Moses and the Israelites - Day 8

Good evening everyone. It's very nice to see you, and it's been a pleasure seeing you over these two weeks. Now we're just going to start. This online workshop is about lessons in leadership and community building. What a journey it has been so far through thousands of years of history, learning meaningful and significant lessons from some of the greatest leaders we know of. As it was mentioned in one of the days in these lectures, as a spiritual community, we are called to be the new Israel, the chosen people. It sounds grand, but I hope we can embody these lessons in our hearts and minds and succeed in creating a new type of history that hasn't been done yet. There are so many lessons we are learning here, and it would be great if we could accept the things we are not doing well in our communities and build upon this great foundation. I'm really grateful that Uncle William is here to point everything out and guide us wisely through this accumulated history and lessons.

So, to recap from yesterday, this is one of the commands that Moses gave an explanation about. One of the biggest problems that happens with any community is when people get angry and resentful, which leads to conflict, separation, and disunity. We will be looking at that in a moment as it develops more in the Israelite community. Moses said, 'Do not hate your brother in your heart. Reprove or reason with your neighbour frankly so you will not bear sin because of him. Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but rather love your neighbour as yourself. I am the Lord.' This is always connected to God and the worship of God. If someone you believe has done you harm, do not remain in a state of silent resentment. Do not give way to hate, bear a grudge, or take revenge. Instead, correct him, reason with him, and tell him what you believe he has done and how you feel it has harmed you.

You may say to this person, 'What you said or did hurt me. I don't think it was the right thing to do.' You may apologize and seek to make amends, as any decent person would. Even if he does not, at least you've made your feelings known to him. That in itself is cathartic and will help you avoid nursing a grievance. At the end of the day, it is your responsibility to do that, and at least the other person now knows what they've done. They are now aware of their actions, and how they respond is their responsibility. This also refers to someone you see acting wrongly, committing a sin or a crime. You may not be the victim; you may just be an observer. The command tells us not to be content with passing a negative judgment on their behaviour, i.e., hating them in your heart. It's easy to develop a bad opinion about someone after seeing them do something wrong. Instead, Moses says you should approach them in as gentle and constructive a way as possible.

If you stay silent and do nothing, you will become complicit in their guilt. This is true in every context within our own spiritual community as well. If we see someone abusing power or doing something wrong or corrupt, we should say something in a gentle and constructive way. The person may not realise that what they're doing is wrong. If you don't speak up, that's how evil thrives. An Irish philosopher once said that evil thrives when good people do nothing. It's true. When people want to seize power and get away with it because nobody stands up to them, evil thrives, and corruption prospers, leading to tyranny.

This is where we were at the end of yesterday, on the edge of Canaan. They have been on a journey that has taken 21 months to reach this point. The question is, are they ready to enter Canaan? Have they made the necessary psychological, social, cultural, and political transformation? What is going on here is not just about geography; it's about making a certain kind of transformation. They were slaves in Egypt, and to qualify to live in Canaan and establish what we would call Chung, they need to make a certain kind of transformation. Originally, God thought they could do it in 21 days, but after 21 months, the question remains: were they ready to go in or not? It's a huge ask.

Canaan is very much what we would call Chungagook. It's the realm of the family pledge, the place where the family pledge is implemented, and where the values embedded in the family pledge bear fruition in terms of social, family, political, and economic dimensions. The most common expressions in the family pledge are 'the owner of Chung' and 'centering on true love.' Being the owner of Chung means we are responsible for the way it is. If anything goes wrong, we need to take ownership and fix it. There's a difference between owning your own house and being a tenant. If the roof starts leaking, as an owner, you have to fix it. As a tenant, you call the landlord. To be an owner of our spiritual community means we need to get involved and change things for the better.

When I was asked which country in the world today most resembles Chung, I said Switzerland. In Switzerland, everyone is involved in the decision-making process. Four times a year, they receive a thick wad of papers and are supposed to read all the information because they have to vote on different laws. This means they are the owners of their community, their canton, and their village. All decision-making is decentralised as far as possible. That is the vision of Chung. I would say Switzerland is the country that most resembles the ideal in that sense, being the most principled country in terms of its political, economic, and social structures. Of course, like everywhere, it has its own problems and challenges.

The next pledge states, 'Perfect the world of freedom, peace, unity, and happiness by centering on true love.' These are the words we've been looking at as we explore leadership and community building. The world of freedom means being free within the law. Compassion and justice must go together. Unity does not mean uniformity; it is a measurement of our love. We are united in heart, which does not mean we are all the same. As a result, we experience joy through love. Freedom is an important word here. The last pledge states, 'Our family owner Chung pledges absolute faith, absolute love, and absolute obedience.' Absolute faith means the highest trust and loyalty to God. Absolute love is love for strangers and enemies, and absolute obedience is about listening to one's conscience. We must listen to our conscience above everything else and perfect the realm of liberation, which is about freedom from slavery into complete freedom. This emphasizes the word 'freedom,' which comes up multiple times in the family pledge, apart from this phrase. Complete freedom means not just limited freedom but the freedom to pursue beauty, truth, and goodness, and the freedom to be responsible. It is the freedom to realise the three blessings in the Kingdom of God on earth and in heaven by centering on true love.

As they stand on the edge of Canaan, they wonder what it is like. Moses sends some scouts out. In translations, people often refer to them as the 12 spies, but in Hebrew, the word actually just means tourists. They were sent by Moses to look at the land and see what it was like. When you go as a tourist, you look for the good things in the land, the wonderful sights and resorts. If you go as a spy, you look for weaknesses. After 40 days, they come back and report that the land flows with milk and honey. Moses told them it would be a land of milk and honey, but he had never been there himself. They needed independent testimony from eyewitnesses, which was the mission of the 12 leaders of the tribes of Israel. They fulfilled their mission by bringing back an accurate report that it was a land flowing with milk and honey. However, ten of them thought their task was to be spies and said they were not able to go up against the people because they were stronger than they were. They brought an evil report to the people of Israel, who lamented and changed their minds, saying, 'Let us choose a captain and return to Egypt.' Only two of the tourists, Joshua and Caleb, argued against them. You might wonder what was going on here. Moses had told them the land was good, but why should they believe him? They needed independent testimony of eyewitnesses, and that was the mission of the 12 leaders.

The conquest was impossible; in other words, they weren't looking for all the good things that were there. They were just spying out the land to see if there were any weaknesses. When they looked at it, they saw that all the cities were well fortified and all the people were very strong. They thought these people were too strong for us. They misunderstood what their mission was; they weren't being sent to spy out the land but to bring back an accurate report of what the land was like, confirming what Moses had said. The difference between the ten and Joshua and Caleb is that the latter had faith, courage, and confidence, while the former did not. They understood the story, whereas the ten did not. Caleb and Joshua understood what Moses had asked them to do, which was to scout out the land and bring back an accurate description of how it was.

The other ten did not understand the task at hand; they thought they were going there to spy out the land and see what the weaknesses were. They didn't get it. It's all about the importance of narrative and the story. Ten of the twelve thought they were part of a story of espionage. The result was that they looked for the wrong things and came to the wrong conclusion, demoralising the people and destroying the hope of an entire generation. This will be eternally remembered as one of the worst failures in Jewish history. Jonathan Sacks, speaking during the height of the coronavirus pandemic, wrote about this. He believed that the story we tell affects the decisions we make. Get the story wrong, and we can rob an entire generation of their future; get it right, like Joshua and Caleb, and we can achieve greatness.

Looking at how the world is dealing with the coronavirus, I personally don't think it's being handled in the right way. People got spooked and panicked. In hindsight, I believe that the decisions made by political leaders in most countries were disastrous and led to a social, spiritual, cultural, and economic catastrophe. I expressed this in March before the lockdown happened and received a lot of criticism for it. But I think that's the reality. So, what did God say? Moses went and told God, who was obviously upset that the scouting mission had not been successful. God asked how long His people would despise Him and said He would strike them and disinherit them, making a nation greater and mightier than they were.

Moses found himself in a similar situation to when they built the golden calf. God was saying to Moses that this was a useless lot, and He would disinherit them. Moses had to decide how to respond. He reminded God that the Egyptians would hear about it and think about God's reputation. He argued that God would not go down in history as a kind and compassionate deity if He destroyed everyone He had brought out of Egypt. Moses then recalled their encounter on Mount Sinai, where God described Himself as slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love, forgiving iniquity. Moses insisted that God pardon the iniquity of the people, or he would resign from leading them.

God then decided on a course of action. According to the number of days they spied out the land—40 days—each day would represent a year of bearing their iniquity. They would know God's displeasure, and all those over 20 years old would die in the wilderness. Only those born in the wilderness would grow up in an atmosphere of freedom, worshipping God and living according to the law. It was better for them to wander for 40 years than to enter Canaan with a slave mentality, which would lead to recreating a slave society. God realised it was more practical to allow the next generation, who had grown up free, to enter Canaan and create a society based on kindness.

Some decided to enter Canaan immediately, refusing to wait for another 40 years of wandering. Moses warned them that they were not strong enough, but they went down anyway and were defeated. This was a difficult time, leading to what is known as Korah's rebellion. The people had been looking forward to entering Canaan, but suddenly they were faced with another 40 years in the wilderness. Many leaders, disgruntled and unhappy, decided to rebel against Moses and seek a change in leadership. Korah rose up against Moses with 250 Israelite leaders, claiming that Moses had gone too far and that the whole community was holy. Moses, in response, humbled himself and bowed down before them, showing his humility.

Moses reminded Korah and the Levites that God had selected them to serve in the sanctuary and minister to the congregation. He questioned why they were grasping for the priesthood as well. Other leaders, Dathan and Abiram, descendants of Reuben, expressed their resentment at not being in leadership positions, accusing Moses of leading them out of a land flowing with milk and honey—Egypt, which was not true. Moses, in anger, declared that he had not taken anything from them, not even a donkey. He was being accused of accumulating wealth and behaving like a bully. Moses insisted that he was sent by God to lead them, not for his own gain.

To understand the motivations behind Korah and his followers, we must listen to their accusations. People often project their desires onto others, attributing to them what they themselves want. Korah wanted to be the chief priest, feeling that he was senior to Moses. The 250 leaders resented the leadership being taken from the other tribes and given to Levi. Dathan and Abiram, as descendants of the oldest son, felt entitled to leadership. This situation created a crisis, bringing all their resentments to the surface. The rebels aimed to discredit Moses, raising doubts about his credibility and accusing him of corruption and making up laws. They sought to undermine his character to seize power for themselves, which is a common tactic in revolutions and rebellions.

This is not an argument for the sake of truth; it is an argument for power. Jonathan Sacks relates this to today's world, where arguments are often not for the sake of heaven but for the sake of power. This is evident in the rise of cancel culture, where social media is used to turn people into non-persons for committing perceived wrongs. Instead of engaging in meaningful discussion, people label others and dismiss their arguments. This is what happened during Korah's rebellion, where the aim was to discredit Moses to gain power. The same dynamics are at play today, where people are cancelled and silenced instead of being engaged with on the basis of evidence and reason. The distinction between arguing for the sake of heaven and for the sake of power is crucial in understanding these conflicts.

These and those are the words of the living God, but the law is in accordance with the school of Hillel. What does that mean? In other words, the views of Shamai and the views of Hillel are both the words of the living God, even though they contradict each other. However, the law is in accordance with the school of Hillel. The reason God said that the law is in accord with the school of Hillel is that whenever the school of Hillel presented the law, they would always first present the view of Shamai with respect and accuracy. Then they would present their own view, allowing everyone listening to understand both sides of the argument and come to their own conclusion. It is this approach that God favoured. It was not a question of which one was right; it was about how they argued. One school respected the views of the other, while the other did not. God said the law is in accordance with the school of Hillel because they presented their opponents' views first before their own.

This is completely different from what was happening with Korah. Korah and his company argued with Moses; they wanted to cancel Moses and discredit him, attacking the person rather than the views. God then became frustrated with this and said to Moses and Aaron, 'Separate yourselves from this congregation so I can finish them off and start over with another nation.' This was a significant moment, as all the major leaders among the people of Israel had come against Moses. It was not just God saying He would wipe them out because they brought bad reports from Canaan; now all the Israelites themselves were standing and opposing Moses. You can imagine the stress of this situation when all the leadership of the tribes confronted him.

When God said to Moses and Aaron that He would wipe them out, they threw themselves on their faces and pleaded, 'Oh God, God of all living things, when one man sins, are you going to take it out on the whole community?' They were echoing the sentiments of Abraham, standing on his covenant. Moses called upon God, saying that only the guilty should be punished. He then asked God to make the earth swallow Korah and the rebels, and so the earth swallowed Korah, the 250 leaders, and all their followers and families. You might think that settled the argument, but the reality was that the argument was not settled. The next morning, rumblings broke out in the community of Israel against Moses and Aaron, accusing them of killing God's people. They felt that settling an argument through force was not fair or just.

The community did not want to be governed by force, even if it was Moses or God. They had enough of that in Egypt. The people gathered against Moses and Aaron, and God intervened again, telling Moses to back away from the congregation so He could do away with them. Once more, Moses and Aaron threw themselves on the ground and pleaded with God not to do it. God relented and instructed Moses to speak to the people of Israel, telling him to gather twelve staffs, one from each leader of their ancestral tribes, and write each man's name on the staff. They were to lay them out in the tent of meeting before God. The staff of the man God chose would sprout, putting an end to the endless grumbling of the people against Moses.

This was a different way of settling the argument. God realised that force was not the way to do it; He needed to find a better way. The rebels wanted to attribute to Moses and Aaron a form of leadership unknown in the Torah, which was radically incompatible with the humility that Moses embodied. Over and over again, Moses is called a humble man. The rebels wanted to set themselves above the Lord's assembly, accusing Moses of doing what they themselves wanted to do. They sought power, while Moses consistently bowed down in humility, trying to prevent the people from doing the same. When arguments are undertaken, how they are conducted is very important. An argument not for the sake of heaven is one that is undertaken for the sake of victory, while an argument for the sake of heaven is undertaken with the aim of truth.

When the aim is victory, as it was in the case of Korah, both sides are diminished. Korah died because he and his followers were swallowed up, but Moses' authority was also tarnished because he won the argument by calling upon God to use force. It became a lose-lose situation. However, when the aim is truth, both sides gain. To be defeated by the truth is the only defeat that is also a victory. If you have an argument for the sake of truth and discover that your views are incorrect, you have the opportunity to discard those incorrect arguments and embrace better ones, bringing you closer to the truth. Losing an argument about truth can actually be a win because it leads to a better understanding of reality.

One of the most helpful things is what is called a critical friend—someone willing to have the courage, humility, and love to point out where your arguments are wrong. This is what it means to love your neighbour. Reasoning with someone who hurts you or someone you think is wrong can feel like losing an argument, but it is a gain because you find a better understanding of reality. This should be the basis of how science works. However, in scientific discussions, especially regarding issues like the coronavirus, there is often a lot of politics involved, with different scientists taking sides for political reasons and trying to discredit each other. Not everyone has power or position, but we all have influence. The most important forms of leadership come not from titles or robes of office, but from a willingness to work with others to achieve what we cannot do alone.

Leadership is about speaking, listening, teaching, learning, and treating others' views with respect, even if they disagree with you. It is about explaining patiently and cogently why we believe what we believe and encouraging others to strive for their best. Always choose influence rather than power; it helps change people into those who can change the world. I remember a teacher from high school who told me that a prominent politician was once his pupil. He claimed that he taught him everything he knows. As a teacher, you can have a huge influence without power. By teaching the truth and helping people pursue and love it, you can influence the world. We often do not realise the impact we have through our words and actions, which might change someone who goes on to change the world.

We should not think about wanting to become powerful leaders but rather consider how we can make a difference in the world we live in. Each of us can influence the people we meet every day, leaving the world a better place. I recall going door-to-door fundraising, meeting all kinds of people. Sometimes, through our conversations, we changed them, and they might have gone on to change the world without us even knowing the difference we made in their lives. In that sense, we are all leaders. A leader is someone who has followers, not just someone with a title. All the prophets in the Old Testament were leaders in a different sense; they had huge influence without formal positions or authority. The most important thing is to leave the world a better place through what we say and do. Now, they set off from Kadesh, and I am losing track of time as usual. In the first month, the whole Israelite community arrived in the desert of Zin and stayed at Kadesh. There, Miriam died and was buried. There was no water for the congregation, and they assembled against Moses and Aaron. The Lord said to Moses, 'Take the rod and tell the rock before their eyes to yield its water.' Moses then went before the congregation and said, 'Here now, you rebels, shall we bring forth water for you out of this rock?' He lifted his hand and struck the rock with his rod twice, and water came forth. The Lord said to Moses, 'Because you did not believe in me to sanctify me in the eyes of the people, you shall not bring this assembly into the land I have given them.' This situation seems very harsh, so let's try to analyse it. First, we need to consider what Moses said: 'Here now, you rebels.' Clearly, Moses had lost his patience with them. The reality is that not everyone was a rebel; he was accusing all the people of Israel of being rebels, which was painful for them to hear. They were simply thirsty and wanted a drink, but he labelled them as rebels, which was a harsh accusation.

Moses struck the rock twice with his rod, and water came forth. However, God had instructed him to speak to the rock, not to strike it. This raises the question of why Moses reacted in such a way. He had faced far worse situations, such as Korah's rebellion, without losing his composure. The turning point seems to be the death of Miriam, his older sister, who had been a source of support and trust throughout his life. Her passing left Moses grief-stricken, and in that state of emotional turmoil, he struggled to manage the situation when the people demanded water.

Miriam had played a crucial role in the practical aspects of leadership, organising and managing various tasks. With her gone, Moses felt lost and overwhelmed by grief. When the people approached him for water, he was unable to respond appropriately, leading to his outburst. It is essential to recognise that leaders are human and experience their own emotional challenges. They need space to recover from intense grief and personal loss.

God's response to Moses was significant. He pointed out that Moses did not believe in Him enough to sanctify Him before the people. The first time Moses struck the rock, it was a reflection of the Israelites' slave mentality, where they needed a stick to motivate them. However, after their experience at Mount Sinai and their covenant with God, they required a different kind of leadership—one that involved encouragement and dialogue rather than force. The interpretation of Moses striking the rock twice also suggests a deeper meaning, where the first strike symbolised the fallen Adam and the second the restored Adam. This highlights the importance of how we correct others; a harsh approach can cause emotional harm.

The remarkable aspect of Moses' leadership is that, despite knowing he would not enter the Promised Land, he continued to lead the Israelites for 40 years. This speaks volumes about his character and dedication. Eventually, they arrived at the Jordan River, ready to enter Canaan. However, two tribes, Reuben and Gad, expressed a desire to settle on the east bank of the Jordan instead of crossing over. This posed a challenge, as it appeared they were prioritising their interests over the collective needs of the nation.

Moses responded to their request by questioning the fairness of their decision. He reminded them of the past mistakes made by their ancestors and encouraged them to consider the implications of their choice. This approach prompted the leaders of Reuben and Gad to reflect on their position. They ultimately proposed a compromise: they would leave their families and livestock behind while their men fought alongside the other tribes until the land was conquered. This solution demonstrated the importance of finding common ground and mutual benefit in leadership.

Moses recognised the legitimate interests of both sides and facilitated a discussion that led to a win-win solution. This contrasts sharply with the polarised arguments often seen in contemporary society, where opposing sides fail to acknowledge each other's concerns. Instead of fostering division, effective leadership seeks to validate the interests of all parties involved and find a path forward that accommodates everyone.

As Moses prepared for his departure, he understood the necessity of appointing a successor. He asked God to designate a leader to guide the community, ensuring they would not be like sheep without a shepherd. The qualities of leadership are crucial, and Moses exemplified humility and foresight. God instructed Moses to appoint Joshua, a man filled with the spirit, and to publicly transfer his authority to him. This smooth transition of leadership is vital to prevent chaos and ensure continuity.

Moses gradually transferred his authority to Joshua, allowing him to take on leadership responsibilities before Moses' death. This foresight ensured that the community would continue to function effectively without disruption. A good leader establishes a system that can operate independently, and Moses' approach exemplified this principle. By publicly recognising Joshua's role, he ensured that the people were prepared for the transition, reinforcing the importance of leadership succession in any organisation.

Moses commanded him concerning them, so this is what we call the Book of Deuteronomy. He sat down and spent a month talking to them, explaining everything. He wrote down all these words that form the basis of the Book of Deuteronomy. It's partly a summary of everything that happened before and also about what is going to happen in the future. This scripture serves as teaching in a particular context. Moses knew that some of his greatest achievements would not last forever; the people he rescued would one day suffer exile and persecution again. The next time, they would not have a Moses to perform miracles. So, he planted a vision in their minds, hope in their hearts, discipline in their deeds, and strength in their souls that would never fade. When leaders become educators, they change lives.

Up until then, Moses had led them out of Egypt, across the Red Sea, to Mount Sinai, and through the wilderness for 40 years. He had been a great leader, but now he had retired from that role. Joshua became the leader, and Moses began to teach, realising that he needed to instil the Divine Principle in their hearts so they would not need him to tell them anything anymore. Moses said to the people, 'If you want God's word and God's truth, you don't need to go to heaven. You don't need to ask who will go to heaven to find the truth for us.' He taught them that the word of God is living in their hearts. He explained that the Divine Principle is not just in a book; it is written into us. When God created human beings, He wrote the Divine Principle into us. Adam and Eve received the commandment not to eat the fruit intuitively, as it was written into their conscience.

Moses instructed them to observe the commands of the Lord their God, walking in His ways and revering Him. He reminded them that the Lord their God was bringing them into a good land, a land with brooks, streams, and deep springs gushing out into valleys and hills. It was a land with wheat, barley, vines, fig trees, pomegranates, olive oil, and honey—a land where bread would not be scarce, and they would lack nothing. Moses emphasised that once they settled down and began to enjoy all these luxuries, they must remember to praise the Lord for the good land He had given them. It is easy for people to forget God when they become prosperous and wealthy. They often turn to God in difficult times but forget Him when life is comfortable.

Moses cautioned them not to forget the Lord their God when they settled down, failing to observe His commands. He warned that when they became proud and forgot the Lord who brought them out of Egypt, they would face dire consequences. He reminded them of their journey through the vast and dreadful wilderness, where they faced thirst, venomous snakes, and scorpions. God provided for them, bringing water out of the hard rock and giving them manna to eat in the wilderness. Moses urged them to remember that it was God who gave them the ability to produce wealth and confirmed His covenant with their ancestors. It is easy to forget where we came from and how God has worked in our lives, both as individuals and as a community.

The real test of a nation is not whether it can survive a crisis but whether it can remain strong in times of plenty. This challenge has defeated every civilisation known to history. The pages of history are littered with the relics of nations that seemed impregnable but eventually declined and fell, often because they forgot their roots and their stories. Our spiritual community faces the same challenge; memories fade, and people lose sight of the values they once fought for. As members grow wealthy, they may become self-indulgent and lose their sense of social solidarity. This description resonates with the current state of Europe and the West, where many have forgotten their history and turned to other gods.

Cultural dementia is a term that describes how the West has lost its history and risks losing everything else. Many young people today do not believe in freedom of speech, viewing it as a right-wing idea. Instead, they embrace cancel culture, silencing those with whom they disagree. They forget what it was like under fascism or communism and why people fought for freedom of speech and religion. This cultural dementia is shocking. The biblical view is that memory is the basis for ethics. Throughout history, many attempts have been made to ground ethics in universal attributes of humanity, particularly since the Enlightenment, which saw the abandonment of the Bible as a source of authority for truth.

Immanuel Kant based ethics on reason and duty, while Jeremy Bentham rooted it in consequences. David Hume attributed ethics to basic emotions like sympathy and compassion. However, none of these approaches have proven failsafe. The Hebrew Bible, on the other hand, emphasises the importance of memory as the guardian of conscience. In Israel, the injunction to remember is felt as a religious imperative. Moses repeatedly urged the people to remember their experiences, including the rise of fascism and the enabling laws that allowed governments to restrict liberties in emergencies. After Moses' death, the Lord instructed Joshua to lead the people into the land He promised them. God assured Joshua that He would be with him and commanded him to keep the laws given by Moses, meditating on them day and night to ensure success.

Moses also instructed that if the people wanted a king, the king must first copy out the Book of the Law and study it daily. The king does not have the authority to make laws but must enforce them. This underscores the importance of leaders, both religious and political, studying scripture. The people responded to Joshua, pledging their support and commitment to follow him as they had followed Moses. They sent out two spies to Jericho, where they encountered Rahab, a prostitute, who hid them from the king's men.

Rahab, the woman who hid the spies, acknowledged the power of the God of Israel. She expressed her fear of what He had done to the Egyptians and other nations, and in return for her protection of the spies, she asked them to safeguard her family. When the authorities came looking for the spies, Rahab faced a critical decision: should she betray them for a reward from the king of Jericho, or protect them at the risk of her own life and her family's safety? Ultimately, she chose to lie, telling the authorities that the spies had already left, thus allowing them to escape. She then helped them down from her window using a red rope, reminding them to keep their promise to protect her family when Jericho fell.

After three days of fasting, the Israelites crossed the Jordan River, led by the Ark of the Covenant. They took twelve stones from the river to commemorate the twelve tribes of Israel and built an altar. All the men were circumcised, as it was a requirement for entering Canaan, and they celebrated the Passover. Following their recovery, Joshua encountered the army of the Lord and prepared to conquer Jericho. With 40,000 soldiers and seven priests blowing trumpets, they marched around the city. On the seventh day, after circling the city six times, they shouted, and the walls came tumbling down. They went on to defeat 31 kings in Canaan, and Rahab and her family were spared, becoming ancestors of King David and, ultimately, Jesus.

As the tribes settled in Canaan, they formed a federation without a central political authority. Their unity was based on race and faith rather than force, with self-governance practiced in each tribe and community. Joshua, after the conquest, gathered the people for a final address at Shechem, where he reminded them of their history. He recounted how their ancestors had worshipped other gods and how God had called Abraham, leading them to the land of Canaan. Joshua emphasised the importance of remembering their roots and passing this history on to future generations, urging them to teach their children about God's deeds and their own transformation.

Joshua reminded the Israelites that it was God who had given them the land of Canaan, not their own strength. He urged them to serve the Lord faithfully and to abandon the foreign gods they had brought with them. He presented them with a choice: to serve the God of Israel or the gods of the nations around them. This call for freedom of religion was significant, as Joshua made it clear that worship must come from the heart. The people responded passionately, declaring their commitment to serve the Lord, acknowledging His mighty acts in their history, and rejecting the idea of worshipping other gods.

However, Joshua challenged their commitment, warning them that serving the Lord required sincerity and that He would not forgive rebellion. The people insisted on their pledge to serve the Lord, leading to a mutual agreement. Joshua then instructed them to put away their foreign gods and focus their hearts on the God of Israel. They affirmed their commitment to obey His commandments, and Joshua formalised this covenant at Shechem, setting up a stone as a witness to their promise. This stone would serve as a reminder of their commitment to God and the consequences of their actions.

In conclusion, Joshua sent the people back to their homes to live out the promises they had made. This emphasis on understanding one's identity and history is crucial. It reflects the importance of knowing where one comes from to understand where one is going. This lesson is particularly relevant for the second and third generations of our spiritual community, as it is vital for them to grasp their heritage and the story they are part of.