In my sermon prep last week in 2 Kings 17-20, a detail popped out to me as I was working through the text.
In describing the spiritual reforms King Hezekiah implemented, the author makes this note in 18:4
"He removed the high places, smashed the sacred stones and cut down the Asherah poles. He broke into pieces the bronze snake Moses had made, for up to that time the Israelites had been burning incense to it. (It was called Nehushtan."
If that reference doesn't ring a bell, there's a short little story in Numbers 21:4-8 of the Israelites growing impatient on their Exodus journey to the Promised Land. God sends snakes in their camp as punishment - and then provides a solution, having Moses craft a snake made of bronze. Anyone who was bitten could look at the serpent and live. Jesus even references it to predict his own sacrificial death in John 3:13-15.
So here in the time of Hezekiah, we learn a) Israel had kept this item b) they had begun to worship it and 3) the King ordered it's destruction.
What are we to infer from these things?
Well, with a), it was not inappropriate for them to have kept this "icon" that reminded them of God's grace. We know that the Ark of the Covenant was a physical item meant to portray (and seat) God's divine presence. And the Ark itself held other items of special notoriety, namely Moses' staff, manna, and the 10 Commandment tablets.
Point b) and c) naturally go together as one causes the other. Technically, the passage stops short of stating that out-and-out worship was being observed in the presence of the bronze artifact. Yet the context is clear that Hezekiah was not going to stand for anything that went beyond Yahweh-prescribed worship.
I find it fascinating how b) follows a) though. Maybe convicting is the better word. Doesn't this feel totally normal for the human experience? Human beings were given a visible sign as part of God's gracious assistance and they start to ascribe special value to the statue itself? Of course we did.
Early on in church history, the Eastern Orthodox and Western portions of Christianity split over issues including the use of images and iconography. Roman Catholic cathedrals around the world feature exhibits (for lack of a better term) of various alleged items of significant objects of historical Christian events. Evangelical churches aren't often that direct. But we like to put a cross prominently on everything and often take great pride in our architecture and building environment. We often glorify experiences - camps, missions trips, the eucharist - making them the main thing rather than the actual experience of knowing God.
I'm not equating these examples nor am I outright condemning them. To be honest, this is a half-baked idea. I'm not fully sure of what big application I want to make here other than, we better take care not to make idols out of symbols or memorials. Don't hedge your bets with other rituals or let good tokens of grace turn into superstitious lucky charms. Bronze serpents can easily turn into golden calves if we don't keep the main thing the main thing.
P.S. If I really wanted to stir up some stuff, I might question whether or not we Americans do this with our flag, i.e., do we worry about "disrespecting the flag" as an object instead of focusing on what the flag represents - freedom, independence etc?
