Home > Hermeneutics > Twelve dissimilarities between the crossing of the Red Sea and the crossing of the Jordan

Twelve dissimilarities between the crossing of the Red Sea and the crossing of the Jordan

It is both interesting and instructive to compare the supernatural passages of Israel through the Red Sea and the Jordan. There are at least twelve details of resemblance between them, which we will leave the reader to work out for himself. Here, we will consider their points of dissimilarity.

First, the one terminated Israel’s exodus from the house of bondage, the other initiated their entrance into the land of promise.

Second, the former miracle was wrought in order that they might escape from the Egyptians, the latter to enable them to approach and conquer the Canaanites.

Third, in connection with the one the Lord caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind (Exodus 14:21), but with reference to the other no means whatever were employed—to demonstrate that He is not tied to such, but employs or dispenses with them as He pleases.

Fourth, the earlier miracle was performed at nighttime (14:21), the latter in broad daylight.

Fifth, at the Red Sea multitudes were slain, for the Lord made the waters to return upon the Egyptians so that they

“covered the chariots, and the horsemen, and all the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them; there remained not so much as one of them” (14:28), whereas at the Jordan not a single soul perished.

Sixth, the one was wrought for a people who just previously had been full of unbelief and murmuring (Exodus 14:11), the other for a people who were believing and obedient (Joshua 2:24; 3:1).

Seventh, with the sole exception of Caleb and Joshua, all the adults who benefited from the former miracle died in the wilderness; whereas the great majority of those who were favored to share in the latter “possessed their possessions.”

Eighth, the waters of the Red Sea were “divided” (Exodus 14:21), those of the Jordan were made to “stand upon an heap” (Joshua 3:13).

Ninth, in the former the believer’s judicial death unto sin was typed out; in the latter his legal oneness with Christ in His resurrection, followed by a practical entrance into his inheritance.

Tenth, consequently, there was no “sanctify yourselves” before the former, but such a call was an imperative requirement for the latter (Joshua 3:5).

Eleventh, the response made by Israel’s enemies to the Lord’s interposition for His people at the Red Sea was, “I will pursue, I will overtake, I will divide the spoil; my lust shall be satisfied upon them” (Exodus 15:9); but in the latter,

“It came to pass, when all the kings of the Amorites… heard that the Lord had dried up the waters of the Jordan… their heart melted, neither was there spirit in them any more” (Joshua 5:1).

Twelfth, after the former, “Israel saw the Egyptians dead upon the sea shore” (Exodus 14:30); after the latter, a cairn of twelve stones memorialized the event (Joshua 4:20-22).

Arthur W. Pink-Interpretation of the Scriptures

Advertisements
  1. June 26, 2018 at 12:47 pm

    Good post

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: