Divine Discontent | Sunday, October 1, 2023

Last night, Andrea and I, along with our two oldest kids, went up to the Rose Bowl to see Coldplay perform. It was a lot of fun, with 60,000 fans in attendance. I had this bright idea to have dinner at a restaurant in a mall about 12 minutes away from the Rose Bowl. I thought we could leave the car there to avoid paying for parking and take an Uber to the event. Not only would we save on parking, but we also wouldn't get stuck in all the traffic.

It was a great idea until after the event was over. Uber has this thing called demand pricing, and with 25,000 people trying to get an Uber at the same time, we experienced what they call demand. We ended up waiting for about 90 minutes to finally get an Uber, so I didn't get home until around 2:30 in the morning. I might be a little tired this morning, so a little grace would be appreciated if I miss a point as we go through the message.

If you would take out your Bibles and open them to the Book of Joshua this morning. If you don't have a Bible, you can raise your hand, and one of our ushers will bring you one. Joshua is in the Old Testament, the sixth book of the Bible: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Joshua. We are in chapter 17.

Some of you know that over the last several years, I've been doing some coursework at a couple of different seminaries. As part of one of the courses I'm currently in, I have to fly out to Kentucky a couple of times a year to attend a seminar. This means that about 10 to 12 weeks before the seminar, I receive a syllabus for the class. Last week, I emailed one of my professors and asked if he could send me the syllabus ahead of time so I could start reading for the class that will be in January.

He sent me the syllabus, which includes 15 books that I have to read over the next 10 weeks. Your prayers would be appreciated. This class is on contemporary issues in ethics, a topic I have been interested in for a long time. You may not realize it, but these ethical issues affect our lives in significant ways. Sometimes we don't think much about it, but some of the subjects we will discuss in this course include questions about when life begins, issues related to death and euthanasia, and topics concerning human rights and sexuality.

Gender identity issues, the relationship between the church and the state, political engagement, free speech, justice, and social justice are the big issues we find ourselves confronted with here in our time in 2023.

Last week, I started reading through one of the books for the class. The title of the book is "The Genesis of Gender," written by a woman named Abigail Fav. Abigail entered her undergraduate studies in August of 2001, right before a major event happened in September of that year. She began her studies as an Evangelical Christian, raised in a Bible-teaching church. However, four years later, when she graduated from a private Christian school, she described herself as a progressive postmodern feminist. She then went on to earn a master's degree in gender studies and a PhD in gender studies, eventually teaching at a university on those very topics.

In the last ten years, though, she has experienced a kind of reconversion. She has returned to faith as a Catholic Christian. This book focuses on the issues we hear a lot about in our culture today, particularly the issue of gender and sexuality. For many people, especially those who find themselves on the political spectrum right of center or who attend church as professed Christians, these issues tend to be something we balk at or consider ridiculous. I understand that perspective, as there are certain aspects of it that are indeed challenging.

However, if you are in Generation Z or if you are a younger Millennial, say in your 20s or early 30s, these are issues you confront on a pretty consistent basis. They come up quite frequently. Just a few pages into the book, Fav writes something interesting. According to the gender paradigm, which is the foundation of gender studies, there is no Creator, and therefore, we are free to create ourselves. This concept may sound familiar, as it reflects much of what we see in our culture today. The body is viewed as an object with no intrinsic meaning; she states that we give it meaning.

Whatever meaning we want, using technology to undo what is perceived to be natural, we do not receive meaning from God, our bodies, or the world. Instead, we impose meaning upon it. What we take to be real is merely a linguistic construct. Ergo, we should consciously wield language to conjure the reality we want. To be free is to transgress limits continually, to unfetter the will.

Woman and man are language-based identities that can be inhabited by anyone because truth is just a story we tell ourselves. All self-stories, self-told stories, are true. Does any of that sound familiar to what we see in our culture today? What does all that mean?

In this worldview that is being promoted in our culture today, there is no ultimate truth and no ultimate meaning. Reality is whatever you believe it to be according to your truth. Whatever you deem to be true becomes reality, and you should never be limited by anything. There should be nothing that limits you from doing whatever you want, whenever you want, however you want, with whomever you want.

Now, if all that is true—which is an interesting concept because they say there is no such thing as objective truth—but then they assert that this is true, you have to wonder if that is self-defeating. If that is true, this is the worldview that pervades in the 2020s here in the United States of America. It stands in stark contrast to a biblical worldview, a Christian worldview. This is what is called a totalizing ideology; it takes over everything within a culture and affects society in deeply subversive ways that shake the foundation of the culture.

Are we witnessing any of that now? You may wonder, what does this have to do with us? What does this have to do with the Bible? It is important to recognize that this totalizing ideology sees the Bible and the Christian worldview, along with those who hold that view, as Public Enemy Number One. So, you are in the crosshairs if you believe the things that are given in the Bible.

Scriptures. Pav writes this just a few pages into the book. I had come to see Christianity as something like a dark cathedral—a broken-down cathedral, a sacred structure that had been rightly dismantled because of patriarchal transgressions. I wanted to construct a new Christianity, fully purged of sexism, hierarchy, and sin. I considered myself a Christian, yet I did not believe anything resembling orthodoxy or sound doctrine, and I had no active practice whatsoever. I was a Christian in name only; in belief, I was agnostic, and in practice, I was an atheist.

You might wonder, on a Sunday morning, why I am bringing this up. For those who hold this worldview, the Bible and those who believe the Bible are the problem. The Bible is the reason that women are subjugated and oppressed. The Bible is the reason that certain people, women and other individuals, are held down and held back. The Bible is the reason that certain lifestyles are seen as wrong or immoral. The Bible is to blame for gender binaries and oppression. If we can just unchain ourselves from the Bible, liberate ourselves from the Bible, then we will be free. Not only will you be liberated, but you will also be happy. That's the promise of this worldview: you need to be liberated from this biblical worldview to be free and to be happy.

We live in a culture that highly values certain beliefs. We often hear about being endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Whatever will make me happy keeps me from happiness, so therefore I just need to be unchained from that, and then I will be happy. This is the pervasive mindset at every university in the United States today.

After the first service, I was talking with a friend of mine here at the church who is finishing a degree at Cal State. This is a College of Education, so if you want to be a teacher, you need to go through the College of Education programs in our nation. One of the required studies he is doing right now is gender studies. It’s all this right here, required to learn this. But it's not just in universities, and here's the striking thing: it's not just secular universities.

Much of what private Christian universities teach is the same, but it's not just in the schools; it's found everywhere in our culture, in pop culture, and even down to what the youngest in our society receive. This became very clear to me a number of years ago. I shared this a while ago, but I was driving my kids to school one day. It's kind of a practice in our house that, as we're driving the kids to school, we often play some music in the car. The number one request right now is "Kung Fu Fighting." Those cats were fast as lightning!

But if you back up about eight years ago, the number one request in the de Benedictus car on the way to school was "Let It Go" from Disney's Frozen. I remember very clearly driving to school one morning with my daughters, Addison and Evangeline. At the time, they were probably six and four years old, and they wanted to play "Frozen." So, it's playing in the car, and they're singing along, "Let it go, let it go," you know, that whole thing. Then it gets to this line: "It's time to see what I can do, to test the limits and break through. No right, no wrong, no rule for me. I'm free."

I was more than a little struck by that as my six and four-year-old daughters were singing it. "I'm never going back; the past is in the past." It's not just Frozen. This year, one of Disney's biggest releases was the live-action version of The Little Mermaid, in which she sings the song, "Bright young women, sick of swimming, ready to stand. I want more." If you back up to the '90s, the number one hit from Disney was Beauty and the Beast, where Belle sings, "There must be more than this provincial life. I've got to get rid of this thing that's chaining me and holding me back."

Or in Mulan, she says, "There I cannot hide who I am. I have to be me." This philosophy, this worldview, is all around us constantly. There’s no getting out of it. In one sense, it is often invisible to us because it's like the air we breathe; it's all around us until we start to see it more and more. The results of what this worldview breeds and brings are evident. Ideas have consequences, and we're seeing it today, aren't we? Now again, you may wonder what...

What does this have to do with the Bible? Well, the Bible is often seen as the problem. Don't you know that this worldview comes from these 66 books, from Genesis to Revelation? It is these texts that hold people back and hold people down. The question is, is that really the case?

We come to passages like the one we will see today in Joshua chapter 17, which seem to indicate otherwise. This text is roughly 3,400 years old, recorded in the second millennium before Christ. In this passage, we find a couple of stories that go against the worldview that the Bible is the problem. A couple of weeks ago, we discussed the land being divided among the children of Israel, and a portion was given to a man named Caleb. His daughter, Axa, comes to her father and petitions him for a portion for herself, a blessing for herself, and he grants it to her.

This act is out of place contextually for the time in which these things were written, 2,000 years before Christ. If you study the history from that period, you will see that it is totally out of place, not just for that time but also for that culture.

Today, you can go to the Middle East and see how out of place that is in 2023. I was in Saudi Arabia earlier this year, and my friends and I needed to pick up a few extra things for our trip. We went to a mall in Tabuk, Saudi Arabia, which was stunningly beautiful and totally empty of people. Rarely would you see a man walking through, and 5 to 10 feet behind him would be his wife, completely covered in a burka from head to toe. Everywhere I saw an adult woman, she was covered head to toe in a burka, following behind her husband at a distance.

That is the culture today, but what we find in this text is different. The difference is striking to the point that you should ask the question: where did this come from in that time?

The answer to the question of where this came from, according to what we find in the Scriptures, is divine revelation. Mount Sinai, where the word came down, is located in Saudi Arabia. I went to Mount Sinai, where the word came down as a divine revelation of something totally different. We will see this again today in Joshua chapter 17.

Look at Joshua chapter 17, verse 1. There was also a lot for the tribe of Manasseh. What is happening here is that the land of Israel is being divided among the children of Israel, to the different tribes. There are twelve tribes, and a census was taken of the tribes back in the book of Numbers to determine the size of each tribe. The largest tribe was Judah, and from there, the others were ranked down to the smallest tribe. They would receive their lots of inheritance as a lot was cast. The largest tribe gets to go first, so Judah would come before the leaders of Israel, Joshua and the other leaders. We already saw this, and a lot would be cast for Judah's tribe, determining the land they would receive.

Now, the next tribe is the tribe of Joseph, which was divided into two: Ephraim and Manasseh. We saw Ephraim's lot last week, and this week we come to Manasseh's lot. There was a lot for the tribe of Manasseh, for he was the firstborn of Joseph, namely for Maer, the firstborn of Manasseh, the father of Gilead. Because he was a man of war, he was given Gilead of Bashan. There was also a lot for the rest of the children of Manasseh according to their families. Each of the families of the tribe of Manasseh was given their portion of the land.

However, look at verse 3. There is a notable mention of Zaphad, the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, who had no sons. Underline that in your Bible. You may wonder why this is even notable. Well, again, the culture in which this is taking place, though not much different today in that same region of the world, dictated that inheritance would pass only to the sons. The only ones who could hold or possess property were men. This creates a problem because the land is being divided among the different tribes by their families.

Then they will hold their piece of land through their generations, passing it down to their firstborn son and on through the line. However, we have a guy who has a problem: he has no sons. Zelophehad had no sons, but only daughters. These are the names of his daughters: Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah. Five more good names right there.

They came near before Eleazar the priest, before Joshua the son of Nun, and before the rulers, saying, "The Lord commanded Moses to give us an inheritance among our brothers." Therefore, according to the commandment of the Lord, he gave them an inheritance among their father's brothers. Ten shares fell to Manasseh, besides the land of Gilead and Bashan, which were on the other side of the Jordan, because the daughters of Manasseh received an inheritance among his sons. The rest of Manasseh's sons had the land of Gilead.

Why is this important? Why take the time to look at this passage? We are told by the increasingly progressive narrative of our culture that this is a Bronze Age text, 3,400 years old, and it is a collection of misogynistic, sexist, patriarchal books that cause subjugation and oppression, especially of women. The question is, is that actually the case? I want to suggest to you that it is not. In fact, we see a challenge to that assertion right here in this text.

If that were true—the assertion of those in our culture, in the gender studies programs, and not just in gender studies but throughout our culture—then this would not be found in a passage of a 3,400-year-old text. A Bronze Age text like this is totally out of place, timing-wise, historically, and culturally for that period of time. It is a provision here in this text that just seems misplaced.

As I mentioned, prior to the children of Israel coming into the Promised Land, Moses called for a census of the tribes, a counting of the tribes. Every single male over 20 years old was to be counted, and this is how they determined who was the largest tribe and how they would receive their lots of inheritance. It is recorded in Numbers chapter 26, and as you read through Numbers...

In Chapter 26, we go through Judah, Ephraim, and Manasseh, covering all the twelve tribes. It lists how many there were counted and introduces us to Zelophehad, who had no sons. In Numbers Chapter 27, we read about the daughters of Zelophehad, the son of Hepher. This is quite a period of time before the text we find in Joshua Chapter 17.

The daughters of Zelophehad came to Moses and stood before him, as stated in Numbers 27:2. They said to him, "Our father died in the wilderness, but he was not in the company of those who rebelled against the Lord, gathered against the Lord in the company of Korah. He died just according to old age in his own sin. He had no sons." These five daughters then asked Moses in Numbers 27:4, "Why should the name of our father be removed from among his family because he had no son? Give us a possession among our father's brothers."

This request does not fit the culture of the time. One would expect Moses to respond with, "Sorry, it doesn't work that way. That's not how we do things around here." However, Moses did not respond that way. When confronted with an issue he didn't exactly know how to deal with, he did what he always did: he brought their case before the Lord, as noted in Numbers 27:5.

So, what does the God of the Bible do in a situation like this? The Lord spoke to Moses, saying in Numbers 27:7, "The daughters of Zelophehad speak what is right." This is surprising, as many are told that the God of the Old Testament is misogynistic and hates women. Yet, the Lord affirmed the daughters of Zelophehad, saying, "You shall surely give them a possession of inheritance among their father's brothers and cause the inheritance of their father to pass to them."

Wait, they are going to hold property? How is that going to work?

That's just not going to fit that bronze text right. A provision is given that this is to be written down for future generations. He goes on to say in this passage, "Take careful note of what God said to Moses: the daughters of Zelophehad speak what is right." This is critically important.

If you are a postmodern naturalist who believes that everything that exists came to be by evolutionary processes over billions of years, then you have no objective basis for what is right. You probably have some friends who hold that kind of worldview, believing that everything that exists came to be by evolutionary processes and that there is no God. I actually hope that you have some friends like that. I have friends who don't yet believe; I say "yet" because I'm praying and spending time with those people.

For that person, they have no basis for an objective value system that says this is right and this is wrong. Now, understand what I'm not saying, because I know what the pushback will be. I am not saying that the naturalistic atheist cannot be a good person. There are a lot of morally good atheists—people who would say to you, "I don't really believe there's a God," or at least, "I don't know if there's a God. I'm not an atheist; I'm agnostic." I am not saying that they cannot be good or that they can't put up an argument for goodness being good.

I'm just saying they have no rational basis for saying that something is right or wrong, good or evil. The leap from what is to what ought to be is a leap that does not actually compute just through the things of this world. You don't just jump from facts to values; that value system has to come from somewhere. So, for the person who says, "I don't really believe in God,"

They have no rational basis for what is right or wrong. Now, again, that's not saying they're not moral. I mean, one of the most ardently moral people who speaks about what is right and what is wrong in our culture today is an atheist who lives up in Malibu by the name of Sam Harris. He is highly moral and has written books on morality. However, the pushback he receives from Christian apologists often questions the basis of his moral system. They ask, "What do you base that moral system on?" To which he will respond, "Well, human well-being."

But that's not a good framing; it's not enough. The value system has to come from somewhere. Such a worldview requires an undergirding foundation upon which the structure is built. There needs to be an objective value system. If you don't have that undergirding foundation, what happens? A number of you are contractors, so you know that if you don't have a good foundation, things start to collapse and crumble.

What are we seeing in our culture today? Remove the foundation, and it's a house of cards at that point. A Biblical value system is what has built the culture we live in today—a culture that I think we enjoy. It's not only a culture that I think we enjoy; it's a culture that people want to see continue. The idea that we would maintain some sort of structure that has a value system is important.

Consider a value system that allows you to park your car on the side of the road because you believe that when you come back to it, the windows are not going to be busted out. Yet, you go to San Francisco today, and that's pretty rare. Imagine a culture where if you happen to leave your garage door open and forget that it's open, you can trust that when you come back, the stuff in your garage hasn't been taken, or maybe your neighbor will come and close it for you. I think we all want to live in a culture like that, but there is no culture like that without a foundation of an objective moral system.

The postmodern naturalistic atheists often argue that the Bible is misogynistic and oppressive. In one sense, I understand where that view comes from because the...

The Bible arose out of a time and a place that was oppressive and misogynistic. However, the fact that the Bible emerged from that culture should not lead us to conclude that the Bible itself is misogynistic and oppressive. Instead, it reflects the nature of the culture from which it came. This raises the question: where did this culture's misogyny and oppression originate? It did not come from the Bible; it came from sin.

The question is not merely about the world from which the Bible sprang. The more significant question is what has happened to the societies where the Bible has been introduced. The answer to that question is inarguable. Where the Bible has gone, along with the worldview of the Judeo-Christian scriptures, it has brought about the elevation of dignity and liberty for all peoples. This is what you would refer to as Classical liberalism.

I understand that the term "liberalism" can sometimes cause concern among Christians, but if you study what Classical liberalism truly represents—such as the rule of law, personal property rights, and the idea that individuals can make decisions according to their own perspectives as guided by God—you will see its value.

Where the gospel has spread and where the Bible has been embraced, it has led to the elevation of liberty and dignity for all peoples. This is an undeniable fact. If you wish to challenge this point, I encourage you to study history. A great book on this topic is "How Christianity Changed the World" by Alvin Schmidt; you might want to start there.

It is important to consider that the subjugation and oppression of individuals, especially women, is not the product of the Bible's influence. Rather, it is the result of sin in the world. The Bible addresses sin and brings the redemptive power of God through the gospel of Jesus to sinners, leading to salvation.

And transformed, as we are transformed, that transforms society. Do the research; don't just label this as misogynistic. Look it up. The Bible, both the Old Testament and the New Testament, promotes and defends those who are defenseless. Notably, in the Old Testament scripture, it speaks of the foreigner, the stranger in your midst, the fatherless, the orphan, and the widow. That is what we see; the Bible transforms society.

You may ask, "What about other societies that don't have that?" Okay, let's start there. Let's start with India. Before the missionary William Carey came and brought the gospel there, what happened to the widow? The standard practice in India before the gospel came through William Carey was a practice called Sati. What is Sati? In that land, when a man would die, his remains would be put on a pyre and burned. It was the requirement of the wife to lay herself down on the burning fire and die as well. This practice of burning widows is called Sati. It was effectively done away with by the gospel as William Carey brought it, such that even non-Christians in the country of India today still respect William Carey. Why? Because he got rid of widow burning, which was a standard practice. Go look it up; it's even on Wikipedia of all places.

The New Testament says that pure and undefiled religion before God the Father is to visit orphans and widows in their trouble and to keep oneself unspotted from the world.

Point number one, if you're taking notes, because I skipped it—I'm tired—the Bible provides the best explanation for the genesis of objective moral ethics. It's not the only explanation that people might be able to give, but it is the best explanation. I can guarantee you that Sam Harris's explanation is significantly lacking. I know because I've read his books and listened to his debates; his argument is laughable. The Bible provides the best explanation for the genesis of objective moral values.

When you talk with your friend or neighbor who wants to discuss what is right and wrong but does not believe in the Bible, I would ask...

You should ask them, "Where does right and wrong come from?" That is the question C.S. Lewis was confronted with and confronted others with back in the middle of the 20th century. His book, Mere Christianity, which began as a series of talks on the radio in Great Britain during the Second World War, addresses this issue.

God said to Moses, "The daughters of Zelophehad speak what is right," and therefore his five daughters received his property according to the Commandment of the Lord. In Joshua 17, we read that he gave them an inheritance among their father's brothers.

Point number two: Righteousness is putting into practice what God has declared to be right. How do you do righteousness? You do what God has declared to be right. God said to Moses, "This is what is right," and now the land is being divided. Joshua did righteousness.

How do we know what God has declared to be right? First, we start with conscience. Everyone has a conscience until it has been seared as with a hot iron. Again, C.S. Lewis in his book Mere Christianity highlights this. If you look at any culture throughout history, they all have a basic understanding of right and wrong that is quite similar. Where did that come from? Conscience.

This leads to what naturalists and atheistic scientists have a hard time with: the hard problem of consciousness and conscience. Where does this come from? They have no good answer because you can't move from facts to values, from the "is" to the "ought."

First, we know what is right because God has written it into our hearts. Paul talks about this in Romans chapters 1 and 2. God has given us a conscience, but beyond the conscience, He has also revealed what is right and wrong through further revelation in Scripture, which is special revelation.

Moreover, we have the demonstration of God Himself in the Incarnate God, Jesus of Nazareth. He demonstrates to us what is good and what is right, which aligns with our conscience and with Scripture. So, if you want to know what is right and what is good, consider first the...

Conscience then considers the revelation of Scripture and the demonstration found in Jesus. The question is, how do you do what is right? You put into practice what God has revealed as right by the enabling power of the Holy Spirit. He enables us to do what is right.

I said there are two key stories in this passage that challenge the worldview of the secular atheist and the gender studies major who view this as a misogynistic text. The first is the story of Zadok's daughters, and the second we find later on in Joshua chapter 17. Remember, if you were here with me last week and the week before, I highlighted that as the tribes of Judah, Ephraim, and Manasseh were receiving their inheritance, they did not fully lay hold of it. God had given them a plot of ground, a lot of inheritance, but they did not fully possess it.

In Joshua 15:63, we read that Judah could not drive out the inhabitants of the land. In Joshua 16:10, Ephraim did not drive out the Canaanites. In Joshua chapter 17, the passage we are in today, verse 12 states that the children of Manasseh could not drive out the inhabitants of those cities. Do you see a similarity?

Then we read this in verse 14 of Joshua 17: "Then the children of Joseph," which refers to the two tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, "spoke to Joshua, saying, 'Why have you given us only one lot and one share to inherit since we are a great people, inasmuch as the Lord has blessed us until now?'" You have to love this because it is so similar to us. The tribe of Ephraim specifically comes to Joshua and says, "You know, we're a really big tribe."

Oh, I know you're a really good tribe. We did the census: Judah, then Ephraim, then Manasseh. You're the second biggest tribe. Yes, you're a really big tribe, and you think you should get more of an inheritance. I want more! This is just like us. We get something, and it's like we want more. It's like going through the buffet line; they serve you a portion, and you think, "Come on, just a little bit more." We see this in our children.

Don't we? I mean, very early on, before they can speak, you begin to see the roots of this desire for more. It's a hard lesson to learn—the lesson of contentment. My flesh doesn't like contentment; my flesh likes indulgence. I don't think I'm all that different from you.

What's really funny is that I don't only see this in myself or in my kids or in other people; I see this in our new puppy. We got this dog, a Weimaraner. She's super cute, with a big droopy face and big floppy ears. She wants all the toys. If there are three toys and we have three dogs, she will do everything she can to gather up all three. She'll be running around with two in her mouth, but there's still one on the ground. She will just pace and cry. It's like, "Oh, you're driving me to the point where we have to take the toys away." But she wants more. It's hardwired into us to want more, and yet we need to learn contentment.

Paul, the Apostle, in Philippians chapter 4, says, "I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, to be content." Then he adds, "I can do all things through Him who gives me strength." How many of you have ever heard that verse? "I can do all things through Jesus who gives me strength." Do you realize that's in the context of being content? Why does it say that? Because contentment is hard. I need the strengthening power of the Holy Spirit through Jesus Christ to be content with what I have; otherwise, I need more.

So why does God not just remove that desire from me? I mean, couldn't He just take it away? It would make it a whole lot easier if He could just transplant discontent with contentment and give it to me. I want that. I'm not content because I want contentment. I want to be okay with not having everything that I want, but I'm not okay with not having everything that I want. Can I get an amen, or am I just talking? Okay, I'm feeling pretty vulnerable here. That's right; John is content—totally. His wife.

Here's the crazy thing: I think that sometimes God allows discontentedness to remain in us. I believe He allows it to remain because there's a certain part of it that He actually wants us to have. I recognize this is weird, but I think a certain amount of discontent can drive us forward to lay hold of what it is that God actually wants us to grasp.

Remember the tribes of Judah, Ephraim, and Manasseh? They never fully took hold of the possessions that God gave them. He wanted them to desire more, to lay hold of what He actually had for them. The lack of contentedness would drive them forward.

Now, this is dangerous because that kind of discontent has to be held in balance. We need to be careful with it because if we allow it to take over, we could become malcontents. Then we just become murmuring complainers, and Israel did that. You do that, and I do that, and even Ella, my dog, does that. We become malcontents if discontent is allowed to take off in us.

In the New Testament, 1 Timothy chapter 6 says that godliness with contentment is great gain. So, there needs to be this right ratio, this right balance of discontent in us. We can't let it take hold, or we become malcontent complainers.

Notice how Joshua responds. Ephraim comes to Joshua and says to him, "We want more." Look at verse 15. So, Joshua answered them, "If you are a great people, then go up to the Forest Country and clear a place for yourself. The land is in front of you; go take it. There, the land of the Perizzites and the giants, since the mountains of Ephraim are too confined."

I'm going to give you a new phrase to think about this week: Divine discontent. It seems like a weird thing to go together, but point number three is that Divine discontent drives the disciple to pursue greater exploits and possess the fullness of their possession. God wanted Judah, Ephraim, Manasseh, Benjamin, and all of the tribes of Israel to lay hold of the fullness of their inheritance.

Possession. He wanted them to be driven forward to take it. In verse 16, Joshua says to Ephraim, "Go take it." They wanted more, but the children of Joseph said, "The mountain country is not enough for us. We still need more than that." They expressed concern about the Canaanites who dwell in the land of the valley, stating that they have chariots of iron, both those who are in Beth Shean and its towns and those who are in the valley of Jezreel.

You see, they wanted more, like the tribe of Ephraim. They wanted more than what they were even given an opportunity to lay hold of. However, they didn't want to have to work for it. They wanted more without exerting the effort or fighting for it. They desired the easy way. They wanted to wake up one morning and realize that they had a long-lost uncle who was really wealthy, and they didn't know anything about him. It turns out they are his only descendant, inheriting a vast empire. Wouldn't you kind of dream about that? I know I’m not the only one.

I mean, I know there are some of you in here who are playing the lottery. I would recommend you don't, but some of you are. Why are you doing that? Because you want more. There’s the prospect of getting more. You even do the calculus: "If I had to, I would tithe for sure. I would totally tithe. Oh, I’d tithe on that! It would be amazing." But no, you won't. We've all seen the studies about what happens to the majority of people who win the lottery. They end up broke, worse off than they were before.

Time and time again, we wish we could effortlessly make some investment that would yield a 10,000% increase, and we would be blown away by that. Bitcoin or whatever it was—those things rarely happen. But when they do, easily won gains are easily lost. We all know the stories or have seen the stories of people who received everything handed to them on a silver platter, and it just never ended well. Rarely do we actually take care of the things that are just handed to us compared to those we actually fight for. But I'm still not entirely sure that...

Wanting more is not necessarily a bad thing. God allows a certain amount of discontentedness to remain in us. If it were totally and wholly rebuked, then when Jesus's disciples came to Him and said, "Lord, what must we do to be great in Your kingdom?" He would have chastised them and rebuked them, saying, "How dare you think of such a thing?" That is what we might assume the Lord of all the Earth would say to such an ostentatious request.

However, He responded differently. He said, "Here's what you do: humble yourself." That is a little bit different from what you hear in 21st-century America, isn't it? If you want to be great in My kingdom, here's what you do: take the lower seat and humble yourself.

The people of Ephraim wanted the possession without a fight. They thought, "Our leader Joshua is of the tribe of Ephraim. If we go to him and say we want more, he's going to say, 'Well, you're on my team. Of course, you should have more; you're part of my team.'" But he didn't say that. He said, "There's the land; go take it."

Divine discontent can motivate positive action, but when paired with laziness and apathy, it festers into resentment, envy, and all manner of dysfunction. Discontent turns men into malcontents when they are too lazy to advance courageously. There is so much more that God has for you.

I think that we, in American Christianity, have fallen into the trap of thinking, "I'll just sit in a whole bunch of Bible studies, and then one day I'm going to wake up with spiritual power and greatness." No, God says, "I have set before you a whole land. I want you to go in and take it."

Discontent turns men into malcontents when they are too lazy to advance courageously. There is so much more that God has for every single one of us, and He has given you all the power you need through Christ's indwelling Spirit to go in and possess that possession. But it is going to require some work. It will require you to be a part of the body of Christ, serving, giving, and using the gifts, talents, and abilities that God has given to you.

You will give an account to God for how you used those things, and I would challenge you to get into the game. I remember years ago when our oldest son was just starting to get into baseball. He was really upset because he wasn't getting any hits. Maybe some of you remember that feeling when you were young. We told Ethan, "You need to start swinging. You can't get a hit if you don't swing."

There was this fear: if I swing, I'm going to strike out. We said, "Yes, you're going to strike out, but you're also going to get some hits." You know what? He started listening to us. He began swinging, and you know what happened? He started striking out. We would sit there, thinking, "No, not that one!" the entire time. But you know what else started to happen? He began hitting.

Then we discovered he runs really slow to first base. So, there's always something. Don't tell him I said this; he's bigger than me now. But you're not going to get a hit if you don't swing. Yes, you might strike out, but you have to swing. If you want more, you have to go get it and lay hold of it.

God allows discontent to remain in us because He wants to motivate us to press on, that we may lay hold of that for which Christ Jesus has laid hold of us. Have I not commanded you? Be strong and of good courage. Do not be afraid nor dismayed, for the Lord your God is with you wherever you go. He said this to the children of Israel before they came into the Promised Land.

In Joshua 17:17, Joshua spoke to the house of Joseph, to Ephraim and Manasseh, saying, "You are a great people, and you have great power. You shall not only have one lot; you shall have more. The Mountain Country shall be yours. Although it is wooded, you shall cut it down, and its farthest extent shall be yours. Take as much as you want; go get it, for you shall drive out the Canaanites, though they have chariots of iron and are strong."

Ephraim, you are a great tribe. You can go take it; it's yours. Just go grab the land. God will be with you. Every place that the sole of your foot treads upon, God has given it to you. Be strong and courageous. Just go take it, cut down the trees, and drive out the Canaanites. God will be with you.

What do you think they did? A hundred years later, the Canaanites were now ruling.

Over them, they had 900 chariots of iron. Don't believe me? Go read Joshua chapter 4 later today. A hundred years later, this tribe had not taken the land; they were being dominated by the Canaanites, who had 900 chariots of iron.

Then what happened? God raised up a woman named Deborah and another woman named Jael. Judges chapter 4 is like every junior high boy's favorite passage. The children of Israel were overcome by the Canaanites; they never fully took the land of Ephraim and Manasseh. This woman, a leader named Deborah, said to another leader, a man named Barak, "God's called you to go and fight against the Canaanites." He replied, "I won't do it unless you go with me." She said, "All right, I'll go with you, but you're not going to get the glory; the glory is going to go to a woman."

So he went, and God went before Barak and the 10,000 in his army, and they destroyed the Canaanites. The leader of the Canaanite army was named Sisera. He leapt off his chariot of iron as his armies were being annihilated by the Jewish people, led by Barak and Deborah, who were telling them to go do it. He ran away, and as he was fleeing, he passed by the tent of a Jewish woman named Jael. She was just a Jewish housewife, and he ran past her tent, saying, "You need to hide me."

Jael said, "Come on in," and she hid him in her tent. You might wonder what she was doing. Then she gave him some milk. At that time, they didn't have refrigeration, so it was kind of like curdled milk. Yes, it's gross. You know what happens when you drink warm milk? That's right; he fell asleep.

Jael went outside, grabbed a tent peg and a hammer, and she went in. She put the peg right on his temple and hammered it into the ground. Yes, it's like the earliest Krav Maga right there!

Know what Krav Maga is? It's awesome. Imagine being in jail with a nail fastened to your head and being forced to the ground. There’s a time and a place for divine discontent. The eyes of the Lord look to and fro throughout the whole earth to show Himself strong on behalf of those whose hearts are loyal to Him.

Even if you're in jail, like Deborah or the daughters of Zah. Point number five, and I’ll finally close: the people of God have an ethical responsibility to advance and possess the fullness of their inheritance. Would to God that we would press in and possess the fullness of our inheritance. Oh God, help us!

We are living in a time not all that different from the days of the judges, when everyone did what was right in his own eyes. All truth was relative; you had your truth, and they had their truth. There was no king in Israel, and everyone did what was evil in the sight of the Lord. We need God to move within His church, but we need the church to move courageously, or we will be subdued by Canaanites.

God help us. Would you stand with me as we close in prayer?

Father God, I thank You for Your word; it is challenging. Help us to consider these things and to weigh them. God, speak to us and teach us, we pray. Would You pour out Your Spirit upon Your church and give us boldness by Your Spirit to act courageously according to what is right and good, as revealed in the Scriptures? We praise You. It’s in Jesus' name we pray, and all those agreed said, "Amen." Amen.