connected with the destruction of Amalek (type of the flesh), Jehovah-nissi, “the Lord my banner”
(Exod. xvii. 15). The third title is the
first of three that suggests the believer’s active appropriation:--
“The Lord my banner” (Exod. xvii. 15).
“The Lord my shepherd” (Psa. xxiii. 1).
“The Lord our righteousness” (Jer. xxiii.
6).
The word “banner” (Hebrew nes) is the word used for the “pole”
upon which the brazen serpent was lifted (Numb. xxi. 8, 9). If we turn to the occasion we shall find that
it is a repetition of Rephidim. The
people speak against God and against Moses because of the lack of water. Jehovah-nissi
is this time set forth in symbol, and this symbol Christ takes to Himself
in John iii. 14:--
“As Moses lifted up the serpent in the
wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up.”
The “banner” under which we must fight our
“Amalek” is the cross of Christ, the serpent on the pole, suggesting in type
the deep doctrine of Rom. vi. 6 and
Gal. v. 24. It is the cross of Christ, seen not as the
means of our redemption, but of our victory over the flesh. This is the burden of Romans vi., vii., viii. and
Galatians v. In the margin of the A.V. of Exod. xvii. 16 we read:--
"Heb. the hand upon the throne of the Lord."
The translation both of the A.V. and the
R.V. shows that those responsible believed “the hand” to be the Lord’s hand,
and therefore translated the passage “the Lord hath sworn”.
The
Companion Bible note reads:--
"Surely
the hand (lifted up) upon the banner of Jah
(is to swear):" &c.
The substitution of “banner” for “throne”
is explained by Rotherham in his Emphasized
Version as:--
"Ginsburg
thinks it should be as follows: These are readings suggested by context and
verse, but not supported by the Ancient Versions" (G. Intro. pp. 162,
170).
Rotherham does not endorse this
“suggestion”, but translates:--
"Because of a hand against the throne
of Yah."
The
hand that was laid upon the throne of the Lord was the hand of Amalek. With all their failures Israel were the
Lord’s anointed. When Balaam was brought
to curse Israel, he had to say:--
“He hath not beheld iniquity in Jacob . .
. . . the shout of a king is among them.”
“His king shall be higher than Agag, and
his kingdom shall be exalted.”
“Edom shall be a possession.”
“And when he looked upon Amalek, he took
up his parable and said, Amalek was the first of the nations, but his latter
end is even to perish” (Numbers xxiii. & xxiv.).
Here Agag is mentioned in connection with
Israel’s king and kingdom. This was a
title similar to that of Pharaoh or Abimelech, and used by all the kings of
Amalek.
(To be
concluded)
No comments:
Post a Comment