From Egypt to Canaan
By Arlen L. Chitwood
Two Callings, Two Houses
Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;
Who was faithful to Him that appointed Him, as Moses also was faithful in all his house.
For this One has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as He who built the house has more honor than the house.
For every house is built by someone, but He who built all things is God.
The thought in the opening verses of Hebrews chapter three turns on a type-antitype comparison between two houses — the house of Moses and the house of Christ. The former constitutes the type and the latter the antitype. “Moses” was a type of Christ (Deuteronomy 18:15; Acts 3:22; 7:37), and the work that he performed in relation to his house typifies the work that Christ is presently performing in relation to His house. And there must be an exact parallel between the two.
The word “house” is used in Scripture to refer to both a material structure and the inhabitants of or the people associated with that material structure, and the thought sometimes merges from one to the other in the same text.
A dual use of “house” after this fashion is seen in 2 Samuel 7:1ff. David sought to build the Lord a house in which to dwell, seeing that he himself dwelled in “a house of cedar” while the ark (resting within that portion of the tabernacle where God dwelled) was surrounded only by “curtains.” However, God had other thoughts in mind about the matter; and He instructed Nathan to tell David that rather than David building the Lord a house, the Lord would, instead, take David and build a house out of him (vv. 4, 11-13).
That which is meant by “house,” thus, merges from the thought of a material structure to that of the people associated with the structure.
When on earth the first time, Christ referred to both the Jewish people and the temple as a “house” (Matthew 10:6; 21:13). The thought in Matthew 23:38 — “See! Your house is left to you desolate [left a ‘desert,’ ‘wilderness,’ ‘waste land’]” — was a reference to both the people and the temple (Matthew 23:39; 24:1, 2). The house of Israel was left desolate at the time Christ spoke these words (a reference to their spiritual condition, likened to a desert or waste land, void of water), the temple (along with the city of Jerusalem) was destroyed thirty-seven years later (in 70 A.D.), and the house of Israel has remained desolate since that time.
Antichrist will complete this desolation (beginning in the middle of the Tribulation) by desecrating the rebuilt temple, destroying this temple, destroying the city of Jerusalem, seeking to destroy the Jewish people, and dividing the land presently occupied by the Jews “for gain” (Daniel 9:27; 11:39; Joel 3:2; Matthew 24:15-22; Luke 21:20-24). In this respect, “your house” in Matthew 23:38 could be expanded to include the temple, the city of Jerusalem, the land of Israel, and the people of that land.
The house of Moses likewise has to do with both a material structure and the people associated with that structure. The thought in the opening verses of Hebrews chapter three is drawn from Numbers chapter twelve. In verse seven of this chapter, the Lord stated concerning Moses that he had been “faithful in all My house.” The immediate context, both preceding and following this verse, has to do with “the tabernacle of the congregation.” Events surrounding the tabernacle furnish the backdrop for the statement concerning Moses’ faithfulness, and there is a shift in the passage from “the tabernacle” to “the congregation” (from a material structure in which the Lord dwelled among His people and in which priestly activity transpired to those who had been separated from Egypt with a view to their becoming “a kingdom of priests” in another land [Exodus 19:6]).
And the thought concerning a tabernacle and the people associated with the tabernacle as both comprising a “house” is the same when it comes to the house of Christ. There is a tabernacle in the heavens, after which the earthly tabernacle was patterned (Exodus 25:40; Hebrews 8:5). Christ is today performing His high priestly ministry on behalf of Christians within that tabernacle, and He is presently building a house out of Christians — those separated from this world with a view to their becoming “kings and priests” in another land (Matthew 16:18; Ephesians 2:19-22; Hebrews 9:11ff; Revelation 5:10; cf. 1 Corinthians 3:16, 17; 6:19, 20). This is a house separate and distinct from the house of Israel, made up of the new creation “in Christ,” comprising the one new man (2 Corinthians 5:17; Ephesians 2:15).
The warning in Hebrews chapter three turns on the thought of the headship of two individuals (Moses and Christ) over two groups of people (Israelites and Christians). There is a tabernacle in each instance (one earthly, the other heavenly [Numbers 12:7; Hebrews 3:1; 10:19-22]); and the warning involves the people associated with both tabernacles (drawn from the experiences of an earthly people in the type [separated from Egypt in order to realize an earthly inheritance in another land], applicable to the experiences of a heavenly people in the antitype [separated from this earth in order to realize a heavenly inheritance in another land]).
(Moses, though of the Levitical line, did not occupy a priestly position following the erection of the tabernacle and the anointing of his brother, Aaron [Exodus 40:14ff]. Rather, this priestly work was carried out by Aaron, after which the present high priestly work of Christ is patterned.
The positions held by Moses and Aaron are combined in the present position held by Christ. And Christ’s high priestly ministry would have to be viewed as an integral part of His present headship over His house, as the ministry of Aaron was an integral part of Moses’ past headship over his house. The two must function together after an inseparable fashion in both type and antitype.)
The Primary, Fundamental Type
The Spirit of God moved some forty different men over a period of about fifteen hundred years to record God’s revelation to man after a certain fashion, and Scripture must be interpreted after the fashion in which it was given to man through the Holy Spirit. According to 1 Corinthians 10:6, 11, all recorded Old Testament history is not only an accurate account of past events but this history is also fraught with types and meaning.
Now these things became our examples [Greek: tupoi, “types”; lit., “Now these things happened as types for us”], to the intent that we should not lust after evil things as they also lusted. (v. 6)
Now all these things happened to them as examples [Greek:, tupoi, “types”; lit., “Now all these things happened unto them for types”], and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages have come. (v. 11)
The Greek word tupos (pl. tupoi), found in 1 Corinthians 10:6, 11, is the word from which we derive our English word “type.” The immediate reference surrounding these verses has to do with the experiences of the Israelites under Moses (and, correspondingly, later under Joshua [cf. Hebrews 3:2-19; 4:1-8]). All these experiences occurred as “types for us.” However, the thought could not be limited to just this one section of Old Testament history — covering about one-fifth of the entire Old Testament. The Spirit of God didn’t move men to write this part of the Old Testament one way and the remainder another. History throughout the other four-fifths could only have been written after the same fashion, which is exactly what internal evidence reveals (cf. Matthew 12:40; Luke 24:26, 27; John 3:14, 15; Hebrews 11:4ff).
Everything having to do with this earth and man occurred under the sovereign control of the Lord, and all Old Testament history has been recorded to not only provide man with a completely accurate account of certain events in history but also in order that the Lord could, at a later point in time, have these events to draw upon for the express purpose of teaching His people the deep things of God. Revelation of this nature begins in Genesis 1:1 and continues throughout all of Old Testament history.
There’s nothing quite like the study of biblical typology. This is where the true meat of the word is to be found, and anyone ignoring the study of Old Testament history within a typical framework is not only refusing to study the Bible after the fashion in which it was written but is also denying to himself (and, in many cases, to others as well [by those in positions to teach]) great spiritual truths that God has for His people.
Scripture as a whole simply cannot be properly understood apart from viewing the Old Testament types. The book of Hebrews is a good case in point. This book is built around five major warnings, and all five of these warnings draw heavily from Old Testament typology. And the central reason this book has been understood so many different ways over the years is because those studying the book have either ignored or not properly understood the Old Testament types dealt with in the book.
All five warnings draw heavily from what could be called, the primary, fundamental type. This is the type dealt with through five books in the Old Testament — from Exodus chapter twelve through Joshua. The overall type (comprised of many different individual types) involves the numerous experiences of the Israelites under Moses, and later under Joshua, from the point of the appropriation of the blood of the paschal lambs in Egypt to the point of either their overthrow in the wilderness (between Egypt and Canaan) or their entrance into and conquest of the land of Canaan — the land to which they had been called for a revealed purpose, wherein they could realize the rights of the firstborn. And a person simply cannot understand the warnings in Hebrews apart from viewing them within the framework of this section of the Old Testament.
Within this overall type, one will find God’s own source material given to instruct His people concerning how to safely and successfully navigate through the course of life as they move from Egypt to Canaan (that is, how to safely and successfully navigate through the course of life as they move from this world to that heavenly land to which they have been called). And, within this type, one will also find something else. One will find the basis for the warnings in Hebrews concerning that which will occur if Christians don’t follow the Lord’s instructions in this respect.
That is to say, this primary, fundamental type covers the whole of the Christian experience — from the point of salvation to that future time when Christians either realize or fail to realize the goal of their calling. Hebrews provides instructions for Christians (drawing from the type) concerning how to govern their lives so that they can be successful in the race of the faith, ultimately realizing the goal of their calling; and Hebrews also warns Christians (drawing from the type) concerning that which will happen if they fail to so govern their lives.
The House of Moses
“The house of Moses” was simply the old creation in Jacob (Jacob’s descendants through his twelve sons [Isaiah 43:1]).
Jacob and his family had gone down into Egypt during the days of Joseph, and over a period of four generations, covering slightly more than two hundred years (cf. Genesis 15:13-16; Exodus 12:40, 41; Galatians 3:16, 17), the descendants of this one family had become a great nation. And it was this nation (comprised of possibly as many as two million people at the time of the Exodus) over which Moses had been placed for the express purpose of leading the people out of the land of Egypt into the land of Canaan.
Israel was (and remains today) God’s firstborn son (Exodus 4:22), and the nation was to be led from Egypt to Canaan in order to realize the rights of the firstborn in the land covenanted to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Exodus 4:23; cf. Exodus 2:23-25; 3:7, 8).
Occupying the position of God’s firstborn son in this land, Israel was not only to rule over all the Gentile nations (the kingly aspect of the birthright) but Israel was also to be the channel through which all the Gentile nations would be blessed (the priestly aspect of the birthright).
1) Death of the Firstborn
The type begins with the death of the firstborn in Egypt as recorded in Exodus chapter twelve. The firstborn had to die in Egypt before the nation could realize the rights of the firstborn in the land of Canaan (an individual and national death, brought to pass through the death of the firstborn in the family).
God rejects first things (the earth’s first messiah [Satan], the earth’s first man [Adam], man’s first birth [the natural birth], etc.), and, consequently, the first had to be removed before the second could be established. This is God’s revealed method for carrying out His plans and purposes (Hebrews 10:9).
In this respect, the firstborn in every household throughout all the land of Egypt (Israelite and Egyptian alike) fell under the sentence of death, a death that had to be carried out. And in order to bring about the death of the firstborn, the Lord would pass through the land of Egypt at midnight, on a specified day, and slay all the firstborn throughout the land.
However, the Lord made a distinction between the Israelites and the Egyptians by providing the Israelites with a means of substitutionary death. A lamb, previously taken from the flock, could die in the place of, in the stead of, the firstborn in the family — a vicarious death. And to show that death had already occurred, blood from a slain lamb (“a lamb for a house”) was to be applied to the door posts and lintel of every house in which the firstborn of each family dwelled.
The paschal lambs were to be slain — followed by the application of the blood — on the fourteenth day of the first month of the year “in the evening [‘between the evenings’].” Then, when the Lord passed through the land of Egypt a few hours later, at midnight, He looked for one thing alone. He looked for the blood applied to the door posts and lintel of each and every house.
If the blood was there, the Lord knew that death had already occurred. A lamb from the flock had died in the stead of the firstborn in the family; and, in this respect, in God’s eyes, the matter was viewed as the firstborn in the family having experienced death himself. And since the death of the firstborn had already occurred, the Lord passed over that house. The firstborn had died, and God was satisfied.
But, if there was no blood on the door posts and lintel, then the firstborn himself, apart from a substitute, was slain (for the absence of blood showed that the firstborn had not yet died; death had not yet occurred). The firstborn in the family then experienced death himself, for that which God had previously decreed concerning the firstborn must be carried out. God must be satisfied. The first had to be removed before the second could be established.
Though the firstborn within a family is singled out after a particular fashion, all members of that family, and consequently the nation as a whole — Israel, God’s firstborn son — must be included within the larger scope of the type. All members of the family had a part in taking, slaying, and eating the lamb. The lamb was “for a house,” not just the firstborn in that house (Exodus 12:3, 4). And every family in the camp of Israel was to take, slay, and eat a lamb after this fashion. In this respect, all (the entire nation) appropriated the blood, in the same sense that Paul recounts,
Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea,
all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea,
all ate the same spiritual food,
and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ. (1 Corinthians 10:1-4)
This was the point of beginning. The birth of a nation occurred this night in Egypt. There was death, followed by resurrection to life (cf. Hebrews 11:17-19). God set aside the first in order to establish the second. Only by bringing this to pass could God move His people out of Egypt with a view to establishing them in the land of Canaan.
2) The Red Sea Passage
The Egyptians though could have no part in the matter surrounding a substitutionary death. God set aside the first (an individual death, reflecting on a national death) apart from establishing the second, for there was no second to be established. There was no resurrection to life. The firstborn died apart from a subsequent resurrection; and Pharaoh and his armed forces were then buried in the Red Sea, where they remained.
While at the same time, Moses and those whom he had led through the sea (who had experienced the death of the firstborn via a substitute, with its corresponding subsequent resurrection to life) stood on the eastern banks of the sea. They had walked across on “dry ground,” with the sea forming two walls of water, one on their right and the other on their left. Because of that which had previously occurred in Egypt surrounding the death of the firstborn, the sea (having to do with “death”) had no power over them (cf. Daniel 3:24-28). Israel on the eastern banks, not Egypt beneath the waters of the sea, was God’s recognized firstborn — the nation in line to realize the rights of primogeniture.
The Red Sea lay between Egypt and the wilderness. The Israelites could not enter Canaan directly from Egypt even after the first had been set aside and the second established. They had to first go through the Red Sea, traverse the wilderness, and receive the Magna Charta for the kingdom (God’s rules and regulations governing His people within the theocracy).
God separated His people from Egypt via the Red Sea passage; and once in the wilderness, their thoughts were to be on the land to which they had been called, not upon the land from which they had been separated. Their eyes were to be focused on the goal of their calling, not on surrounding things in the wilderness or on the things back in Egypt (cf. Hebrews 12:1, 2).
This though was often not the case. Because of the Israelites’ lengthy prior association with Egypt (dwelling in Egypt and partaking of the things of this land for over two centuries), trouble often developed in the camp of Israel throughout the wilderness journey; and this trouble could always, after some fashion, be traced back to what the people had learned in Egypt and brought out of Egypt into the wilderness with them.
At Mt. Sinai, for example, the Israelites fell into a pagan form of idolatry, desiring “gods” like unto the gods of the Egyptians, gods they had previously worshipped in Egypt (Joshua 24:14). The calf (or ox) was the principle Egyptian god, and Aaron fashioned “a molten calf” for the Israelites while Moses was on the Mount (Exodus 32:1ff).
On another occasion the Israelites grew tired of the manna that God had provided, remembering the fish, melons, and other food that they had previously enjoyed while in Egypt (Numbers 11:4-8). And at Kadesh-Barnea they climaxed their rebellion against the separation that God had established. At Kadesh-Barnea, rather than following the leadership of the Lord and entering the land of Canaan under Moses, they, instead, sought to appoint another leader (in Moses’ place) and return to Egypt (Numbers 14:1-4).
According to 1 Corinthians 10:2, the Israelites were “baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.” The “cloud” was the pillar of a cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night that went before the Israelites — the Shekinah Glory, the visible presence of God among His people (Exodus 13:21, 22); and the “sea” was the Red Sea through which the Israelites passed (Exodus 14:22).
“Baptism” is used in Scripture in the sense of identification. Usually there is an element into which the individual is immersed to either bring about or show this identification (Matthew 3:11), but sometimes this is not the case (Matthew 20:22). The baptism of the Israelites “in the cloud and in the sea” showed their identification with the Lord (“in the cloud”) as a people separated from Egypt (“in the sea”). And there was a reason for this identification and corresponding separation, which had to do with their being positioned in the land of Canaan.
They had been buried “by baptism” on the western banks of the sea in Egypt and raised to “walk in newness of life” on the eastern banks in the wilderness (cf. Romans 6:4; Colossians 2:12). The firstborn had died. The first had been set aside and the second established.
There had been a death and subsequent resurrection to life, in which the people were separated from Egypt for a purpose; and, within this new standing, with their eyes fixed on the goal of their calling, God expected His people to govern their lives accordingly.
3) The Wilderness Journey
The Israelites’ march through the wilderness was not directly to the land of Canaan. Rather, through God’s prior command to Moses, the march was first to Mt. Sinai (Exodus 3:12; 19:1, 2). God had to first communicate His Word to His people, and this was to be done through Moses at Mt. Sinai.
In the third month after their departure from Egypt, the people of Israel came into the wilderness of Sinai and camped before the Mount. Moses then went up into the Mount to receive the Word of God, and the first thing that God communicated to Moses concerned the Israelites standing before Him.
Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be a special treasure to Me above all people; for all the earth is Mine.
And you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. These are the words which you shall speak to the children of Israel. (Exodus 19:5, 6)
The Israelites were to be “a special treasure,” placed “above all people” as “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.” This had to do with their standing as God’s firstborn son; and their occupying this position in the land covenanted to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob was contingent on obedience.
They had to obey the voice of the Lord and keep His covenant (v. 5). Thus, at Mt. Sinai, the Lord, after singling out and identifying the people who had been brought out of Egypt under Moses, communicated His Word to His people through Moses.
Also at Mt. Sinai, in connection with God’s communication of His Word to His people, instructions for the building of the tabernacle and the manner in which the Levitical priests were to carry out their ministry were revealed to Moses. Subsequently, at Sinai, the tabernacle was constructed and the priesthood established (Exodus 25-40).
Then, immediately after Moses had “finished the work” which God had commanded, the “glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle” (Exodus 40:34); and at this point, a theocratic kingdom came into existence in the camp of Israel.
The people of Israel, in possession of the Word of God (rules and regulations governing them within the theocracy) and the Lord dwelling within the Holy of Holies of the tabernacle in their midst (forming a theocracy), were now in a position to march toward the land of Canaan, occupy that land, and realize the rights of the firstborn in that land.
God’s purpose for calling Abraham out of Ur of the Chaldees five hundred years earlier, and singling out Shem as the only one of Noah’s three sons with a God nine generations preceding Abraham (in Abraham’s lineage), could now begin to be realized.
4) At Kadesh-Barnea
Several months beyond Israel’s departure from the wilderness of Sinai (Numbers 10:11, 12), about one and one-half years beyond the nation’s departure from Egypt, the newly established nation, God’s firstborn son, arrived at the borders of the land of Canaan. The end of an era was at hand. Heretofore the descendants of Abraham had been considered “strangers” in relation to the land of Canaan (Genesis 15:13; 37:1; 47:9; Exodus 6:3, 4).
But the sojourn of the seed of Abraham had ended (Exodus 12:40, 41), and the descendants of Abraham were now at the very borders of the land — an established nation under God (the only earthly nation that ever has been or ever will be so placed) — ready to enter in and take possession of the land covenanted to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
Moses, as instructed by the Lord, first sent spies into the land to obtain a report concerning the land and its inhabitants. These spies traversed the land, “from the wilderness of Zin to Rehob,” for forty days and nights. And at the end of this time they appeared before Moses, Aaron, and the congregation of Israel to give their report (Numbers 13:1-33).
Their report contained both positive and negative aspects. The land was truly a land flowing with “milk and honey,” but . . . the inhabitants of the land were strong, they dwelled in walled cities, and the sons of Anak (the Nephilim) dwelled in the land (Numbers 14:26-29, 33).
Then, Caleb stilled the people before Moses, and said,
Let us go up at once and take possession, for we are well able to overcome it. (Numbers 13:30b)
Within his and Joshua’s thinking concerning the matter, the strength of the land’s inhabitants was not the issue. Rather, that which God had promised and God’s faithfulness to carry out His promises, through His strength, was the issue with them. They believed God would be well able to complete His dealings with Israel by and through bringing the people of this nation into a realization of their calling (cf. Numbers 14:8), ultimately effecting the fulfillment of Genesis 12:2, 3.
The other ten spies though presented an opposing report, saying,
We are not able to go up against the people, for they are stronger than we. . . . (Numbers 13:31-33)
These ten spies led the people of Israel to believe that they would be unable to go up against and conquer the inhabitants of the land. And viewing matters after this fashion, they were in essence saying that God would be unable to complete His dealings with Israel by and through bringing the people comprising this nation into a realization of their calling, resulting in Genesis 12:2, 3 remaining unfulfilled.
The people of Israel chose to believe the ten spies with their “evil report,” and it is at this point in Israel’s history that we find a national apostasy, resulting in the nation being overthrown in the wilderness. Because of that which occurred at Kadesh-Barnea, rather than the people overcoming the inhabitants of the land and realizing their calling, the nation was overcome outside the land before ever engaging the enemy in battle.
The entire accountable generation, twenty years old and above, was caused to wander in the wilderness (for another thirty-eight and one-half years) until that entire generation, save Caleb and Joshua, had died. Then, the second generation, under Joshua, was led across the Jordan to enter the land, engage the enemy in battle, and ultimately occupy the land.
The House of Christ
That which occurred at Kadesh-Barnea under Moses and that which occurred thirty-eight and one-half years later after the Israelites had crossed the Jordan under Joshua form the two central places from which teachings surrounding the warnings and promises to Christians are drawn in the book of Hebrews.
Everything is identical when dealing with the house of Christ — from the death of the paschal lambs in Egypt to the overthrow of an entire generation (save Caleb and Joshua) following events surrounding the Israelites at Kadesh-Barnea under Moses, or to the subsequent entrance of the second generation into the land under Joshua.
Accordingly, the first matter that must be considered in the antitype is the death of the firstborn. The firstborn is under the sentence of death and must die; and, as in Moses’ day, a substitute has been provided. “Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us” (1 Corinthians 5:7). His blood has been shed — blood that must be applied. And this is accomplished through faith in the One who shed His blood (John 3:16), effecting a passage “from death to life” (John 5:24; Ephesians 2:1, 5).
(There is also a “national” aspect to the death of the firstborn, as in Israel’s case. Collectively, Christians presently comprise “a holy nation” [1 Peter 2:9], which will, during the coming age, comprise a third firstborn Son [along with Israel and Christ (Hebrews 12:23)]. And, exactly as was the case with both Israel and Christ, the firstborn must die, with a view to resurrection and life, with the latter shown in the antitype of the Red Sea passage of the Israelites under Moses.)
The Red Sea passage under Moses showed that the firstborn had died. Then, beyond showing that the firstborn had died, the Red Sea passage showed that there had been a separation from the world, and the Israelites had been raised on the eastern banks of the Sea to “walk in newness of life.”
In the antitype, all of these different things are shown through the act of baptism, occurring following the death of the firstborn, following the individual passing “from death to life.” The individual, through baptism, is identified with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection, raised to “walk in newness of life” (Romans 6:3-5; Colossians 2:12).
Then comes that which is foreshadowed by the wilderness journey, wherein the person receives the Word of God and, through this Word, moves from immaturity to maturity in the things of God, with a view to entrance into the land whereunto he has been called. He cannot move from Egypt directly into this land, for he must first be properly equipped to engage and overcome the enemy occupying the land. And becoming equipped after this fashion occurs in the wilderness.
The individual must first be trained in spiritual matters over a period of time. Then, and only then, can he be in a position to move forward into the land, engage the enemy, and overcome the enemy (the different Gentile nations infiltrated by the Nephilim in the land of Canaan in the type, and Satan and his angels in that heavenly land in the antitype [cf. Numbers 13:28-33; Ephesians 6:11ff]).
But, as it is in the type, so it is in the antitype. Most (apparent from the type) will be overthrown in the wilderness. They will be overthrown on the right side of the blood — eternally saved — but short of the goal of their calling. They will have failed to follow the Lord’s leadership during the wilderness journey or relative to entering the land to which they had been called. Rather than overcoming the enemy in the land, they will have been overcome, most before ever engaging the enemy in combat. And, as a consequence, in that coming day they will be denied positions with Christ in the land, within the theocracy.
And also, as it is in the type, a smaller group will realize the goal of their calling. They will have possessed “another spirit,” “followed” the Lord, and will ultimately “possess” the land (Numbers 13:30; 14:24). Properly equipped for battle, they will have moved into the land and overcome the enemy. These are the ones who will occupy positions in the land, within the theocracy, as co-heirs with Christ.