HOLINESS IN THE SERVICE OF GOD (SUMMARY OF A READING)
[p. 184] HOLINESS IN THE SERVICE OF GOD (SUMMARY OF A READING)
This portion of Scripture is very important in its instruction for us because we get now for the first time something introduced into the service of God at Jerusalem which was idolatrous and corrupting. Ahaz may have been encouraged in this by what his father had done, who in a general way did what was right in the sight of Jehovah, but we are told in chapter 15: 35 that Jotham “built the upper gate of the house of Jehovah”. Evidently in doing this he thought he could improve on the original plan which had been given to David by the Spirit, and carried out by Solomon. I do not doubt that there was true piety in those who, in the early days of the church, thought they could improve upon the original order of service in the house of God. They thought they could devise a better means of approach to God than was known to the apostles.
Not many years after the death of the apostles it became almost universal to have a liturgy, a fixed form of service. It was thought that this would provide for things being done in a more orderly manner but it really indicated a great decline in spirituality. It was worship by a fixed rule, which could be carried on whether there was the power of the Holy Spirit in it or not. There was no longer liberty for the holy brethren to voice what was living in their hearts. Indeed, the living spring must already have been lacking,
[p. 185] or such an innovation could never have been tolerated. It was an attempt to make up in a human way for something which was felt to be lacking. We know, alas! how widely the principle of a humanly ordered service obtains today. It is supposed to be an improvement on the liberty of the Spirit. But we must beware of human improvement on divine order. It is well for us all — and for younger ones particularly — to take note of how the corruption of christendom came in through setting aside the original order. We may, perhaps, admit that it was done with good intent, but it opened the way for positive corruptions to come in, just as what Jotham did made it easier for Ahaz to go much farther and corrupt the whole character of the service of God. Jotham did not exactly corrupt the service, but he introduced an innovation which probably opened the way for his son to corrupt the service altogether by bringing in what was idolatrous.
This first departure was in connection with a new way of approach to God. It was, no doubt, thought to be a better way than Solomon’s for it is called “the upper gate”, but it was an innovation. In the present dispensation there was no suggestion of any service that could go on without living movements of the Spirit of God in the hearts of the saints. But forms of service were soon introduced, under plea of being helpful but they very soon led to many corrupting things having place in what was supposed to be the service of God. We may be sure that God’s original plan is superior to anything that men can introduce, because what is of God must be superior to what is of man. I trust we are seeking, through grace, to find our way out of what man has introduced, and to come back to what God ordained. God has favoured us, and is favouring us, by giving us spiritual light to set us free from what is idolatrous, and from what exalts man. He would bring us back to His original thought, and teach us how to worship [p. 186] Him in liberty in the spirit of sonship, a liberty which no liturgy could ever give.
One of God’s intents is that our true spiritual measure should come to light in our approach to Him. If I go to church and listen to the service, and it may be a good preaching by a godly man, my spiritual measure never comes to light. But when we leave human innovations and corruptions and come together as brethren in the Lord to take part in the service of God according to the grace given to us, our spiritual measure comes to light. If we are small spiritually it becomes apparent, and this is a real benefit for it awakens exercise. If I am small, and I take it to heart, there is no divine reason why I should continue small.
If we have weak meetings the reality of our spiritual measure is coming to light, and it is a benefit that it should. If we have a poor meeting does it not lead us to our knees that we may not have a poor meeting when we come together again? We should never get these exercises if we were submerged under a religious order that hides the true condition from view. If I have only five words, that is my measure; let it come into service. Brethren often do not take part because they are afraid of their true measure coming to light! Well, why should not my measure come to light? Why want the brethren to think I am bigger than I am? What I can contribute spiritually has value in the assembly, even though my measure be small. The assembly convened is a place of great liberty, for no one normally wants to be thought bigger than he is. What is of the Spirit and of the work of God in our souls, is to come into view. I would rather be in a weak meeting where something that God has wrought in the souls of His people comes to light than in the grandest cathedral service that ever was. I am sure that every brother and sister here would endorse that. 1 Corinthians supposes that every one has something by the Spirit; otherwise he could hardly be [p. 187] regarded as of the body at all. If we have something by the Spirit it is for service according to God’s original plan; it is to be available for the service of God. We need not be afraid of weakness; the thing to beware of is the fancied power of the flesh.
As we were saying, what Jotham did probably gave Ahaz an excuse to bring in elements that Jotham never thought of. Ahaz would not trust God, though God shewed him very special favour and would have given him any sign that he liked to ask for (see Isaiah 7), but he made friends with the king of Assyria and went to Damascus and saw an altar there which he thought superior to the altar at Jerusalem. We are told in 2 Chronicles 28: 23 that he said, “Since the gods of the kings of Syria help them, I will sacrifice to them, that they may help me”. Here in verse 10 we are told that he “saw the altar that was at Damascus”. It raises the question of what sort of eyes we have got. If this man had had a spiritual eye the altar he saw would not have appealed to him at all, for it was an idolatrous altar; but he looked at it with a carnal eye and saw it as superior to the divine altar at Jerusalem. He had not the vision of the Spirit of God at all. If he had he would never have thought that what was of God could be improved upon.
The history of Ahaz has a solemn voice to us for he appears as a man who had no thought of the holiness of God in His service. The altar stands in a special way for the holiness of God. It is called “most holy” in Exodus 29: 37, literally, ‘Holiness of holinesses’; the same word is used of the altar as is used of the holiest. And in the temple the altar was the exact measurement of the holiest. So that the altar represented publicly the same intense character of holiness as was set forth inwardly in the holy of holies. The full measure of this holiness was seen when Jesus as the forsaken One upon the cross bore the judgment due to sin; He justified the One who had forsaken Him by saying,
“And thou art holy”, Psalm 22: 3.
The brazen altar, we are told here in verse 14, was “before Jehovah”; it fully met, typically, all His requirements. It spoke of Christ as the means of approach to God according to God’s holiness, involving the thought of His capability to sustain all the sacrificial requirements of God. All that the altar spoke of was found in perfection in Christ. We read that “there went out fire from before Jehovah, and consumed on the altar the burnt-offering, and the pieces of fat”, Leviticus 9: 24. The blood of the sin-offering was put on the horns of the altar, and the fat of the sin-offering was burnt upon it. So that the altar ever witnessed that God had been glorified by the judgment of sin being borne. It is noticeable in the Scripture before us that Ahaz brought no sin-offering. He kept up a round of things in a traditional way, but he had no sin-offering.
There is nothing we need more than a deep sense of the holiness of God; it is very lacking with christians generally. In the epistle to the Hebrews, which largely takes up the question of approach to God, the death of Christ is seen in sin-offering character almost all through. This matter of divine holiness is most important. A man said to me the other day, ‘We want more love’, but I replied, ‘For that we must have more holiness’.
It is sad to see how Urijah the priest lent himself to Ahaz’s work of desecration; he did everything that Ahaz wanted. Religious leaders quickly fall in with what is wanted by man’s corrupt tastes. If people want ritualism they let them have it; if they want rationalism they can have it; but where is the holiness of God in all this? What about Christ as forsaken sustaining the judgment of God? The divine altar is really displaced. It was not that Ahaz did away with the brazen altar altogether, but he put it aside so that it became secondary to his altar. In Christendom Christ is not yet altogether disowned, but He is made [p. 189] secondary to what is of man or of Satan. Ahaz says, “The brazen altar shall be for me to inquire by”. People cannot get rid of the sense that Christ should have some place, but if He has not the place that God gives Him He has no place really. When what is of man is brought into the service of God the whole divine thought is lost.
Ahaz represents a state most common today — the giving up all true sense of the holiness of God. It is only as Christ and His offering for sin have their place with us that there is any right sense of the holiness of God. But Ahaz not only displaced the altar, but he “cut off the panels of the bases, and removed the lavers from off them”. The lavers were to wash in, and in them they rinsed what they prepared for the burnt-offering (2 Chronicles 4: 6). The question of holiness in the saints is raised in connection with the lavers and the sea. If we give up the holiness of God we necessarily give up holiness in the saints. My exercise as to personal holiness will be measured by my sense of the holiness of God. “Be ye holy, for I am holy”. In cutting off the panels and removing the lavers Ahaz was interfering with the means of purification, and thus with the holiness of the service of God. Nothing is more striking in the temple built by Solomon than the abundant provision for purifying (see 1 Kings 7). A great quantity of water was provided in the ten lavers and in the sea. It stressed the need for holy conditions in the service of God. It reminds us of the Lord’s word, “Unless I wash thee, thou hast not part with me”, John 13: 8.
If Satan can take away from us the true thought of the lavers and the sea he will succeed in robbing us of influences that would make us holy and make our service holy; if our service is not holy it will not be acceptable. The lavers need to be used in view of every Lord’s day morning. I do not mean that we are occupied in the use of them when we are together, but we should come to the meeting [p. 190] as having experienced their action and value. Everything prepared for the burnt-offering had to go through the lavers; there was no acceptable offering to God except what had been rinsed: “Let a man prove himself”, 1 Corinthians 11: 28. There is the possibility of fleshly elements entering in to what we sing or say to the blessed God. How important that every offering should be “rinsed”!
It is noticeable how much is said in 1 Kings 7 of the bases and panels on which the lavers stood. On the panels were “lions, oxen and cherubim” (verse 29), and again “cherubim, lions and palm-trees” (verse 36). I think that these symbolical creatures are intended to represent the power of holiness in the saints. The priests must wash, and every offering must go through the lavers. But the washing must be accompanied by what is set forth symbolically on the panels; that is, overcoming power in a holy priesthood. Satan would like the thought of offering to be disconnected from spiritual overcoming on the part of the saints. He would like us to break bread and to take part in the service of God, without being overcomers. He would like to cut off from our minds the thoughts of the “lions, oxen and cherubim” and of the “palm-trees” for they all speak of overcoming power. If this is not present with us there will not be holiness in the service of God. I think we must all realise that there cannot be a pure offering apart from the feature of overcoming in the saints.
The Lord would remind us that we have power to overcome. If we are carnal the Lord would say to us, ‘I have given you the power to be spiritual; why do you not use it?’ It is in using the divinely given power that conditions of holiness are brought about so that our offerings become acceptable. Every offering is rinsed. All is brought in holiness under the purifying action of the word. We should all be more exercised about holiness in connection with the service of God. The hour we spend [p. 191] together in assembly is the most important part of our lives, for it is the time when God is served in His assembly, and He can only be served in holiness. It should be a great object with us to maintain holiness throughout the week in view of coming together in assembly.
It is to be noted, according to 1 Kings 7: 30, 33, that the lavers were upon wheels. We have been taught that the wheels as seen in Ezekiel 1 refer symbolically to God’s movements in government in the world. But the wheels of the lavers were in the court of the temple and they refer to purifying movements which go on so that the service of God may be carried on in holiness. All the movements of God amongst His people have this in view. That by which God acts upon us, and upon our service, for purifying is always on wheels; it is marked by movement. All spiritual ministry of the word is a divine movement: indeed, “a word spoken in season” (Proverbs 25: 11) is literally ‘spoken upon his wheels’. Every divine speaking calls for some corresponding movement in us: it is thus that purification is effected in relation to the service of God.
Ahaz apparently got rid of the wheels of the lavers. Satan would like us to lose sight of divine movements in the meetings and in the ministry of the word; he would like to bring all down to the level of man. If what we hear or read in ministry does not purify us it has not come to us as a divine movement. If we do not move on with light which God gives, particularly as to how He would be served in His assembly, we are not getting the good of the lavers upon wheels. Purification for service is a continuous thing; it is a question of “perfecting holiness”. What is offered to God must be “rinsed” in the lavers so as to be suitable to Him in holiness. The great effort of Satan, as set forth in the action of Ahaz, is to lower or corrupt the divine thought.
Then Ahaz “took down the sea from off the brazen oxen [p. 192] that were under it, and put it upon a stone pavement”. The “sea” like the lavers, had much to say of holiness on the part of those who approach God. It spoke of immense means of purification, for it held two thousand baths according to 1 Kings 7: 26, and it sets forth the great volume of purifying influence which is available in the word. But the twelve oxen supporting the sea remind us that it is only as the word is accompanied by the patient, persistent service of Christ that it is really effective for purifying. The twelve oxen speak of the unwearying service of Christ in love to sanctify and cleanse the saints by the washing of water by the word. They look north, west, south and east, speaking of a precious service of love which is available universally. If the word is separated from the service of Christ it loses its efficacy. We read Scripture sometimes without being purified. Ahaz taking down the sea from the brazen oxen shows how Satan would seek to separate the word from the living service of Christ, and thus nullify it.
I trust we all read the Scriptures daily, but I dare say most of us would confess that they have not been so productive of holiness as they should be. I believe the reason is that in reading the Bible we do not look enough for the personal service of Christ to make good in our souls what we read. It is the same in listening to the ministry of the word; Christ alone can make it good to us in purifying power. To have the sea without the oxen is to lose the whole divine thought. Much ministry of the word produces little result in holiness because the people of God do not realise the necessity for the personal service of Christ to make it effective. The sea without the oxen under it is like the word unapplied by the service of Christ. The Lord said to Peter, “Unless I wash thee, thou hast not part with me”, John 13: 8. And Paul, in desiring Timothy to think of what he says, adds “for the Lord will give thee under standing in all things”, 2 Timothy 2: 7. It is Christ who sanctifies and purifies the assembly by the washing of water by the word. These Scriptures shew clearly how essential the personal service of Christ is: if Satan can induce us to go on without it he has gained his point.