GOD'S INHERITANCE IN THE SAINTS (4)

GOD’S INHERITANCE IN THE SAINTS (4)

1 Chronicles 23:1 - 6; 1 Chronicles 24:1 - 6; 1 Chronicles 25:1 - 7

JT It is in mind to refer again to chapter 22, but before doing so it might be remarked that this section — chapters 23 to 27 inclusive — contemplates Solomon on the throne; that is, David and Solomon reigning together; they also contemplate the ordering of the kingdom on the principle of twenty-four. Every department in the kingdom was thus ordered and provided for, down even to the matter of field products, vineyards, trees; also cattle — what is called “the substance which was king David’s” (chapter 27:31). In the previous section we have the light of sonship. Solomon was not yet born when Nathan’s message was delivered; the events connected with his birth are not recorded in this book, but according to 2 Samuel, the birth took place in the period covered in that section, and in chapter 22 he is alluded to as “young and tender”, but not yet on the throne. So that the instruction in those chapters, in chapter 22 particularly, contemplates Solomon on the scene, young and tender, and coming under David’s instruction.

It is to be noted that chapter 22 begins with the definite statement of David as to the house: “This is the house of Jehovah Elohim, and this is the altar of burnt-offering for Israel”. It is a definite end reached in his soul, God having answered him on the ground of sacrifice, and taking account of him as reaching a certain point in his soul through discipline. So that the house comes into view on moral lines, and what follows in chapter 22 shows that David would have it secure. The pattern of the house came in later, on a more spiritual plane; for it is not on the moral line, but on the spiritual line he received the pattern; it was “by the Spirit” (chapter 28:12).

^[p. 257] It is thought well to ponder chapter 22 a little on the moral line — how things are to be held, and how sonship is to be recognised; exercises reaching on to sonship fully presented: the state in which things are to be before God. Solomon represents that the governing principle now is to be sonship, already present, already expressed. Our brother had something in his mind, held in abeyance, from our previous reading; perhaps he will express it.

Rem I had in mind the two generations you were speaking of — all the wealth already brought into the ministry, and which the younger generation inherit, and that which they may add.

JT I think it would be a very practical help in view of the many coming in now, younger men able to minister, that it should be made clear that they come into wealth. David says: “Solomon my son is young and tender, and the house that is to be built for Jehovah must be exceeding great in fame and in beauty in all lands: I will therefore make preparation for it”. Then he called for Solomon and said: “As for me, my son, I was minded to build a house unto the name of Jehovah my God. But the word of Jehovah came to me saying, Thou hast shed blood abundantly, and hast made great wars: thou shalt not build a house unto my name, for thou hast shed much blood upon the earth in my sight” (verses 7,8). So David is thoroughly self-judged, having accepted the message from Nathan; correspondingly, he would have judged his military course; for that had turned out to be a hindrance to some extent in regard of the house. Great and successful as he was in military exploits, it has turned out to be a hindrance to his entrance on greater things. That is an important thing for those of us who are older, to review our lives, as to whether our service has in any way hindered us, whether we have been unable through it to enter on the more spiritual things; the full spiritual plane that God has in mind for us.

^[p. 258] Then he proceeds to speak further to Solomon: “Now, my son, Jehovah be with thee, that thou mayest prosper, and build the house of Jehovah thy God, as he has said of thee” (verse 11). Then: “And behold, in my affliction I have prepared for the house of Jehovah a hundred thousand talents of gold, and a thousand thousand talents of silver; and of brass and iron without weight, for it is in abundance; and timber and stone have I prepared; and thou shalt add to it. And there are workmen with thee in abundance, hewers and workers of stone and timber, and all manner of skilful men for every kind of work. Of the gold, the silver, and the brass, and the iron, there is no number. Arise and be doing and Jehovah be with thee” (verses 14 - 16). I thought it would be worth noticing the wealth with which Solomon begins, and also whether there is not a corresponding condition now come down to us from the afflictions of others; wealth particularly which those who are coming on share in; they have therefore an immense advantage, but they are to “add to it”. They are not simply to keep on in that into which they have come, but to add, each one, something of his own, to what is already accumulated. The number of younger men that are now active gives rise to inquiry as to whether the Lord is continuing on, or whether He is finishing up, completing the dispensation, but in either case, He would have those who are now coming on to be in freshness, and each to add to what there has been.

Ques Would the inclusion of Moses in this section support what has been said about the moral line?

JT I should think it would. A principle attaching to any real ministry is that it is cumulative; it carries down what preceded, particularly in the sense of instruction and example. Moses would represent the authority of God, what is formally commanded; David is moral authority, more what the person is, involving headship.

ECB In its application to ourselves, why could not-David as a man of war build the ^[p. 259] house?

JT It is a question as to whether a man’s service hinders him for use on higher levels. If I take a line and excel in it, even allow some will in it, I may be successful outwardly, but I may be hindering my movement on to higher levels; and God takes on others.

Rem You mean that there should be the sitting down at the Lord’s feet, so that what is added is added in a spiritual way.

JT You want to be open for what the Lord may bring in, so that in the service you thought yourself ready for, you may not through it be disqualifying yourself for service of a more spiritual character.

MWB Would that be like specialising on a certain line?

JT Yes; I do not think anyone should specialise. There are those who have done it, but they have disqualified themselves for greater things.

Rem Solomon, later on, when he speaks about it, does not refer to the hindrance, he says that God told David that what he had in his heart was good; he goes on from what had been reached in David’s soul (1 Kings 8:18).

JT Quite so; David himself enlarges on the hindrance.

JAP How would you distinguish between specialising and gift?

JT Gift, of course, involves a certain line of work, but the gift does not cover the whole man. It is true that Ephesians 4:11 states: “he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers”; but then, if you take Paul, he was nothing behind any of the apostles, yet he would do anything needed to be done; he would not confine himself to any particular line of service.

AJG So a son is always greater than his gift or his service.

JT Well, that is seen here. Personality is the thing first of all; because personality goes through,

^[p. 260] gift does not. In personality I may develop a great variety of ability in service, and I want to be open and not confine myself to any one line.

Ques In 2 Chronicles 17:7 - 9 Jehoshaphat sent princes, Levites and priests to teach in all the cities of Judah. Would that support the thought — the princes coming first?

JT Just so; “princes” implies personality.

FI Would you say that both Philip and Stephen represent those who had gift and did not allow themselves to be bound by it, but increased in spirituality?

JT Yes. They represent men who have purchased “to themselves a good degree” (1 Timothy 3:13). That would mean that they began on low ground and reached a higher plane. If I think unduly of my gift, I may confine myself to it. I am not purchasing, I am thinking of my gift and using it; but if I serve in whatever God brings to me, in whatever my hand finds to do, then I purchase to myself a good degree. So that the whole field is laid open to us in that way. In both Stephen and Philip we see that although they reached great heights in their service, they began as serving tables. Philip is the only one formally called an evangelist in the Scriptures. That would point to what has been said, that he purchased to himself a good degree.

LES Would the acceptance of the sorrows of the testimony be in view of increased wealth, and result in the affections referred to in the last chapter? David refers there to the affection he had for the house of God, and what he gave for it of his own property.

JT Yes; he refers here, not to his affection, but his affliction. He did not enter into affliction exactly to gain wealth, the wealth was the outcome; but giving in affection is another matter. Here it is the outcome of his affliction; the wars, for instance, which we alluded to in chapter 18, wealth came in there. In chapter 29:3 he says, “In my affection for the house of my God I have given of my own property”;

that is more premeditated and formal. “Affection for the house of my God” is a beautiful phrase.

Ques Would you connect the instruction that David gives to Solomon in chapter 22:12 with Paul’s first prayer in Ephesians?

JT Yes; it applies specially to the younger men now: “Only, Jehovah give thee wisdom and understanding, and place thee over Israel, and to keep the law of Jehovah thy God. Then shalt thou prosper, if thou takest heed to perform the statutes and ordinances which Jehovah commanded Moses for Israel” (verses 12,13). All that is most practical, and, as being restrictive, it keeps one within bounds and balanced. You are not a law to yourself. The most spiritual man is not a law to himself; however great he may be and successful, he is under orders.

TH Speaking of the young men coming into wealth, would that be seen in Saul coming into Antioch?

JT Quite so; God was working and many were already added to the Lord there. Besides, he came into all that had been effected through the twelve.

ABP Would Timothy as following Paul, being called to stir up the gift that was in him, and being reminded that he was fully acquainted with Paul’s teaching, be in line with what is before us — co-ordination in the work by the younger men?

JT Yes. You can see how Timothy would add to what was there — great wealth was there. He is to comport himself in regard of that, what he came into. Many who have been successful on certain lines have thrown off restraint. The last general universal sorrowful division that occurred amongst us was really through men throwing off restraint. They were a law to themselves, disregarding the “ordinances which Jehovah commanded Moses for Israel” (verse 13). When men specialise and are successful, often a certain ^[p. 262] independency arises.

WGT When you refer to orders, have you in mind divine principles?

JT Well, I was referring to what comes out at the introduction of the house of God (Genesis 28). Jacob was under orders, he was not seeking a wife on his own initiative. He was under orders, and that is the principle that runs down in the service of God; we are always to be under divine direction. The spirit of control strikingly marks the book of Acts. However great a man may be, such as Saul of Tarsus, he is to be under orders; and at first not from the Lord directly, but through others: “Enter into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do” (Acts 9:6). That balances us; however great we may think ourselves, we can never be independent of the brethren.

AG It says “the sons of David were the first at the king’s hand” (chapter 18:17).

JT Quite so — that bears on sonship.

MWB In what way would you encourage those who are relatively younger in acquiring acquaintance with the substance of the truth into the light of which they come?

JT I should think the instruction in our section would help as to that. Everything is under control. You might say it is a departmental situation; so that we have persons into whose hands the treasures are committed — the dedicated things. For instance, in chapter 27:25, we have “over the king’s treasures” was so-and-so. I think that would mean that we become acquainted with that side of things, the elements of conservation, the elements among us that value what there is of God. They are really valued; not simply to have the books, but the inheritance brought down spiritually. It is not the books only, but the Spirit has brought down things to us, and there is the element of control conserving the wealth; that is the thought we should lay hold of. Take the position in Acts 1: the upper room was a conservatory, one may say, of all ^[p. 263] that had preceded. The Lord had given much through the apostles; they were all there by name: Mary, the Lord’s mother was there; also certain other women; and those who had seen the Lord go up are spoken of as going there. They are, as it were, bringing their treasures where they would be valued and preserved. Take such treasures elsewhere, to the greatest religious denomination; they would not be rightly valued, nor cared for; but the upper room represents that in which the things of God are treasured. We need to be there.

DLH Paul wrote to Timothy: “Think of what I say, for the Lord will give thee understanding in all things” (2 Timothy 2:7). And he was to communicate to others that which he had learned through the apostle.

JT “Commit thou to faithful men” (2 Timothy 2:2); that is the idea. Timothy followed up what he came into, and was to commit it to faithful men; thus it would be preserved.

DLH Is not that the way the former wealth is conveyed, carried on and added to today?

JT That is what I was thinking. The conservatory, for the treasures, was in the upper room, as over against the temple. The apostles served for a while, in grace to Israel, in the temple, but not as having a treasury there; those ruling in the temple would not conserve the teaching of Christ. The upper room would be wholly for the Lord; it was a place “where were staying both Peter, and John, and James” (Acts 1:13), and the other apostles, as well as others acquainted with Christ. Anything brought in there contrary to Christ or derogatory to Christ would be immediately expelled; but anything in the nature of a treasure would be conserved, by whomsoever it may have come.

Ques Does the thought of charge enter into all this? David charged Solomon, the Lord charged the apostles, and Timothy was charged by Paul. Is it a question of responsibility in this ^[p. 264] sense?

JT It is. We have these men who were over the treasures. “This Shelomith and his brethren were over all the treasures of the dedicated things, which king David, and the chief fathers, the captains over thousands and hundreds, and the captains of the host, had dedicated (from the wars and out of the spoils they had dedicated them, to maintain the house of Jehovah), and all that Samuel the seer, and Saul the son of Kish, and Abner the son of Ner, and Joab the son of Zeruiah had dedicated: all that was dedicated was under the hand of Shelomith and of his brethren” (chapter 26:26 - 28). That, it seems to me, is what the young brothers are coming into; the dedicated things and treasure, that have come down, by whomsoever they came, even by a Joab. Gold is gold wherever it is. Let us name the things, so that we watch it and stand for it; if anybody would discredit it, contend for it; every item of divine treasure is to be valued and preserved.

EuR Does Matthew 2:11 help? “And having opened their treasures, they offered to him gifts, gold, and frankincense, and myrrh”.

JT Quite so: that is an addition.

JSE I should like a little more help as to this question of being under orders.

JT I think it is an important suggestion that runs down to us. If any man is to be free from restraint on the part of the others, it would be a man seeking a wife. Jacob was a man advanced in years, but he is under orders as to a wife; and, as moving in obedience to his parents, the house of God comes into view. He is moving definitely under the orders of his parents.

NKM We see that very definitely too in Abraham’s servant.

JT Yes; he does not vary a hair’s breadth from the orders of Abraham.

Rem The mind of the Lord is found amongst the saints, and that is always to be ^[p. 265] sought.

JT That is the principle of the assembly: everything is there, “in which are hid all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge” (Colossians 2:3). Each of us as loyal to Christ, as lovers of God, and lovers of Christ are to be on the watch that nothing should slip away from us, but rather that we should add to what there is.

Now, as regards this section, it is a most important one because it assures balance; speaking simply, the departmental system is essential to order and prosperity. The number twenty-four here, which permeates all, comes not only under David, but also Solomon — not that Solomon is active, he is not properly seen as active in this book; he is passive, but he is there; he is now on the throne. The number twenty-four is to preclude rivalry and interference with other men’s lines. Each has his own line and as of the number twenty-four, I am amenable to divine manipulation, divine orders; I am ready for anything that is of God: “By love serve one another” (Galatians 5:13).

AMP Why is it twenty-four, not twelve?

JT It is increase of amenableness in sub-divisions, I think. Twelve is the most divisible of all numbers up to itself, and twenty-four is double that; and, as has often been remarked, two dispensations are involved in christianity: “upon whom the ends of the ages are come” (1 Corinthians 10:11). Love has its greatest place in the assembly; and that is why, I think, the assembly is said to have “the glory of God” (Revelation 21:10), because love has such a place; there is such an intelligent use of love, love acting in a divinely intelligent way: it is glory — it implies the glory of God. It is the “way of more surpassing excellence” (1 Corinthians 12:31).

FWW What would be the application for us today of David and Solomon on the throne at the same time?

JT It is progression here; it is a mark of progress in the instruction of the book. It really refers to advanced apprehension in the saints of the things of ^[p. 266] God. Sonship, presented as a matter of light in chapter 17, is seen in a concrete way in Solomon in chapter 22, only, he is “young and tender”, not doing anything, but under a charge. In chapter 23 he is on the throne with David; that is, the old and the young in administration together. On our side it is a point reached in the history of the testimony; especially that the young are needed, and on their side they cannot get along without the old. A young man might feel that the older brethren are in his way. Love would not take this attitude, but would rightly value the older brethren. And on the other hand, the elder brethren would rightly value the young. All are to “bind on humility towards one another” (1 Peter 5:5).

Ques Does the Lord identify Himself with both in Matthew’s gospel — the ass and the colt?

JT He does. In Matthew it is two; there are two blind men at Jericho instead of one: that is, two persons testifying to the truth of the Person of Christ as known at that moment. They are blind men, but they cry, “Lord, Son of David” (Matthew 20:30), not ‘Jesus of Nazareth’; that is, two blind men testifying to the truth specially applying at that time. The section in 1 Chronicles before us fits just where it is in this sense. David has placed Solomon on the throne; we want to understand the section as thus begun. The two blind men referred to furnish the initiative in that section. Following on that in chapter 21 they are, as it were, both employed; in what? Carrying the testimony. That is the principle; the blind men have added to what is there. It is addition in the faith; they have added to what is there and all is to be carried forward; so the ass and the colt carry it forward — the old brother and the young brother. It is safe that way. As Christ the King is drawing near to Jerusalem, everything needed was to be there. “It is the city of the great King” (Matthew 5:35); the great King is being carried into it in testimony, and these two are thus employed;

^[p. 267] the ass and the colt fulfilling the word in Zechariah: “Say to the daughter of Zion, Behold thy King cometh to thee, meek, and mounted upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass”, (Matthew 21:5). Then the crowds cry: “Hosanna to the Son of David; blessed be he who comes in the name of the Lord” (verse 9). All that is carried through into Jerusalem; but how will He be received in Jerusalem? There must be completion to what has been introduced. The “city was moved, saying, Who is this? And the crowds said, This is Jesus the prophet who is from Nazareth of Galilee” (verses 10,11); but He is more than that — the blind men have said more than that. The Lord is in the temple opening their eyes, and the chief priests and scribes complain; but what about? — the children; the children are carrying on what was started by the blind men: “Hosanna to the Son of David” (verse 15). They are maintaining the testimony as carried in. We can see now the accumulative idea in the testimony: two blind men; the ass and the colt; and then the children; the thing is completed. The Lord heard the children, and He says in answer to the complaint of the priests and the scribes: “Have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise?” (verse 16). The testimony for the moment is perfected, that is the idea; the truth as developing is carried through.

Ques Rehoboam lost the kingdom through failing to understand the principle you referred to as to young men: in consulting with the young men rather than the old. Did he not lose the kingdom through failing to understand David and Solomon reigning together in principle?

JT Just so. He took counsel with those he had been brought up with. The old men who stood before Solomon were wiser than the young men with whom he had been brought up. At this juncture David and Solomon on the throne together is a safe position. It is divine ordering.

HWS “David commanded all the princes of Israel to help Solomon” (chapter 22:17). What is the force of that?

JT That would be from their side: those who have acquired a princely reputation; their side would be to support the young man: “David commanded all the princes of Israel to help Solomon his son, saying, Is not Jehovah your God with you? and has he not given you rest on every side?” (chapter 22:17,18). That would be their responsibility; so that whatever the old brethren have acquired in reputation and wealth, they must use to promote what God is bringing in to succeed them.

HMS Is there a comparison between this and Paul and Timothy — a younger man to carry on?

JT Yes. Paul had directed Timothy in the second letter to commit to faithful men what he had heard from Paul, and that they should “teach others also”. But the point is to see that the truth is carried down intact, not to let anything slip. And I am to “add to it”. I shall not add to it if I do not value what is there and make the most of it.

WH There was not only treasure and wealth present, but skilful men, too; “add to it” includes all that.

JT Yes; Solomon would have all. David says they were with him there. It would be for him to know how to use these men and not to assume at once to know better. “And there are workmen with thee in abundance” (verse 15).

WH It says later that David supplied “gold for things of gold” (chapter 29:2); as if the material was there, but had to be formed in different vessels; would the skill come in in that connection?

JT Quite so; and the subsequent history brings out, in this respect, wonderful results. Solomon we shall see later, taking up the attitude of being a little child; God gave him largeness of heart and wisdom,

^[p. 269] and he had men who could do things, and he employed them to do things with the greatest possible results.

Ques Chapter 24:4 says: “And there were more head-men found of the sons of Eleazar than of the sons of Ithamar, and thus were they divided: of the sons of Eleazar there were sixteen heads of fathers’ houses, and eight of the sons of Ithamar according to their fathers’ houses”. Is it not a beautiful way in which the sixteen and eight serve together?

JT That brings out that love is at the bottom of all this — no rivalry at all, we go on together: “yet shew I unto you a way of more surpassing excellence” (1 Corinthians 12:31). I believe these chapters are to show that; the wonderful results that must accrue because the principles we have been speaking of were at work.

WGT Does this involve service Godward and manward?

JT Yes, it applied both ways. We may see that the whole year, every month, was looked after by a son, in nearly every case; to provide food each month; superintendents to provide the food for Solomon’s house (see 1 Kings 4:7). So here, we have in chapter 27, in David’s ordering: “And these are the children of Israel after their number, the chief fathers and captains of thousands and hundreds, and their officers that served the king in every matter of the divisions, which came in and went out month by month throughout the months of the year; in every division were twenty-four thousand” (verse 1). So that there is wonderful ordering in a departmental way, so to speak. All is in love: “by love serve one another” (Galatians 5:13). That is the way of surpassing excellence. No one has any feelings of rivalry as to this; it is all by appointment, and the number twenty-four perfectly divisible without the slightest cause of offence. David and Solomon could direct in person in any one of these departments without fear of causing the sense of rivalry. One is ready to do whatever one’s hand finds to do as set in this ordering.

Rem In connection with Moses and Joshua, Moses was told he could not enter the land, but he suggested that Jehovah would bring forth a man who would go in and out with the people: there was no sense of rivalry with him. The suggestion came because of his love for the people.

JT That is the principle. We have been remarking that David failed to enter on higher levels because of something that hampered him. The same is true of Moses, and it is very solemn that any one of us may disqualify himself for higher levels because of the way he has carried on his service. The example of Moses and David in desiring young men in the service is to be noticed and followed. On the other hand, the extremes to which those great servants went, under certain circumstances, causing them serious limitations, are to be carefully observed, especially by young men. Let everything be done in love (1 Corinthians 16:14).

LES Would Philippians 2:1 - 4 apply here? “If ... there be any comfort in Christ, if any consolation of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and compassions, fulfil my joy, that ye may think the same thing, having the same love, joined in soul, thinking one thing; let nothing be in the spirit of strife or vain glory, but, in lowliness of mind, each esteeming the other as more excellent than themselves; regarding not each his own qualities, but each those of others also”.

JT Quite so. It is peculiarly fitting in that epistle, which goes on to say, “Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus” (verse 5). You are made to feel that to get on to the higher levels of which we have been speaking you need to follow Him in His descending perfection.

ROS Would that mean keeping “the royal law ... Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself” (James 2:8)?

JT ^[p. 271] Quite so.

JHB What is the reason for the direction as to courses in chapters 24, 25, and 27?

JT It is a question of understanding what the numeral twenty-four means. Why does it come in here? It is just set in these chapters and carried through to the book of Revelation: why is it? It is really a question of love — the book of Revelation shows that it goes through — the saints set in this divisible relation to one another, so that headship can operate. There is no thought of rivalry. If there be rivalry, then the service will not go on; it will be disjointed. Love comes through into the book of Revelation; and hence in the heavenly city we get the wonderful statement, “having the glory of God” (Revelation 21:10). It goes through, leading up to headship. David mentions in the last chapter of this book that God is Head; His headship can operate, can function in this condition of things as love is operating. So there is the result in headship in Christ, who is “head over all things to the assembly, which is his body, the fulness of him who fills all in all” (Ephesians 1:22,23). The body, the assembly, is great enough for that; the fulness of Christ works out in it. You could not have headship functioning without the body; and it is now marked as having power for “its self-building up in love” (Ephesians 4:16).

WH Is there any suggestion of sovereignty in that, of the twenty-four sons of Asaph, Heman and Jeduthun, those of Heman, fourteen, are said to be given of God?

JT No doubt. Chapter 25 is really more a propos of our inquiry than any of these chapters. It is the most refined as to the divine service. What is so striking is that the chapter begins with the military thought: “And David and the captains of the host separated for the service those of the sons of Asaph and of Heman and of Jeduthun who were to prophesy with harps and lutes and cymbals”. Now it seems to me that in coming on to this high ground there is help in comparing ^[p. 272] what we have already had before, how David in his successes in military service had disqualified himself for building the house. The military side is brought in here as perfectly compatible with higher levels. If under control, if I have to fight in love for the truth, I can turn round and sing. If I am contending “earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints” (Jude 3), I can sing. Jude was going to write about “our common salvation”, involving the gospel, but he had to turn aside to “contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints”. Well, you can sing in that. In our chapter we have the military in thorough correspondence with the service of God in its highest setting. They are operating here: “And David and the captains of the host separated for the service those of the sons of Asaph and of Heman and of Jeduthun who were to prophesy with harps and lutes and cymbals”. It is not only singing, but under their fathers these sons, given of God, we may say, are proficient on these remarkable instruments, in prophesying.

EuR What is the import for us in the fact that David gives these directions, but the service was actually inaugurated by Solomon?

JT The lesson here is that I can sit down and write a letter to defend the truth or expose error; do it with all my might, and at the same time I can sing. Your feelings are not affected, you are not carried beyond yourself in assumption in anything you do, so that you can sing. If any could have been resentful of their persecutors it was Paul and Silas. They suffered most unreasonably, but as in the prison their feelings are right: they maintain that in spite of the sufferings; in praying, they were praising God with singing (Acts 16:25).

ABP The Lord Jesus was pre-eminently a Man of war at Calvary, but the “praises of Israel” (Psalm 22:3), ^[p. 273] were in His heart.

JT Beautiful! Such praises were indeed in His heart! They would soon be heard in the assembly (verse 22).

ETS Jude at the close of his epistle, after his onslaught, closes with that beautiful note of praise, “But to him that is able to keep you without stumbling, and to set you with exultation blameless before his glory, to the only God our Saviour, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, might, and authority, from before the whole age, and now, and to all the ages. Amen”.

JT A beautiful finish to a militant epistle.

MWB In 1 Chronicles 25:2,6 we have “according to the king’s order”, the thought of the direction of the king; is that coming under the influence of Christ as Head, or is that the impulse of spiritual sensibilities?

JT It is coming under the impulse of Christ, I should say, only it does not go quite so far as headship; it is direction — ‘at the hand’ of the king. The bringing in of the king, princes, and captains, the king directing the music, would show how everything is completely balanced now in David’s soul. If he is a soldier, he is not going beyond what is right for the soldier; and if he is doing anything in the divine realm, he is doing it aright; his spirit is right.

LOL Is not prophecy generally connected with an instrument? Elisha called for a minstrel (2 Kings 3:15), and in 1 Corinthians 14:7 it speaks of “what is piped or harped”.

JT Here we have the instruments mentioned. These great singers are prophesying. It is not simply a question of gratifying our taste for music, but thinking for God. My conscience should support the hymn while I am singing it.

PHH Does Asaph bring this in particularly in Psalm 72, where Christ is seen in His sonship, and in Psalm 73, fitting in with what it is to be in the presence ^[p. 274] of God? Does that stand connected at all with this line of things?

JT I think it does; he is alluded to here. It seems to me that God would help us in regard to the hymn-singing; we are inclined to sing to our natural taste, the tune affecting us more than the words. The tune is part of the service, certainly, but there could be no prophesying in the tune, it is in the words; that is to say, the words are words of truth. Paul said, “I will sing with the spirit, but I will sing also with the understanding” (1 Corinthians 14:15).

Ques Does the prophetic thought explain why they are called “songs of Jehovah”?

JT No doubt it enters into it. It is remarkable that the prophetic thought is brought in here. It is to enter into our service in the assembly. God’s part and place in the service should never be lacking; God having to do with us, at times challenging us.

NKM You refer to the conscience as affected by the prophesying in the singing?

JT Yes; there is no danger of corruption through mere sentimental feeling if the prophesying be present.

PL Does it link with Colossians 3:16? — “in all wisdom teaching and admonishing one another, in psalms, hymns, spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to God”.

JT Yes. The Lord would challenge us in our songs, whether we are just ministering to ourselves in the singing. Although Ephesians 5:19 says, “speaking to yourselves”, it is also to the Lord, and the thanksgiving is to God; prophesying brings in God as present in His service.

JJ Are these songs included in the compass of Scripture or are they what the singers composed themselves?

JT That is another matter: take the psalms in the third book, to which our brother alluded. Asaph writes almost every one of them; I suppose he would use ^[p. 275] some of them in the services contemplated in 1 Chronicles 25.

HC I suppose we should not sing hymns of a prophetic character at the Supper?

JT They have place in God’s service generally, as seen in our chapter. The best hymns we have make a great deal of God being present in the singing.

MWB Perhaps we do not clearly grasp the idea of prophecy in this connection; will you say a little more as to it?

JT Well, it is a very striking thing that this is the thought: “David and the captains of the host separated for the service those of the sons of Asaph and of Heman and of Jeduthun who were to prophesy with harps and lutes and cymbals”. It is a remarkable thing that it comes from David and the captains; how thoroughly free they are now as to the service of God! They are equal to this, that all is to be maintained in the spirit of prophecy. David would no doubt say, If I maintain the spirit of prophecy in my military operations, I should have a right spirit and not go to excess.

Ques Is there a link between this and the scene in Acts 4:23,24? “And having been let go, they came to their own company, and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said to them. And they, having heard it, lifted up their voice with one accord to God”; and afterwards, the wonderful unity that marks the saints is seen.

JT A good example; and how God honoured them!

Rem In Luke 1:76 Zacharias says: “And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest”; and immediately after that it says: “And the child grew” (verse 80).

JT You have in mind that for the prophetic ministry there is growth.