THE NUMERAL THREE IN TESTIMONY (4)
[p. 296] THE NUMERAL THREE IN TESTIMONY (4)
Exodus 3:1-6; Exodus 4:1-17; Exodus 4:27-31
JT So that our subject may be more clear, a verse from Micah 6: 4 will help. It says, “I sent before thee Moses, Aaron, and Miriam”. The proposal is to consider the thought of full testimony, as seen in the numeral three, as regards the ministry. We have considered the question of the Deity, taking up Genesis 18, and then the patriarchs in Genesis, as representing, under the same numeral, the fatherhood of God. Now we have before us the ministry; what God has appointed, so that all we have before us in the types as to God, the Trinity, and then the Father, may be made effective through officially qualified instrumentalities. The official feature of the truth is not much in view in Genesis, indeed scarcely at all, whereas in these books — Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy — it is the leading feature. They show what Christ is officially, and what ministers appointed by Him are; what their function is. The proposal is to view this subject under the head of Moses, Aaron, and Miriam, as put together by the Spirit of God in Micah, and as seen in detail in these books. The inquiry, of course, is not only that we may be instructed in this great subject, but that it may have a moral bearing upon us, since the obligation to serve attaches to each of us, although there are those who are specially qualified.
WJH Would you say a little more as to what you mean by what is official?
JT We see it here in the way in which Moses and Aaron are appointed by God to lead His people out of Egypt, and as out, to lead them through the wilderness and regulate them, and hold them in a moral way in relation to the service of God. In the New Testament the Lord Himself is the antitype,
[p. 297] the One who, as we are told, was here in flesh, and anointed by the Holy Spirit, and now as risen from the dead, and ascended into heaven, is made both Lord and Christ. Then the twelve apostles are formally constituted to represent Him here, to represent the Lord; and especially Paul. The Lord addresses him as one called to be a minister and a witness; “a called apostle”. I suppose that would indicate what is meant in the official feature of the truth.
WJH With Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, everything was personal, in a family setting. Moses, Aaron, and Miriam are distinct from that.
JT Yes; although Moses and Aaron are brothers, and Miriam their sister, they are mentioned as appointed leaders, and hence do not represent the family of God, but what is official.
FWW Would the official be more connected with the anointing?
JT Well, it is formally stated to be that. Jesus is said to have been anointed by God. He says in the synagogue: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach ...” In Genesis the patriarchs represent the fatherhood of God, and that would be what constituted the economy in Genesis from the family point of view under the head of three — three men — and then three patriarchs, or fathers, presenting the full testimony connected with the idea of father, which, of course, applies to God, and which we see more fully brought out in the New Testament. Then there is the official anointing, which is to make all this effective in an authoritative way, and a skilled way too, for one idea in ministry is skill.
ESW What is it that is ministered?
JT Well, typically, the full revelation of God. The Spirit of God is sent down; the great result of redemption, and represents that side, what is administered. “He has poured out this”, Peter said of Christ [p. 298] as established in heaven as Lord and Christ. What was there was what Christ had “received of the Father”. That is the principle, for “the Father loves the Son, and has given all things to be in his hand” (John 3: 35). So that He is constituted an official under the title of Lord and Christ, and being thus constituted, He received of the Father, it says, “the promise of the Holy Spirit”, and poured it out. That is the great general act of administration, and nothing can exceed it in extent. What follows is the testimony of it applied in its wonderful bearing towards man in the gospel, and in the formation of the assembly.
NBS What is the bearing of two of these being brothers, and one a sister?
JT The first is authority, Moses, and ability to open up the mind of God; and in Aaron brotherly sympathy and affection, which is allied with authority and the general opening up of the mind of God. So that the ministry in Moses is made sympathetic as to men, and attractive, in that way; as illustrated, for instance, in the gospel of Luke. Matthew and Mark convey the idea of authority, and great general principles mark those gospels, whereas Luke enlarges on personalities, sympathy in persons. John also enlarges on personalities and brings out dignity. Luke enlarges on personalities to bring out sympathy, but particularly as allied with Matthew, and presents the thought of Aaron, so that the testimony is presented in an attractive, sympathetic way to men. It is a very important matter in the ministry, that we do not prejudice it, “that the ministry be not blamed”, as Paul says (2 Corinthians 6: 3).
ET Is the thought of divine selection seen in the appointing of these ministers, but underlying that the moral qualities, each having their moral history?
JT That is an instructive way to put the position. In Moses we have a life-size picture. Aaron is first presented to us at the age of eighty-three, that is, he is an old man before he is presented, while Miriam is [p. 299] not presented, by name, until she is probably much older than that. No doubt she is alluded to in chapter 2, under the name of Moses’ sister, but not by name. So Moses is to be taken to be representative personally of this great subject, because we have him from his infancy, and in his infancy he suggests the idea of divine selection; from that time he is being prepared to take up his ministry. His beauty as a child is alluded to twice in the New Testament; as if God foreshadowed what he was to be. There was to be a certain attractiveness in his ministry, which was there potentially in the babe; and he was under divine care peculiarly, until he was eighty years of age; then he receives his appointment. This shows how, as taken up young, an extended course of instruction is necessary for the ministry. We cannot enter into it immediately we are converted. We may do things, but ere God commits Himself to us, we require careful training; that is what Moses represents. He represents the ministry actually, while Aaron and Miriam are adjuncts to make it attractive, first in the way of sympathy, and then affection and instinct, on the feminine side.
JDU Is the patriarchal side more connected with purpose, and the official side with extrication from the scene of opposition, of what is to be for God?
JT That is right. The first is the family side, what God has in mind in approaching men. He has in mind to secure not only a people down here for Himself, but a family of sons, and that, I think, is what is represented in the fathers. The ministerial service runs alongside of that, but only as an instrumentality to secure it. The official side will drop out as the family is secured according to divine counsel. First of all Moses is presented to us as a beautiful child, but there is more in that verse than mere physical beauty. He is fair to God (Acts 7: 20), it is evidently what God saw in him; and then the education extending over a period of eighty years, forty years of which were [p. 300] spent in the court of Pharaoh. All that is to bring out the educational side, and in the course of that education we have divine selection evidenced in Moses. It was seen in God taking him up, but the moral fitness shows itself in that, when he came to years, he “refused to be called son of Pharaoh’s daughter; choosing rather to suffer affliction along with the people of God than to have the temporary pleasure of sin; esteeming the reproach of the Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt” (Hebrews 11: 24 - 26). A very important side in a minister, as developed in his educational period, is the principle of selection: choosing and refusing. Choosing the good, choosing the suffering and the affliction, and refusing the evil. Then as coming under the wrath of Pharaoh, he flees, and in Midian sits by a well. We see there what God was doing in the man. This everyone who aspires to serve, or is serving, must have in mind. What God is doing in him educationally, and how the work of God in him shows itself, in his ability, and holy qualities generally. So Moses sat by a well, we are told, in Midian. He had had recourse to physical energy, and doing things in his own ability in Egypt, but now he is trusting to a power outside of himself, he is resting by the well; alluding, doubtless, to the Spirit of God. These things are all very important for us, whether we are in the service or aspire to it; indicating how we have to pay attention to the educational side, and how the work of God runs along with it, showing its spiritual instincts.
GCH Is there teaching in the way in which the names of God and Jehovah are interchanged? Does the official thought come to light in connection with the name of Jehovah, and the service you have referred to?
JT In the chapter read, God enters into relation with His people under the name of Jehovah, which is the covenant name; that is the name of relationship with His people. The idea of the Father, as we have had in [p. 301] the patriarchs, is largely to set out grace. What runs through them is the thought of blessing; blessing is a great feature of the Father; it marks this dispensation. Then there is the idea of the covenant, and thus the name Jehovah would represent that which would set us free from ourselves; that the people of God should be liberated. God says “Let my people go”, that is, from under the authority of Pharaoh. But, also, as in the wilderness, to be liberated from themselves — ourselves — through the knowledge of God in the covenant; and for the covenant we need a Mediator, another thought that enters into the ministerial side of our position: the Mediator of the covenant, which Moses represents, to effectuate these things in us. God would have us entirely free from ourselves; the truth of the epistle to the Romans opens this up to us.
JDU Is the thought of selection on God’s side, or on both sides?
JT It is on both. It is on God’s side in choosing Moses, Aaron, and Miriam; on our side as seen in Moses making his selection, in due course, when he came to years; when he became great, he refused and chose. God will be known through the Mediator, hence you have the thought of the appearing in Exodus 3, reminding us that in the service of God we are to be impressed by Him. God will seize every opportunity to impress us, to keep us occupied with Himself. It is a very important thing for those who serve to receive impressions, it requires abstraction; that is really seen in chapter 2, where Moses was occupied with keeping sheep. He was given great opportunity of solitary relations with God, and we are told that he led the flock behind the wilderness, and came to the mount of God — to Horeb. That is how his history is presented before the divine appearing to him; he was in the way of it. No minister can be effective unless he studies all this; as to how to be in the way of divine impressions, so that he has something [p. 302] that comes directly from God. What he has from God, God furnishes him with the means to convey; and so here he led the flock behind the wilderness, and came to the mount of God, Horeb. The mount had already acquired a place in the vocabulary of the people of God. It began in Genesis 22, and Moses had understood. It comes in here, “the mountain of God”. The minister understands that he must needs put himself in the way of divine impressions, divine resources, and that as getting such, there is also resource to enable him to carry it to God’s people in an effective way. What comes out is that “the Angel of Jehovah appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a thorn-bush”. Moses looked and the thorn-bush was not being consumed. That is a matter of appearing. The Lord may help us just to dwell a little on this, especially in view of ministry, of being in the way of divine impressions, and to lead in the direction of divine resources. Divine impressions and divine resources are bound up together.
ET So that, at the outset, the servant would be impressed and say, What a God! One who can come into such conditions.
JT That is the next thing in the course of ministerial education, how to see the manner of the divine incoming, how God came in here in Christ, the mystery of godliness.
WJH The apostle Paul speaks of God making him competent as a minister of the new covenant, and he was the subject of divine appearings.
JT That is exactly what is stated about him; the Lord says to him, “what thou hast seen, and of what I shall appear to thee in” (Acts 26: 16). As he proceeded with his ministry there would be appearings from time to time. We may not look for what Paul had, but we should look for it in principle. If we put ourselves in the way of it we shall get divine impressions, and at the same time [p. 303] divine resources.
JJJ What is the thought of turning aside? Was it from something?
JT Moses said, “Let me now turn aside and see this great sight, why the thorn-bush is not burnt”. What we notice is that it is a deliberate act of Moses. “Let me now turn aside and see this great sight”. It is not simply that he did it, but he resolved to do it. Something came into his vision, came before him, and he resolved to find out what it was. A very great matter not to miss what God would manifest to us. We want to see it, and understand it, and there is a definite resolve on the part of the prospective minister to see what is presented to him.
ESW Does he turn aside from his service to gather fresh impressions from this thorn-bush?
JT That is the idea. He is turning aside from keeping sheep. He is still in his ordinary employment; this has come to his vision and he is deliberate about it. “Let me now turn aside and see this great sight”. It is an extraordinary thing that he wants to understand it, he is not careless about it.
JJJ Is it not also significant that it says that Jehovah saw that?
JT Yes; Jehovah takes notice of a movement like that, that you are sufficiently interested to turn aside to see what He presents. It is the uninterested persons that God dislikes. When He puts privileges in our way and we are neglectful of them, God resents such an attitude. But when He saw that Moses turned aside, God called to him out of the midst of the thorn-bush, and said, “Moses, Moses!” as much as to say, You are the man, you will do. God hates lack of interest in Himself.
CSS Would it be something more than mere desire? David said, “One thing have I asked of Jehovah, desired that will I seek after” (Psalm 27: 4).
JT Quite so. This is brought to Moses and he is going in for it. That is what God delights [p. 304] in. He calls his name twice. He is mentioned thus, and distinguished.
NBS Should we be impressed with the urgency of it? It says, “Let me now turn aside”.
JT Yes, he did not put it off. Many of the young brothers and sisters put off their opportunities. They make up their minds that they will not commit themselves to the Lord, or to His people, until some other thing happens; taking matters into their own hands, and thus slighting what God is proposing to them. Here it is “Let me now turn aside”.
WJH Do you not think that the lack of contentment with the place in which God has put us often causes us to lose these opportunities?
JT Very good. Certainly if I take up the service of ministry, because I do not like my ordinary calling, that is not commendable. “Moses consented to remain with the man” (Exodus 2: 21). It was a great change of circumstances for him, having been a prince, to become a mere servant of the Midianite, looking after sheep, but he was content. If God calls us into the ministry, it is not because we are dissatisfied with our ordinary calling.
JDU Would you recommend then that if an impression is received in a meeting like this it should he immediately followed up?
JT That is right. The gospel of Mark is characterised by the word “immediately”. Let there be no delay as soon as the way is made clear to us by God.
Ques Does this double call indicate that God has taken account of the prior history?
JT I suppose so. His name, Moses, refers back to his infancy, meaning drawn out. He has been taken out of the water; he is a thoroughly baptised person. God has pleasure in the names of those in whom His work is seen distinctly. He delights in His own work.
Ques Does this question of divine appearings enter into what we call [p. 305] gift?
JT That appears here. I should take this incident as the occasion of Moses receiving his gift. It involves what is seen here; an indelible impression of God in Christ.
ESW Would that impression give character to subsequent service, in one who receives gift?
JT I think so. The good will of Him that dwelt in the bush is what runs through these books; that is to say, the service is in identification with God as having come into these lowly circumstances. The circumstances are lowly, not exalted according to man, nor has heaven intended that the ministry should be clothed with any human dignity. It is outwardly identified with what is very small, and that is what is spoken of here, a thorn-bush, not a cedar or an oak; it is, in itself, very insignificant.
Ques Does that refer to the people, or is the incarnation suggested in it?
JT I think the incarnation is in the bush.
WJH Does the likeness of sinful flesh suggest something like that?
JT Yes. Thus, “the good will of him that dwelt in the bush” refers to God having come into those lowly circumstances. It is a “great sight”. The whole ministry is in view; God would occupy us with the thought of a power outside of ourselves. Flesh profits nothing, and the Lord said, “without me ye can do nothing”. We need a power outside of ourselves and this is suggested in the well. Of course it is in us in the sense of the Spirit springing up, and the anointing which makes one superior to human ability, then the contentment in whatever calling we may be, however irksome, and the instinctive movement to Horeb, the mount of God. So that, instead of human resources, seminaries and the like, and salaries from the world, all that which marks christendom, the true servant reaches the mountain of God and is blessed with divine resources. Then God honours the servant in appearing to him, so that he [p. 306] has impressions to present to men, and means by which to present them.
The next thing is the moral teaching as to sin that Moses has to understand before he can enter into the ministry. God says to him, “What is that in thy hand?” This suggests to us that what you have of Himself, God can use. A man has something, but in this gift he has to learn what sin is, what the flesh is, and so these signs. The first is, that Jehovah directs him to cast his rod on the ground, and it became a serpent; as much as to say, Moses, that is just what you will become if you are released from My authority. Your staff represents yourself, release it and it comes under satanic power. That is what you are exposed to if you get out of the hand of God; you come under Satan’s power. You must keep in your place in the divine hand, and so Jehovah says, “Stretch out thy hand and take it by the tail”, and he did so, “and it became a staff in his hand”. That is to say, it is the second man, not the first. The first is fallen under the power of Satan, but man taken up under divine authority, in God’s hand, becomes a staff again, becomes man as answering to His mind. That is what I understand by this remarkable sign. It is sorrowful that if I get away from the divine hand, I come under the power of Satan.
WJH So that it becomes the rod of God ultimately as held in relation to God, God calls it His rod.
ESW When Moses saw it like a serpent he fled from it. Would it have the same effect upon us, if we could see ourselves as released from divine authority like that?
JT I am sure it would. It was the staff he was accustomed to use; it represented his experience, but in spite of that, released, it became a serpent. I may have experience with God and yet get away from His authority, hence I come under the power of Satan.
FWW Do we see manhood in its perfection in the Lord when He was tempted of [p. 307] Satan?
JT Exactly, and what is there seen in Him clarifies this whole subject. The Lord stood His ground. Satan proposed to Him to take other ground than that of dependence, saying to Him in effect, You are the Son of God, You are independent, You can command stones to become bread. But the Lord, as Man, was here in dependence on God, so that He says, “Man shall not live by bread alone”. Satan does not say it as to man, but as to the Son of God. The Lord answers as Man; sonship is in manhood, and what is proper to manhood is dependence upon God. He lived “by every word which goes out through God’s mouth” (Matthew 4: 4). Thus He did not come under the power of Satan.
WJH He ordered Satan to get behind Him, instead of fleeing from him.
Ques Have not all the sorrowful divisions in the assembly been brought to pass by unregulated gift?
JT A very solemn suggestion. We ought to feel it a challenge to those of us who are serving, whatever gift we may have. We are liable, if we take ourselves out of the divine hand, to come under the power of Satan, and be the more destructive.
Ques Why does he take it by the tail?
JT Well; I suppose it would be due to the fact that the tail would, in a serpent, be weakness: his power is in his head. God in taking up man in this way does not take him up in his dignity. To take him up by his head would be regarding him in his natural power and dignity. Taking a serpent by the tail would ordinarily be dangerous, for it could strike in its usual way, and hence the result stated denotes the power of God. Then the next thing is the state of man — leprous. Jehovah said: “Put now thy hand into thy bosom”. His hand became leprous. Then he put his hand into his bosom again and “it was turned again as his flesh”. This would typify the state of man, but changed by the power of God. The one [p. 308] is what man is naturally, and the other is what God has made him in Christ.
WAP Would that be new birth?
JT Yes, but more. The epistle to the Romans opens up the process, the purpose of God and the love of God come into it.
JD Would you say that Moses had to learn what Satan brought in through the fall by putting his hand into his bosom?
JT Yes, but all is changed in the believer through redemption. The serpent would denote the violence that has come in through sin, and the leprosy would denote corruption. Ministers have to carry with them the understanding of the overthrow of satanic power in these features. The hand is the symbol of man’s intelligent activity; as restored, he uses it according to what God has made him in Christ.
Rem A deep lesson for the minister to learn, that anything attaching to himself according to nature would only bring in corruption.
JT One of the most important lessons to be learned by those serving in any way, but necessary for all of us.
ESW I suppose Moses would never forget after this, what was in his own bosom according to nature?
JT Quite so. That is the point, to see what we are capable of, the meanness of our own hearts. It comes up so that you hate the thought of it, and God humbles us by that fact, and by the meanness you discover in your own heart.
RS Does God use these things to cast us more upon Himself?
JT The bringing in of these signs reminds us what we are capable of, and the need of dependence on God; in the second instance the need of dependence on the Spirit of God. It is only by the Spirit I am free of this corrupt state.
WWW David was deeply conscious of this, as seen in Psalm [p. 309] 51.
JT Yes. He never realised how bad he was until he reached the experience contemplated in that psalm.
HSH So that the voice of these two signs should never be lost to us?
JT No; they were to be used in testimony. The passage says, “if they will not believe thee, neither hearken to the voice of the first sign ... they will believe the voice of the other sign”. That is, first of all, that a man is able to preach and present the testimony in power so that souls are subdued; the second sign is more what he is in himself, he is free from sin in himself; practically, that he is a fully delivered man. “If they will not believe also those two signs, neither hearken unto thy voice, that thou shalt take of the water of the river, and pour it on the dry land; and the water that thou takest out of the river shall become blood upon the dry land”. That is the final thing. No shelter there at all, that is judgment. In other words, if the power of the testimony and the gift is not believed, and if the power of God in changing a man completely from a corrupt man to a righteous man is not believed, there is nothing left but judgment. If people are not affected by these two signs, there is nothing but judgment.
The next thing is the question of speaking, and this brings out what had been thought of earlier, as far as the narrative goes. It brings out Aaron and what comes to light in him, so that, to complete our subject in these chapters, God says, I know him. That is a very suggestive statement, although he is eighty-three years of age according to the record, and we have not had his name before. God says, I know him. We might say, God knows Moses, for He has portrayed his history. But He has not done it in regard to Aaron, but we have this unquestionable testimony that God knew him. He intimates here that He would not propose him if He did not know him: as though God said, I am not taking anyone up that I do not know; he is a [p. 310] man that I know. The weakness of Moses leaves room for Aaron, and that is, in a sense, how the ministry goes on. God says in effect, I would have used you more extensively, only you were too backward, hence I had to bring in another. The point is, is there another? Vacancies are coming up continuously, so the thing is to be ready. What does God know about you? Young men should have that in mind. The brethren have not noticed me yet, but the point is, has God taken notice of me? Whatever disregard there is in the brethren, God will never disregard whatever ability He has given me. So that vacancies are constantly occurring and it is for young men and women to be in dependence, and God will bring them into His service in His own time.
ESW Two things evidently marked his previous history, he was not only a Levite, but a brother.
JT Not only a Levite, but the Levite. That is, God honours this man as knowing his qualities. He is listed in the divine books, as it were. God says to Moses: “Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother?” That is how he is reckoned in heaven. With God he is actually listed under the proper designation of the ministry, that is “the Levite”. That is the point for us to see, because the ministry must go on and vacancies are constantly occurring. The urgent matter then is, Am I available?
GHW Does the fact that he is coming to meet him show his availability?
JT Quite so. God says to him, “also behold, he goeth out to meet thee; and when he seeth thee he will be glad in his heart”. How well God knew him! How good to have a brother like that!
EESL You spoke of the opportunities for young men, would you not suggest a little help for the older ones also?
JT Aaron was a good age, you know. God must have had good times with him! We leave God out [p. 311] too much in thinking of times of enjoyment. I believe He has enjoyment every day with those who are faithful, and no doubt He had enjoyment in Aaron. He knew everything about him. We know not how far it went, but God says: I know him, and he is going out to meet you. That is the great thing in the service that at least there is one brother who is thinking of you in this sense.
JJJ It says God knew he could speak well, I suppose Aaron was used to speaking to God in secret.
JT We may assume that. That is how God knew that he could speak well. He used to speak to him in prayer. He met Moses on the mountain of God and kissed him. It is the appropriate meeting-place. We all need to be at the place of divine resource.
EESL Does the description of Aaron as the Levite suggest that Aaron would be prepared to take a subordinate place? Levite means joined.
JT That is a good suggestion. A minister is to understand that he may have to take a second place. In principle, the levite must do this, because he is subservient to the priest. That is what develops afterwards. Here Aaron is not the priest, but when he became high priest the tribe of Levi was united to him to minister unto him (Numbers 18: 2). That is the principle, but we shall have to touch a little on Exodus again, so as to bring out the position of Miriam, and then to proceed to Joshua, and perhaps Judges, to bring out how the suggestion of three enters into the inheritance.