Moses' Selective Memory
There are a number of stories in the Bible that are told several times. Often the details get changed in each retelling. How might we respond to these apparent contradictions, and what might we learn from them? The following is an examination of one such story. I invite you to reflect on it with me and to share your own conclusions about what it all might mean…
The book of Deuteronomy opens with the Israelites stood on the banks of the river Jordan, ready to take possession of the Promised Land. This is a huge moment! Some five hundred years after Yahweh first promised this territory to Abraham, his many offspring are finally going to receive their covenantal inheritance. Moses steps up, ready to offer a keynote speech worthy of the occasion. But rather than sounding a celebratory note, he instead chastises the people, cataloguing the history of their failures and faithlessness over the last 4 decades.
You see, Israel had been here before – thirty-eight years ago. The last time they came to the shores of the river they got cold (possibly wet!?) feet. Back then, they decided that they had been better off enslaved in Egypt, conspired against Moses and rejected their covenant with Yahweh. This lack of trust and betrayal didn’t go down very well. Yahweh, somewhat diplomatically (but only after a brief rant to Moses!), accepted the people’s decision. It was determined that they would not enter the land after all, but instead die in the desert as they had essentially opted for. Unsurprisingly, when the consequences of their decision were made clear to them, the people had a sudden change of heart, choosing to take up arms and enter the land after all. Moses’ protested that this was yet another way of going against Yahweh, but they did not listen. Instead, they marched off into battle where they were soundly beaten. You can read the whole story in Numbers 13-14.
So now, thirty-eight years later, Moses is warning the people not to make the same mistake again. What is interesting though is that his recounting of these past failures appears to involve a rather – what shall we call it – creative? – relationship with the truth! He certainly appears to have a somewhat selective memory of events. Let me give you some examples of what I mean…
In the first instance, Moses recalls the sending of the spies saying
“…all of you came to me and said, “Let us send men ahead to spy out the land for us and bring back a report about the route we are to take and the towns we will come to.” The idea seemed good to me; so I selected twelve of you, one man from each tribe.” (Deut 1:22-23)
But this isn’t exactly what happened… According to Numbers the idea to send the spies into the land didn’t come from the people as a good idea, it came from Yahweh as an instruction: The LORD said to Moses, “send men to spy out the land of Canaan which I am giving to the Israelites…” (Num 13:1-2).
Next, Moses suggests that the report the spies brought back was a favourable one: Taking with them some of the fruit of the land, they brought it down to us and reported, “It is a good land that the Lord our God is giving us” (Deut 1:25). But this isn’t exactly true either. According to Numbers the spies report was a profoundly negative one:
“We went into the land to which you sent us, and it does flow with milk and honey! … But the people who live there are powerful, and the cities are fortified and very large. We even saw descendants of Anak there… We can’t attack those people; they are stronger than we are.” And they spread among the Israelites a bad report about the land they had explored. They said, “The land we explored devours those living in it. All the people we saw there are of great size.” (Num 13:27-32)
In spite of the fruitfulness of the land, the spies (minus Caleb and Joshua) were afraid of its inhabitants and very deliberately gave an unfavourable report (13:32). It was only because of their doomsday-ing that the people became convinced they’d been better off as slaves in Egypt! They didn’t reject the promised land for no reason! Yet Moses seems to miss this detail out.
He also appears to rewrite his own involvement in the narrative, saying it was he who told the people not to fear because God will be with them and fight for them (Deut 1:29-30) though it was actually Joshua and Caleb who made this point (Num 14:6-9). He then implies that it was because of this moment of the people’s rebellion that he himself was excluded from the promised land (Deut 1:37) which, frankly, is a flat out lie! Moses was barred from the land because of his own personal failure to obey God’s instruction to speak to rather than strike the rock at Meribah (Num 20:1-13).
Finally, in a flurry of creative embellishment, Moses recounts the failed invasion. He suggests that the Amorites had so soundly beaten the Israelites that they had ‘chased them like bees do’, adding that when they had returned weeping Yahweh had neither ‘heeded their voice nor payed them any attention’ (Deut 1:44-45). This is a somewhat harsh ending to the story and portrays Yahweh in a light not cast by the book of Numbers.
What are we to do with moments like this? Where the Bible offers two versions of the same story that don’t quite match up? How are we to handle these differences… these – dare I say it – contradictions? It seems to me we have a number of options.
OPTION 1:
We could choose to lose faith in the Bible.
This is certainly what some people choose to do when they encounter apparent ‘errancy’ in the Bible. There is an assumption that any hint that the Bible deviates from a particular idealized version of ‘truth’ or consistency proves that it is simply the work of human hands and not of God and, therefore it is of little or no use to us. Whilst I understand this response, I can’t help but think it stems from a naively simplistic and narrow understanding of what the Bible actually is. Much more could be said about this but, for now, I suggest you simply read on for a more compelling proposal as to how we should engage with it.
OPTION 2:
We could choose to play these differences down.
You might think I’m splitting hairs here. After all, why does it matter whether the spies were sent out at Yahweh’s initiative or the people’s initiative? What does it matter that their report was cut short in Deuteronomy to include only the important bit? Who really cares whether it was Moses or Caleb and Joshua who told the people not to fear? And should we really criticize Moses for being a good story teller? Perhaps it is just better to just overlook the minor differences and synthesise the similarities into a single coherent account. After all, the main thing is knowing the general gist of the story and events right?
The problem with responding in this way is twofold. First, Moses can get the details pretty much exact when he needs to. Take, for example, these comparative sentences:
| NUMBERS 14 | DEUTERONOMY 1 |
|---|---|
| 22-23 ...not one of those who saw my glory and the signs I performed in Egypt and in the wilderness but who disobeyed me and tested me ten times - not one of them will ever see the land I promised on oath to their ancestors | 35 Not one of these—not one of this evil generation—shall see the good land that I swore to give to your ancestors… |
| 24 But because my servant Caleb has a different spirit and follows me whole-heartedly, I will bring him into the land he went to, and his descendants will inherit it. | 36 …Except Caleb son of Jephunneh. He shall see it, and to him and to his descendants I will give the land on which he set foot, because of his complete fidelity to the Lord. |
| 31 As for your children that you said would be taken as plunder, I will bring them in to enjoy the land you have rejected | 39 As for your little ones, who you thought would become booty… they shall enter there; to them I will give it, and they shall take possession of |
| 25 …set out toward the desert along the route to the Red Sea. | 40 But as for you, journey back into the wilderness, in the direction of the Red Sea.’ |