BEMA Episode Link: 30: Lead with Your Voice
Episode Length: 40:23
Published Date: Thu, 04 May 2017 01:00:00 -0700
Session 1
About this episode:

Marty Solomon and Brent Billings wrap up the discussion of the desert and the book of Numbers with the story of Moses striking the rock and subsequently having his entrance to the Promised Land denied.

Why Was Moses Not Allowed into the Promised Land? — Aleph Beta

Why Couldn't Moses Enter The Land? — Aleph Beta

Study Tools

Legacy Episode Content

Notes

*Note: The following notes are handwritten by me, Adam, and I reserve the right to be wrong.

BEMA Episode 30: Lead with Your Voice - Study Notes (2025)

Title & Source Summary

This episode examines the critical story of Moses striking the rock in Numbers 20, which results in his denial of entrance to the Promised Land. The teaching explores the deeper meaning behind this seemingly harsh punishment, focusing on the contrast between leading with authority/violence (“stick”) versus leading with character and invitation (“voice”). The episode connects this incident to broader themes of Empire versus Shalom Kingdom throughout Scripture.

Key Takeaways

  • Moses is denied entrance to the Promised Land not for a simple mistake, but for reverting to Empire’s methods of leadership through force and anger
  • The story reveals the critical difference between “stick power” (coercion, violence, authority) and “voice power” (invitation, character-based leadership)
  • Miriam’s death and the lack of public mourning may have contributed to Moses’ emotional state and poor decision-making
  • The two rock-striking incidents (Exodus 17 and Numbers 20) are deliberately paralleled to show Moses’ progression from obedience to disobedience
  • God’s holiness (kadosh) means He is fundamentally different from other gods - characterized by love, mercy, and restoration rather than violence
  • Leaders are called to demonstrate God’s character through their methodology, not just accomplish right outcomes through wrong means
  • The placement of people “before the rock” parallels God’s earlier positioning, suggesting Moses may have directed violence toward the people instead of taking it upon himself

Main Concepts & Theories

Two Kingdoms Paradigm: The episode reinforces the central BEMA framework of two competing narratives: the Kingdom of Empire (fear-based, using force/stick power, built on self-preservation) versus the Kingdom of Shalom (trust-based, using voice/invitation, built on self-sacrifice). Moses, despite having God’s heart for justice, initially operated with Empire’s tools and needed 40 years in the desert to learn God’s methods.

The Three Tests Framework: The teaching suggests this may be a “test of the soul” - where one withholds themselves from God unless God proves Himself worthy. This differs from tests of the heart (will/choice) and tests of might (using resources for others). Moses may have been testing God by essentially saying “these people don’t deserve water unless they properly mourn my sister.”

Hagah Learning Method: The concept of hagah (Hebrew: rumbling/growling like a lion over prey) represents deep, meditative engagement with Scripture - “chewing” on the text to extract every possible meaning and connection, rather than surface-level reading.

Priestly Leadership Model: The tabernacle served as a teaching tool where Israelites could observe literal priests to learn their calling as a “kingdom of priests.” This connects to the leadership lesson that priests serve through character and invitation rather than coercion.

Examples & Applications

Modern Leadership Applications:

  • Pastors who lead through position/authority rather than character and humility
  • Parents who rely on power and control rather than relationship and guidance
  • Managers who coerce compliance rather than inspire commitment
  • Political leaders who use force and fear rather than moral persuasion

Biblical Parallels:

  • The Balaam story immediately follows, featuring a donkey that speaks while the prophet beats it with a stick - reinforcing the voice vs. stick theme
  • Pharaoh’s use of the staff for oppression versus Moses’ intended use for liberation
  • Jesus’ rejection of worldly power and His emphasis on servant leadership

Historical Context:

  • Moses’ 40-year shepherding experience taught him voice-based leadership methods
  • The Exodus plagues demonstrated God’s power without requiring Moses to use violence
  • The tabernacle system provided visual education in priestly service and character

Potential Areas for Further Exploration

  • The midrashic traditions about Miriam’s role in providing water and the “well on a cart”
  • Paul’s reference in 1 Corinthians 10:4 to “the rock that accompanied them” and its connection to Jewish tradition
  • The significance of place names (Kadesh, Meribah, Massah) and their theological meanings
  • Rabbi David Fohrman’s teachings on this passage at Aleph Beta
  • The connection between Moses’ anger and modern pastoral burnout or leadership failure
  • The role of grief and unprocessed emotions in leadership decisions
  • The contrast between Aaron’s public mourning versus the lack of mourning for Miriam
  • Josh Bossé’s Session 6 teaching that potentially vindicates the people’s complaints
  • The theological implications of Moses potentially killing two people when he “struck twice”
  • The development of Moses’ character from palace violence through shepherding to this failure

Comprehension Questions

  1. According to the teaching, what is the fundamental difference between “stick power” and “voice power” in leadership, and how does this relate to the Kingdom of Empire versus Kingdom of Shalom paradigm?

  2. Why might the lack of public mourning for Miriam be significant to understanding Moses’ emotional state and subsequent actions in Numbers 20?

  3. How do the parallel structures between Exodus 17 and Numbers 20 (the two rock-striking incidents) help illuminate what Moses was supposed to learn versus what he actually did?

  4. What does it mean that Moses failed to show God as “holy” (kadosh) before the people, and how does this connect to the broader biblical understanding of God’s character?

  5. In what ways does the Balaam story that follows serve to reinforce the theological lessons about voice versus stick leadership that Moses failed to demonstrate?

Brief Personalized Summary

This episode challenges conventional explanations for Moses’ punishment by revealing a deeper issue of leadership methodology. Rather than simply making a mistake, Moses reverted to the Empire’s way of leading through anger, force, and positional authority instead of demonstrating God’s character of love, mercy, and invitation. The teaching suggests that effective biblical leadership comes not from having the right to command, but from developing the kind of character that makes people want to follow. This has profound implications for anyone in leadership positions - whether pastoral, parental, or professional - showing that how we accomplish good things matters as much as what we accomplish. The episode serves as both a warning about the dangers of unprocessed grief affecting our leadership and an invitation to examine whether we lead like Pharaoh (through coercion) or like the Good Shepherd (through voice and character).

BEMA Episode 30: Lead with Your Voice - Study Notes (2017)

Title & Source Summary

This episode examines the story of Moses striking the rock in Numbers 20 and explores why Moses was denied entry to the Promised Land. The discussion analyzes two competing narratives throughout scripture: empire (using force/stick) versus shalom (using voice/invitation), and how Moses’s leadership journey demonstrates the tension between these approaches.

Key Takeaways

  • There are two dominant narratives competing throughout human history: empire (force, fear, self-preservation) versus shalom (invitation, trust, self-sacrifice)
  • Moses was raised in Pharaoh’s household (empire narrative) but shaped by God in the desert to lead as a shepherd (shalom narrative)
  • The traditional explanations for Moses’s punishment (hitting rock twice, not following instructions, taking credit) are inadequate when examined closely
  • Moses’s failure was not mechanical disobedience but a reversion to empire leadership methods when he should have demonstrated God’s holiness through voice
  • The story in Numbers 20 is deliberately linked to Exodus 17 through specific Hebrew phrases and narrative parallels
  • God wants leaders who demonstrate His character of love, grace, and difference through invitation rather than coercion

Main Concepts & Theories

The Two Narratives Framework
  • Empire Narrative: Characterized by force (“stick”), fear, self-preservation, comfort, security, and coercion
  • Shalom Narrative: Characterized by invitation (“voice”), trust, self-sacrifice, and demonstrating God’s holiness
  • These narratives compete both internally (in our hearts) and externally (in the world around us)
Moses’s Leadership Journey
  • Phase 1 (Age 0-40): Raised in Pharaoh’s household, learned empire methods but retained God’s heart for the oppressed
  • Phase 2 (Age 40-80): Shaped as shepherd in desert, learning God’s narrative and methods
  • Phase 3 (Age 80-120): Leading Israel, ongoing lessons in using God’s authority versus Pharaoh’s methods
The Hebrew Concept of Nakah
  • Means “to strike to kill” or “to smite”
  • Used throughout Moses’s journey to teach lessons about authority
  • In Exodus 17, God told Moses to “nakah” the rock (strike God metaphorically)
  • In Numbers 20, Moses used “nakah” twice, possibly killing people in his anger
The Paniym Principle
  • Hebrew word meaning God positioned “in front of” or “between”
  • In Exodus 17, God stood between Moses and the rock, taking the blow for the people
  • In Numbers 20, Moses positioned people between himself and the rock, reversing the lesson

Examples & Applications

Biblical Parallels
  • Balaam’s Donkey: Immediately following this story, God opens a donkey’s mouth to use voice when humans won’t
  • Jesus’s Triumphal Entry: “If these people don’t cry out, the very stones will cry out” - God’s commitment to voice
  • Paul’s Teaching: 1 Corinthians 10 references the midrash about the rock following Israel through the desert
Leadership Applications
  • Employers, teachers, parents, and others in authority positions face the choice between empire and shalom methods
  • Using authority tells either the narrative of empire or the narrative of Kingdom/Shalom
  • True leadership demonstrates God’s character of love and grace rather than relying on force or position
Historical Context
  • Desert Tests: Three tests on the way to Sinai (heart/will, soul/essence, external enemies) parallel the tests in Numbers
  • Midrashic Tradition: Miriam’s role in providing water through speaking to the rock demonstrates the power of voice
  • Place Names: Locations receiving multiple names (Kadesh/Meribah, Rephidim/Massah) indicate layered significance

Potential Areas for Further Exploration

  • The role of anger and accumulated frustration in leadership failures
  • Comparative study of empire versus kingdom leadership models throughout scripture
  • The significance of Miriam’s death and its connection to the water crisis
  • Hebrew word studies on nakah, paniym, and marah (bitter/rebellious)
  • The midrashic tradition regarding the portable rock and its theological implications
  • Joshua’s leadership model as contrasted with Moses’s later failures
  • The concept of demonstrating God’s holiness in practical leadership situations
  • Connection between voice/speech and God’s creative power in Genesis
  • The role of grief and loss in leadership decision-making
  • Analysis of God’s patience versus justice in dealing with repeated rebellion

Comprehension Questions

  1. Comparative Analysis: How do the two narratives of empire and shalom manifest in modern leadership contexts, and what specific behaviors characterize each approach?

  2. Textual Connection: What specific Hebrew phrases and narrative elements link the Numbers 20 incident to Exodus 17, and why is this connection crucial to understanding Moses’s failure?

  3. Character Development: How did Moses’s upbringing in Pharaoh’s household versus his 40 years as a shepherd in the desert shape his leadership style, and where do we see evidence of both influences throughout his ministry?

  4. Theological Significance: What does it mean for God to be “demonstrated as holy” through human leadership, and how does this concept relate to the broader biblical understanding of holiness?

  5. Leadership Transition: Why was it necessary for Joshua rather than Moses to lead Israel into the Promised Land, and what does this teach us about the consequences of reverting to old patterns of leadership?

Brief Personalized Summary

This episode reveals that Moses’s exclusion from the Promised Land wasn’t about minor disobedience but about a fundamental leadership failure. After 120 years of learning to lead with God’s voice rather than Pharaoh’s stick, Moses reverted to empire methods in a moment of frustration and grief. God’s judgment wasn’t petty but protective - He couldn’t allow the Promised Land to be established through the narrative of force and fear. The story challenges modern leaders to examine whether they lead through coercion or invitation, demonstrating either the character of worldly power or the holiness of God’s love and grace. It’s a sobering reminder that even great leaders can fall back into old patterns, and that our methods of leadership matter as much as our intentions.

Original Notes

Notes on 233: Introducing the Team – Striking the Rock w/ Josh Bossé

Edit | Previous | Next