Moses and the Israelites - Day 2

Today is our second day of this workshop, and I really hope that we can pay attention and open our hearts and minds so that we can receive what we get from all these lectures. Uncle William has a lot to share today as well, so if you're ready, I'll just give the virtual mic to him. Thank you, Sandra. Good evening, everyone. It's really nice to see you all again. I'm always happy to see your faces. I wanted to mention making a foundation of faith on a national level, which is basically creating a spiritual community of people who worship God, study, and pray. When the Messiah comes along and starts talking about God, they can understand what he's talking about. The second part is the foundation of substance, which is more challenging. Making a foundation of faith on a national level is quite easy because most people throughout history have been religious and have formed spiritual communities. You can look at the great religions of the world, and there's no place you can go where you won't find people with some kind of spirituality. However, the current phenomena of secularism and atheism is not the norm. The difficult part has always been creating a foundation of substance, which includes freedom of speech and belief, and that has always been the challenge.

If you look at most of European history, people have been incredibly religious and faithful, attending church and following the expected practices. However, there has often been no foundation of substance because those with different beliefs were persecuted. In the Muslim world today, there is a strong foundation of faith, with people praying five times a day and fasting, but there is little freedom of religion. If someone wants to change their beliefs, they often do so at the risk of their lives. This is why it has taken such a long time for God to send the Messiah in a situation where there is a spiritual community with guaranteed freedom of belief and speech. Such situations are very rare.

Now, let's go back a little bit and pick up where we left off yesterday. When Moses encountered God, God told him to go down to Egypt and take His people out of Egypt. Moses asked, 'Who am I?' This is a profound existential question. God didn't answer that question directly; Moses had to figure it out for himself. Was he an Egyptian? He spent the first 40 years of his life growing up in Egypt as a prince. Was he a Midianite, having spent the next 40 years living in Midian? Or was he a Hebrew, which he learned from his birth parents? This was an existential question for him. He could have easily dismissed the Hebrews, thinking, 'What have they got to do with me?' He also questioned whether he was qualified for the task.

Moses didn't eagerly accept the role of being the greatest prophet in history. When Jesus appeared to Father at 16 and asked him to take up His mission, Father said no three times. All the prophets in the Bible were reluctant when called by God. They often feel inadequate and saying yes is a real act of faith. It's the same for Father and probably for Jesus, although we don't have a record of how He came to understand who He was. When Moses asked God who He was, God replied, 'I am. My name is Yahweh.' This was the beginning of Moses getting to know God, but he continued to question God, trying to understand the depths and mystery of who God was. He wasn't satisfied with just the name Yahweh or the idea that He was the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

God instructed Moses to assemble the elders of Israel and tell them that the Lord, the God of their fathers, had appeared to him. God assured Moses that the elders would listen to him, but Moses replied, 'They will not believe me.' Here, Moses wasn't saying he wasn't qualified; he was contradicting what God said. God said they would listen, but Moses doubted that they would believe him. This leads us to an important point about leadership. A leader must believe in the people they are to lead. If a leader is appointed but nobody follows them, they are not a leader. The followers determine who the leader is. It's essential for a leader to have the confidence of their followers, not just hold a title or position.

Jonathan Sacks commented on the importance of trusting and believing in the people one leads. When Moses put his hand in his breast and it became leprous, it was understood that this affliction was due to his disbelief in the people. God knew His people better than Moses did. The children of Israel were believers, but Moses ultimately doubted them. This is a crucial lesson for leaders: it doesn't matter whether the people believe in you, but whether you believe in them. If you don't believe in the people, you cannot lead them effectively. A leader must identify with their followers and see their virtues, not just their faults. Otherwise, they risk becoming detached and cynical, which is detrimental to their role as a leader.

Moses went to the elders first because he needed their support before approaching Pharaoh. If he had gone directly to Pharaoh without the backing of the elders, he would have had no authority to represent anyone. Therefore, he had to gather the elders of Israel before meeting Pharaoh. This step was crucial for establishing his leadership and authority in the mission to free the people.

Often, Father was like that. Before he would go to a particular place or meet a specific person, he would give a long speech. At the end of all his speeches, he would always get to the point of asking people, 'Are you making a commitment?' If so, he would ask them to raise their hands. With that, Father felt confident to go and do what he was going to do next because he felt he had our support. He poured out his heart and inspiration, and at the end, we would all make a commitment in front of him, raising our hands or shouting as he asked. This was the foundation upon which he could proceed with his next mission, and that is really important. This is why Moses needed the support of the elders of Israel before he could go to see Pharaoh. Just like one needs the support of one's family before embarking on a mission, you cannot simply say, 'I have been told to do this,' without first gaining the support of your husband, wife, or children. It is crucial to have that kind of backing, and if you do not have it, you need to invest in your family and community until you do.

Moses understood that he needed the support of the elders of Israel before he could approach Pharaoh. When Moses went in front of Pharaoh, he conveyed what Aaron said on his behalf: 'This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says: Israel is my firstborn son, and I told you, let my son go so he may worship me.' The phrasing here is interesting. The Lord is the God of Israel, which is not unusual, as every tribe and nation had its own gods in the ancient world. However, the Lord's declaration that Israel is His firstborn son signifies a special relationship. While Israel is chosen for a particular mission, the Egyptians are also considered sons and daughters of God. This reflects the biblical understanding that the Bible does not start with Abraham or Moses, but with Adam, who was the son of God. All humanity descends from Adam and Eve, meaning all human beings are sons and daughters of God, even if they do not recognise it.

When Moses speaks to Pharaoh, he asserts that Israel is God's firstborn son, but he also implies that God loves the Egyptians as well, for they too are God's children. Moses does not tell Pharaoh that he intends to lead the people out of Egypt forever; instead, he asks to take them out for three days to worship God. Moses understands that Pharaoh is unlikely to allow his entire workforce to leave permanently, so he negotiates for a temporary reprieve. Pharaoh's response, however, is dismissive: 'Who is the Lord that I should pay attention to him and let Israel go?' He views the God of Israel as a local, tribal deity without authority in Egypt. Pharaoh's refusal leads to increased hardship for the Hebrews, as he orders their workload to be intensified, forcing them to gather their own straw and make bricks without assistance.

Upon returning to the elders of Israel, Moses finds them displeased. They express their frustration, saying, 'May the Lord look upon you and judge you; you have made us a stench to Pharaoh and his officials, and have put a sword in their hand to kill us.' This reaction is not uncommon for leaders; often, when things go wrong, they lose support. Moses faces the challenge of what to do when his initial efforts result in failure. Instead of giving up, he turns to God and pours out his heart, asking, 'O Lord, why have you brought this trouble upon your people? Is this why you sent me? Ever since I went to Pharaoh to speak in your name, he has brought trouble upon your people, and you have not rescued them at all.'

One remarkable aspect of Moses is his openness with God. When things go wrong, he does not hesitate to express his feelings honestly. This is a valuable lesson for our own spiritual lives; sometimes we may not feel like praying or think we are not good enough to pray. However, Moses demonstrates that even in the worst situations, we can approach God with our feelings of failure and disappointment. If you find yourself in a similar position, start by telling God about your day, no matter how terrible it was. This honest communication can lead to a shift in your spiritual state, allowing you to engage in a meaningful conversation with God.

Winston Churchill once said, 'Success is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm.' He experienced numerous failures throughout his life, from failing exams to being rejected in politics. Yet, he persevered and eventually became a respected leader. Moses, too, faced setbacks but picked himself up and continued. God instructed him to say everything He commanded and to tell Pharaoh to let the Israelites go. However, God also warned Moses that He would harden Pharaoh's heart, meaning that despite the signs and wonders He would perform in Egypt, Pharaoh would not listen. This raises ethical questions about Pharaoh's responsibility for his actions, which we will explore as we examine the story step by step.

The ten plagues are significant events in this narrative: the plague of blood, frogs, lice, flies, livestock death, boils, hail, locusts, darkness, and finally, the death of the Egyptian firstborn. Some question whether these events truly occurred, suggesting that the Bible is fabricated. Critics argue that the biblical text was composed long after Moses, concocted to explain various phenomena. However, Professor Sir Colin John Humphreys, a scientist and Christian, sought to reconcile his scientific understanding with his faith. He authored a book titled 'The Miracles of Exodus,' exploring the plausibility of these events. In a video associated with his work, he discusses the ten plagues and the scientific inquiries surrounding them, illustrating the ongoing fascination and mystery these stories hold for scholars and scientists alike.

The biblical accounts of the plagues in Egypt provide an accurate record of events that likely occurred three and a half thousand years ago. The authors of the Bible documented what they observed, but they lacked the scientific understanding of the natural phenomena at play, such as the eruption of the volcano on Santorini. They interpreted these events through the lens of their beliefs, attributing them to divine intervention. This was a common perspective until relatively recently, as people often viewed natural disasters like earthquakes and tsunamis as acts of God due to their limited understanding of geology and ecology. Thus, while the biblical narrative reflects the experiences of those who lived through these events, it also carries layers of interpretation that were shaped by the cultural and religious context of the time.

The plagues serve a dual purpose: they demonstrate the power of the God of Israel and challenge the false gods of Egypt. Each plague systematically overthrew a major Egyptian deity, starting with the Nile turning to blood, which undermined the worship of the Nile god. The subsequent plagues, including the death of frogs and the darkness that engulfed the land, further illustrated that the gods the Egyptians revered were powerless. This revelation was not just for the Israelites; it was a lesson for the Egyptians as well, showing that the God of Israel is the God of all humanity and history. Through these events, God was teaching that there are universal moral values that everyone, including Pharaoh, is expected to uphold.

Pharaoh's actions raise complex questions about free will and responsibility. When God hardened Pharaoh's heart, it prompts us to consider whether Pharaoh was truly free in his decisions. If he was not acting freely, can he be held accountable for the suffering of his people? The analogy of a person forced to commit a crime illustrates this dilemma; if someone is coerced into an action, they cannot be deemed guilty in the same way as someone who acts of their own volition. This tension between freedom and responsibility is central to understanding the narrative of the plagues and Pharaoh's role within it.

As the plagues progressed, Pharaoh repeatedly made promises to Moses, only to retract them once the immediate crisis passed. This pattern of behaviour indicates a hardening of his own heart rather than a direct action from God. Each time relief came, Pharaoh's resolve weakened, and he chose to ignore the consequences of his actions. The magicians of Egypt even recognised the divine nature of the plagues, stating, 'This is the finger of God,' yet Pharaoh remained obstinate. His refusal to acknowledge the reality of the situation led to further suffering for his people, illustrating how denial can blind leaders to the truth and lead to catastrophic outcomes.

The consequences of Pharaoh's obstinacy became increasingly dire, culminating in economic ruin for Egypt. His officials, recognising the devastation wrought by his decisions, pleaded with him to let the Israelites go. However, Pharaoh's pride and denial prevented him from accepting the reality of the situation. This mirrors historical instances where leaders, like Saddam Hussein during the Iraq War, refused to acknowledge defeat, resulting in further destruction. Such denial is often a hallmark of tyrannical leadership, where the inability to accept reality leads to a refusal to change course, even in the face of overwhelming evidence.

Ultimately, Pharaoh's journey illustrates the gradual descent into a state of denial and addiction to power. As he continued to resist the inevitable, he lost his freedom, becoming a slave to his own obstinacy. This reflects a broader truth about the nature of evil; it harms not only its victims but also ensnares the perpetrator. The more one engages in wrongdoing, the more one becomes trapped in a cycle of moral degradation, losing the ability to discern right from wrong. This cycle of addiction to power and denial can lead to a complete loss of freedom, as seen in Pharaoh's tragic downfall.

In the context of addiction and the gradual loss of freedom, we can see parallels in the story of Pharaoh. Just as individuals in a 12-step program must acknowledge their need for help from a higher power, Pharaoh was trapped in his own stubbornness and denial. When people lose their freedom, it often happens gradually, without them realising it. For instance, someone who starts smoking or drinking may insist they can stop at any time, yet they become increasingly enslaved to their addiction. This gradual loss of freedom can lead to a deeper enslavement, as seen with Pharaoh, who became a prisoner of the very values he espoused: obedience and slavery. Tyrants ultimately bring about their own destruction, while those with the courage to act against the consensus can achieve monumental freedom.

Freedom, in its truest sense, is the ability to do what is right and good. However, this freedom is not guaranteed; it can be acquired or lost over time. Often, we know the right thing to do but fail to act on it. This raises the question of whether we are truly free if we cannot follow our conscience. The freedom to act according to our values can easily be lost, leading to shame and the desire to hide our true selves. This theme resonates with the biblical stories of Adam and Eve and Ham, where denial and shame lead to destruction. Conversely, when individuals like Abraham choose to go against societal norms, they often find liberation and a sense of empowerment, free from the constraints of peer pressure.

Pharaoh's eventual concession to Moses, allowing the Israelites to worship, was a reluctant admission of his dire situation. He attempted to negotiate by insisting that the Israelites leave their livestock behind, revealing his desire to maintain control. Moses, however, insisted that not a hoof would be left behind, highlighting the importance of complete freedom. This negotiation reflects the broader theme of addiction and the need for honesty. Just as a person caught in a web of lies must continually fabricate new lies to maintain their façade, institutions can become corrupt when they refuse to acknowledge their wrongdoings. Whistleblowers often face persecution for revealing the truth, as institutions prefer to uphold their cover-ups rather than confront their failures.

The biblical narrative presents freedom not as a binary state but as a journey influenced by our choices. Unlike philosophical discussions that focus on whether humans are free or not, the Bible illustrates that we can either reinforce our freedom through wise decisions or gradually lose it through poor choices. This perspective emphasises the importance of self-mastery. As Father said, true might comes from conquering oneself rather than defeating others. Pharaoh's inability to control himself led to his downfall, as he became obsessed and could no longer make decisions for the good of his people. Effective leaders must be willing to admit mistakes and adjust their policies for the benefit of those they lead, a quality that is often lacking in contemporary governance.

The recent global response to the coronavirus pandemic serves as a contemporary example of leadership failure. Many nations implemented strict lockdowns, while Sweden took a different approach, facing criticism for its decisions. However, leaders in Sweden were willing to acknowledge their mistakes and adapt their policies accordingly. In contrast, leaders like Boris Johnson in the UK have been reluctant to admit errors, perpetuating the same ineffective strategies. This reluctance to change is reminiscent of Pharaoh's stubbornness, which ultimately led to his downfall. The ability to evaluate past decisions and learn from them is crucial for effective leadership, yet it is a quality that is often absent in those in power.

Finally, the narrative of the Israelites' liberation culminates in the death of Pharaoh's firstborn son, a moment that forced him to confront the reality of his situation. His request for Moses to bless him signifies a turning point, as he acknowledges the power of the God of Israel. This moment of humility is significant, as it reflects a recognition of the need for divine intervention. Moses, despite the trials he faced, must find the strength to forgive Pharaoh and pray for him, ensuring that he does not become a prisoner of bitterness. The Israelites' departure from Egypt, marked by their request for silver and gold, illustrates the Egyptians' recognition of their own complicity in the oppression. The Egyptians, realising the true source of their plight was Pharaoh's stubbornness, chose to support the Israelites, leading to a peaceful separation without resentment. This act of generosity underscores the importance of acknowledging the past while moving forward without bitterness.

The act of killing and consuming the god of Egypt was a capital offense, representing a significant act of public disobedience. This could be seen as the price of deliverance from slavery to freedom. The Israelites had to demonstrate, at the risk of their lives, on whose side they stood: the God of Israel or the Egyptian law. Often, we find ourselves in life-and-death situations that involve a change of lineage, identity, sovereignty, and loyalty. This was the context in which they found themselves.

The Israelites were initially in Goshen, and Pharaoh had given them permission to go into the desert for three days to worship God. They set off from Goshen and arrived at a place called Sukkoth after about three days. On the fourth day, Pharaoh looked over the city from his balcony and realised that the building site was unusually quiet; the Hebrews had not returned. He felt tricked by Moses and was furious that his entire workforce had left Egypt. Consequently, Pharaoh called upon his army to pursue the Israelites, who had a three-day head start.

As the Egyptians began to catch up, the Bible states that it took them seven days to reach the point where they would cross the Red Sea. It is important to note that the Red Sea is not merely a geographical location; it is a complex area that includes the Sea of Reeds. The journey took about seven days, which suggests that the crossing occurred at a different location than commonly assumed. There are archaeological remains of two ancient cities on either side of the Gulf of Aqaba, which may have been connected by a land bridge that was exposed during low tide, allowing the Israelites to cross.

Moses, having lived in Midian as a shepherd for 40 years, would have been familiar with the area and the land bridge. It is plausible that the tide receded significantly due to geological phenomena, providing ample time for the Hebrews to cross before the tide returned and drowned the pursuing Egyptians. Some ancient chariot wheels and armaments have been discovered in the area, supporting this theory. Furthermore, many believe that Mount Sinai is located in this region, which aligns with the biblical narrative.

Once they crossed the Red Sea, God spoke to the Israelites, saying, 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord. You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your might.' This commandment emphasises the importance of loving God and teaching these principles to their children. Moses did not give an impassioned speech about freedom; instead, he focused on the relationship with God and the responsibility to pass this love onto the next generation.

This teaching is fundamental to Judaism. Ramban, one of the greatest medieval rabbis, stated that respect for one's teacher should be as great as that for one's parents, as parents bring children into this world while teachers guide them towards the world to come. Raising children is not merely about physical existence; it is about nurturing their spiritual lives. If a community neglects the education of its youth, it risks being excommunicated, as the survival of the world relies on the merit of schoolchildren.

Jewish culture is deeply oriented towards children, as evidenced by the child-friendly nature of Jewish festivals and traditions. The aim is for children to enjoy these celebrations, fostering a sense of curiosity about their meanings. Over time, as they mature, they begin to understand and practice these traditions in a more spiritually mature way. This raises a critical question for our own spiritual community: have we been child-friendly? Many second-generation members recall experiences during holy days that were not engaging or enjoyable, leading to a disconnect from the spiritual practices.

Reflecting on our past, it is clear that our holy days and services have not traditionally been very child-friendly. The focus has often been on lengthy sermons rather than creating an engaging environment for families. This lack of child-friendly practices has implications for how we invest in the education of our children today. The most important aspect for any society is the investment in its youth, and we must consider how we can create a more inclusive and nurturing environment for families within our spiritual community.

In contrast to other cultures that have focused on monumental structures, Jewish investment has been in education and community. Synagogues serve as community centres, emphasising the importance of teaching and learning. This focus on education is why Jewish culture has endured, while other civilisations have faded. The Divine Principle teaches that understanding the particulars of restoration is essential for finding the path to life. We must study the principles of restoration in detail, as a lack of historical understanding leads to ignorance. To comprehend our current reality, we must grasp the events of the past three thousand years.

Otherwise, you just cannot make head or tail of it; it's like a mystery. Churchill also said, 'The further you can look, the further back you can look, the further forward you're likely to see.' That's why Father spent a huge amount of time studying history. He understood the whole history of God's providence and restoration from Adam right up until today. This understanding allowed him to predict and prophesy very accurately what was going to happen in the future. He knew what needed to be done today so that when the future came, he and our movement would be ready to address it. Without understanding the past, the present becomes a mystery, and when things happen in the future, it can be shocking. However, if you understand the patterns and themes of history, you can anticipate what is likely to happen based on the trajectory of events over time. This was the basis upon which Father was able to understand things; it was not that God told him directly, but rather that he had to figure these things out for himself. That was Father's responsibility.

When Jesus appeared to Father and asked him to undertake His mission, Father, being a sensible person, initially said no. He thought it was ridiculous and impossible for a boy from a backward country in Korea to bring about the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth. However, after some discussion, Father eventually agreed to take on the mission. To accomplish this, he needed an instruction manual to understand how to mend the 'machine' of humanity. The instruction manual for the restoration of humanity is the Bible. This is why Father studied the Bible intensively; he sought to understand the natural pattern for subjugating Satan. He examined the stories of creation, Adam and Eve, and the subsequent biblical figures to discern what went wrong and which parts of the 'machine' needed fixing. He studied the Bible to uncover the old truths that needed to be expressed anew, as revealed through the stories of Abraham, Cain and Abel, Noah, and others.

Father recognised that these biblical figures had pioneered the way to restore the world. He understood that to be successful, he needed to inherit their lessons and avoid repeating their mistakes. This is why he often spoke about repeating and restoring the same course of restoration that the patriarchs went through. By learning from their experiences, he aimed to bring history to completion and achieve success. Therefore, it is crucial for us to study these things in detail. Like Father, we should not be mystified by current events; instead, we can anticipate what will happen and know the best ways to respond. This is why studying the Bible in depth is so important.

Up until now, God was doing everything, as interpreted through the events of the Exodus. The Israelites faced the ten plagues and fled Egypt, crossing the Red Sea in fear of being defeated by the pursuing Egyptians. When Moses parted the Red Sea with his rod, they crossed over, taking unleavened bread with them. The reason for the unleavened bread was that it is denser and easier to carry, allowing them to have enough food for their journey. However, once they crossed the Red Sea and consumed their provisions, they began to complain to Moses about the lack of food. They questioned why he had led them into the desert to starve, and Moses, unable to provide food, consulted God. In response, God provided manna from heaven.

As the journey continued, the Israelites faced another challenge when they ran out of water. They complained to Moses, who then went to a bitter lake at Rephidim. By throwing a tree into the water, he made it sweet, demonstrating his understanding of the situation. Throughout this time, the people remained in a state of dependency, constantly complaining and questioning why things were not better planned. This dependency led to a lack of faith and trust in God's provision. Interestingly, the very first commandment God gave to the Israelites was to rest. Moses instructed them to gather manna for six days, but on the seventh day, they were to rest. This commandment may seem surprising, as it emphasises rest rather than increased productivity.

God's intention was to establish a god-centered family. By instituting a day of rest, He aimed to create a structure for this ideal family. In Egypt, the Israelites had worked tirelessly without rest, so God encouraged them to take time to spend together as a family, to pray, worship, and enjoy each other's company. This was the beginning of establishing a god-centered family, which is a fundamental aspect of God's plan.