THE NUMERAL THREE IN TESTIMONY (5)
[p. 312] THE NUMERAL THREE IN TESTIMONY (5)
Numbers 27: 15 - 23; Joshua 14: 6 - 15; Joshua 22:10-14; Joshua 22:30-34
JT Our last reading was in regard to the ministry. In the book of Exodus we read from chapters 3 and 4, and had in mind a verse in chapter 15 which speaks of Miriam’s service. It might be well to touch on Exodus again for a moment in view of Miriam being one of the three raised up, according to Micah 6: 4, and, according to the facts in Exodus and Numbers, to lead Israel out of Egypt and to establish the service of God. We dwelt on Moses and Aaron considerably, but failed to reach the end of chapter 4, which records that as Moses and Aaron began their ministry together, the people worshipped Jehovah, reminding us that all ministry according to God will lead in that direction, it will make everything of God. Ministry is for this purpose, not to exalt the persons who minister, but to exalt God, to instruct His people so that they may worship God; that is the end of Exodus 4.
Another important item in the subject of ministry is that in chapter 12, where Jehovah gives at length the instruction relative to the passover, Moses epitomises it in telling the message to the people; suggestive of brevity in ministry, that in serving we should be regulated by wisdom, by what people are able to take in, and present what is sufficient. In this instance the minister secures that the people worship God. In chapter 15 we have the song of Moses and the children of Israel, the first song indeed that we have in Scripture, and Miriam rendering her peculiar service, appears at the end, for “Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took the tambour in her hand, and all the women went out after her with tambours and with dances”. Miriam, added to Moses and Aaron, comes [p. 313] in as filling out the full testimony of God in regard of ministry.
WJH What is the thought of the feminine side being connected with leadership, in the way you have presented it?
JT I thought it was to bring out the depth of the work at that time. A ministry may be very effective on account of its power, but we have to measure the results of it, what it effects, and it seems as if Miriam’s service here affected the women in Israel, bringing them into the current of praise.
WJH Would that be in keeping with the important place the women had in the Lord’s ministry when on earth?
JT Yes. Unless the sisters are brought into the ministry, you doubt whether it is effective, whether the result desired has been reached. Because they represent the subjective side, the side of affection and response, and therefore unless the sisters generally are brought into the truth in an active way, the effect of the ministry is questionable. The testimony may be right and in power, but then there may be a hindrance to it. Miriam is presented here for the first time by name; no doubt she is alluded to earlier as Moses’ sister, in chapter 2, but not by name. She is not mentioned by name until this chapter 15, and she was then quite an old person, probably over ninety, and she is presented as a prophetess and sister of Aaron, so that she is linked up with God, and she is linked up with Aaron. It is said, she “took the tambour in her hand, and all the women went out after her;” that is a lead given from God.
HW How would we see the effects of this working out today?
JT Well, I think it is in the generality of the saints coming forward and expressing their appreciation of what there is, what is given of God, and that in a way indicates they are linked up with Him in it. It [p. 314] is not a passing thing, nor a superficial evidence of approval as in the days of Ezekiel; what he said was to some as a pleasant song (Ezekiel 33: 32), but there was no permanent effect produced. What is needed is that the generality of the saints should come forward and show that they are with God in the matter. In Miriam there is the lead given, so that the women come out after her — a definite evidence of response.
EESL She had greater staying power than Barzillai the Gileadite, who when aged could not hear any more the voice of singing men and singing women.
JT Quite so. She joined in heartily, not merely as a passing interest, but as with God; she is called a prophetess.
ESW Would you expect to see the results of it working out in a high spiritual level in the meetings for worship?
JT Well, that is the thing. What she says is in keeping with what Moses and the children of Israel sang, but it shows that she and the women were heartily in the thing, and with God about it.
GCH Would the filling out of this song be seen in the wise-hearted women in the part they took relative to the tabernacle?
JT That is confirmatory. Exodus 35 shows how heartily the women joined in to provide the material for the tabernacle, spinning certain things that were needed.
GCMcK Would Phoebe in the New Testament be an example of the filling out of the thing and the results of it?
JT Yes. I think that Luke shows us the feminine result in a striking way in his gospel, particularly in Anna. What is proper to the man is seen in Simeon in the way he is spoken of — Christ received in his arms. Then Anna coming in at that moment rejoicing, joined in heartily; so throughout his gospel, and throughout the Acts, Luke’s second treatise, women [p. 315] have a great place in his thoughts. Those that were affected generally by the testimony showed that it was a real movement of God; it took root, and what takes root downwards and bears fruit upwards, stands.
FWW Does that mean that in all ministry there is not only to be presentation, but also response?
JT If there is not response, you feel there is nothing; for God’s testimony is intended to be effective. What has been said touches on that side of our subject as to ministry, I think a most important side of it, that there should be results, and that the generality of the saints should come into that which is coming out in a spiritual way, showing that they are linked up with God in their souls in what they are doing; able to take part in what is presented, then spread it abroad in their own way. The women of Israel followed Miriam, there was influence with her to lead them.
WJH The result of the Lord’s ministry is seen not only in the twelve in the upper room; with them were the women also and Mary the mother of Jesus, thus securing the responsive side.
JT Yes. What you get there in the upper room in Acts 1 suggests the result of ministry in quality. No doubt there were many more affected by the Lord’s ministry than were there, but these would express the result of it, in quality. Thus there are now means to go on with, to open up the dispensation, to go on with the ministry.
JHF In Revelation 15 there is the song of Moses and the Lamb; would you tell us why the one is mentioned before the other?
JT It is to link up the two corresponding lines of thought. The song of Moses alluded to in that chapter is undoubtedly the one in Exodus 15. It would celebrate the deliverance out of Egypt; the song of the would imply what the Lamb effected. The Lamb [p. 316] is a leading title of Christ in Revelation, specially calling attention to His character as the Sufferer. It is a diminutive word there, rather conveying the idea of one that is passive in suffering, one who suffers and does not defend himself outwardly, but who secures great results in his service.
Now the subject before us for the time left is the inheritance, which comes in in order after the ministry, for the ministry has in mind that the saints should take up their inheritance. That means that we have not only left Egypt, but have another world opened up to us; so that what is needed now is leadership into that world, and Joshua represents that. He is the leader into the inheritance, so that he is introduced to us, in view of this service, as “a man in whom is the Spirit”. That is what is to be noted in Numbers 27: 16, 17. Moses says to Jehovah, “Let Jehovah, the God of the spirits of all flesh, set a man over the assembly, who may go out before them, and who may come in before them, and who may lead them out, and who may bring them in, that the assembly of Jehovah be not as sheep that have no shepherd”. Moses alludes to the spiritual side, he addresses Jehovah as the God of the spirits of all flesh. Our entrance into the inheritance now is not an external, but a spiritual matter.
GCH Would this refer to the assembly as in Ephesians, the heavenly position.
JT That is what is in mind. Joshua is introduced to us first in Exodus 17 where the issue was the Spirit; the Spirit typified in the water from the smitten rock. Amalek attacked Israel, and Joshua is introduced first there, because the conflict was typically a spiritual matter, its object being to make room for the Spirit.
ESW Is it significant that in Numbers 27 this is preceded by exercises amongst certain women, the daughters of Zelophehad, that they should not lose their portion [p. 317] of the inheritance?
JT It is very significant, especially as the claim of these five women to their part of the inheritance follows immediately on the numbering of the people for the inheritance in chapter 26. God numbers those that are qualified for it, and these women claim their portion and the section that we have read comes in immediately after that.
GCMcK Does it imply that although we are taken account of for this, it requires spiritual power to enter upon it?
JT That is important, because the taking possession of the inheritance is not the mere objective understanding of the truth of the inheritance, it requires spiritual power, hence Joshua is said to be a man in whom is the Spirit.
Ques Is that distinct from gift?
JT Yes; gift is for the work of the ministry, as Ephesians 4: 12, 13 states: “for the perfecting of the saints ... until we all arrive”. Gifts are to help us to arrive at the mind of God, but having light as to the inheritance, we need the Spirit to enter into it.
JDU Does the ministry of the Spirit in connection with the new covenant help us in the taking up of the inheritance?
JT Well, it does; it has the effect of liberating us. The ministry of the covenant is properly in the types in Exodus; it belongs to the glory that filled the tabernacle, and is in view of the saints entering into the service of God in the wilderness. It attaches to the Lord’s supper, so that we might be liberated to enter on the divine service, but the effect of it of course goes on, as applied to ourselves, in assembly. It properly belongs to the Lord’s supper, and it has the effect of liberating us. Leadership into the inheritance is by Christ and is a further thing, but the effect of the covenant upon our spirits sets us free for Him to lead us.
Ques Does the apostle’s prayer in Ephesians 3, that the saints might be strengthened by the Father’s spirit in the inner man, bear upon the matter?
JT It does. What is needed to take up the inheritance is not only that we have the Spirit, but that we use the Spirit; indeed He leads us. “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God” (Romans 8: 14).
GAvS What are we to understand by the inheritance?
JT It is to be taken account of as to how it is entered on now, for that is how it is largely presented in Scripture. It is to be entered on now, but of course it alludes to our portion in and with Christ eternally in the heavenlies. When the Lord comes He will take us into the place of it, but how it is entered on now is what the book of Joshua teaches. It is a question of apprehending Christ as He is in heaven, not simply risen, but in heaven, and our being conformed to Him, and the Spirit enables us to take up that ground. Viewed in its fulness, the Spirit is the earnest of it.
WJH Previously, in the book of Exodus we have the Spirit under the figure of water and of oil, but in Joshua it is the Spirit personally.
JT That is right. From Numbers 21 the Spirit is formally recognised, “Sing unto it”. Numbers 21 is celebrating the Spirit, who is a divine Person, as Jehovah is celebrated in Exodus 15. The Lord stresses in John 14 that, “he will give you another Comforter”, that is a divine Person here to lead us in.
ESW Is the thought of the inheritance summed up in the prayer already referred to: “the breadth and length and depth and height; and to know the love of the Christ which surpasses knowledge” (Ephesians 3: 18, 19)?
JT Yes; Abraham was called to view the land in its length and breadth (Genesis 13), only that we have additional measurements, depth and height — we have the [p. 319] fourth dimension in the verses in Ephesians, which can only be apprehended spiritually.
GCH Does the thought of “the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory” convey the thought of the inheritance?
JT That is in Ephesians 1. What is in mind there is to bring out His inheritance. The first prayer in Ephesians is to bring out God’s inheritance — what it is, “the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints”. But in the second prayer it is that we may be great enough to enter on the inheritance of God for us in all its extent. It is that “ye may be fully able to apprehend with all the saints”. It is to be apprehended collectively, for there is more power in “all the saints” than there is in one saint. The measurement alludes to the extent of the inheritance, but it is not merely surface measure, but also depth and height.
FWW What is the thought of the going out and the coming in, in connection with which Joshua’s leadership was so prominent?
JT Well, I think to accustom the saints to him. It says in Acts 1: 21, “all the time in which the Lord Jesus came in and went out among us”. Here the idea is that Joshua should lead them out and in, as David did later. I think it is to accustom them to his leadership. The actual leading into the land is not stated here.
NBS Would you say more as to the position of Joshua as leader? Is he typical of Christ or of spiritual elements in the saints?
JT Joshua typifies Christ as the hidden Leader, Moses the public leader in relation to the tabernacle, but Joshua is Christ in a hidden way, leading us in. Here he is set before the assembly, it says, that they “may obey him;” the principle of obedience must be in the people. Entrance into the inheritance requires this and also hinges on the Spirit; not only on our having the Spirit, but being led by the [p. 320] Spirit.
ESW Does coming in and going out imply spiritual liberty? In John 10: 9 it says, “shall go in and shall go out and shall find pasture”.
JT It is a very delightful state of things, it involves liberty, but also that we are amenable to the leading of Christ, amenable to spiritual leadership. I think spiritual leadership implies influence; it is not only what is said; it is the influence that is exerted and particularly in assembly; the influence that the Lord exerts over our spirits, because it is a question of the “spirits of all flesh”. Paul says, “I will sing with the spirit” (1 Corinthians 14: 15), meaning his own spirit. We may be ready to sing and yet not be controlled by intelligence, so he says, “I will sing also with the understanding”. That is the line on which we come into what we are speaking of.
JDU Do we experience that as together?
JT I think the leading into the inheritance is a collective thought, it is all the saints. We are raised up together and made to sit down together, and as we love one another we would not have it otherwise; and God would not have it otherwise, it is a question of leading all in that direction.
AC Why is Caleb brought in in such an outstanding way, as one who wholly followed the Lord?
JT He is introduced here as the second personage in this part of the testimony; he valued the inheritance, he would have it. We apprehend Christ as our Leader, and this is a spiritual matter entirely. Then the next thing is, do we value what God has for us? Caleb is brought in as testimony for us to that side of the position; he is the second witness as to the inheritance, he valued the inheritance. So in the verses read in Joshua 14, “Caleb the son of Jephunneh” relates what happened, and said, “Moses swore on that day, saying, The land whereon thy feet have trodden shall assuredly be thine inheritance, and thy children’s for ever! for thou hast wholly followed Jehovah my God”.
[p. 321] He is brought in in Numbers as one of the spies, and his loyalty and integrity were manifest. He traversed the land and valued it, and stood for it against all the opposition; stood for it with Joshua, and he recalls this fact here forty-five years later asserting that his strength is equal now to what it was. He valued the inheritance, and he is maintained in spiritual freshness: that is the idea.
GAvS Was that valuation of the land connected with his affection? He had tasted, so to speak, of the grapes of Eshcol.
JT Manifestly, he valued what God had apportioned for His people, it was a good land. It was not mere words, for he had traversed the land, and knew it was a good land flowing with milk and honey, and he would have it; it was guaranteed to him and now he claims it. The word to each of us is, Do I value it today? If I do I claim it, and this needs spiritual power. Caleb maintained his spiritual power throughout all the journey in the wilderness. He proved the land, he had been into it.
WJH Joshua and Caleb say, “The land ... is a very, very good land” (Numbers 14:7).
FWW Although Caleb claims this inheritance as it had been promised him, he refers to the conflict that will be involved. Will you say a word about that in its collective application?
JT Well, that will he understood if we understand Ephesians, that the enemy is now in our place, the enemy is now where we ought to be, a place designed for the assembly in the counsels of God; so that at the present time it involves conflict.
ESW If Joshua represents spiritual leadership, does Caleb represent spiritual desire in all of us, that we may take up the inheritance in spite of the conflict?
JT It is the question whether I value what God has given me; the Spirit is the earnest of it, but in our laying hold of it we encounter opposition, hence [p. 322] conflict, and this is not with blood and flesh, but with principalities and powers in the heavenlies. It is very real conflict, but we are furnished for it, and should be equal to it. According to what Caleb says here, there should be no fear as to it. Caleb’s title to this territory is guaranteed, a fixed thing, and hence the strength of his claim. It says, “Moses swore on that day, saying, The land whereon thy feet have trodden shall assuredly be thine inheritance, and thy children’s for ever!” He valued that oath, for by it the inheritance is assured to him, and so it is with us, the promise is assured; there is the promise and the oath, that we might have a strong consolation. Caleb had a strong consolation up to this time, and now he wishes to get possession of what was sworn to him.
GAvS Is that a necessary element in spiritual energy and vigour?
JT It is — to know that the thing is assured to you by God. You claim it; God is pleased as you claim what He has apportioned for you. The Lord says, “The lines are fallen unto me in pleasant places; yea, I have a goodly heritage” (Psalm 16: 6). Caleb understood the inheritance, the actual part where “the lines” had fallen. Joseph and Judah get their portion before the general allotment in Joshua 18.
JDU Why did he choose Hebron?
JT Spiritually, Hebron means that which was before the world. As the apostle says, “which God had predetermined before the ages for our glory” (1 Corinthians 2: 7).
CSS Does the refusal to face the warfare mean the loss of the enjoyment of the inheritance?
JT Quite so, we have to dislodge the enemy, and that is what comes out in Caleb; he immediately dislodges the enemy. He took Kirjath-Arba, and then he would have Kirjath-Sepher, as we get in the next chapter, and that brings in Othniel and Achsah, both of his house, who show that they valued the inheritance [p. 323] and secured what sustained them in it. Achsah would have springs of water, a feature of great intelligence marking Caleb and his house.
GAvS Does Hebron bring us to the collective side?
JT Well, I suppose that is right, not that it goes to the full length of the divine mind, it is properly Colossian truth. We need Jerusalem for the full divine thought, but that awaited David; it required great spiritual prowess. I think the full truth of Colossians and Ephesians involves what is collective in its spiritual sense, not exactly the collective truth of 1 and 2 Corinthians, which is local and visible, but what we are to each other spiritually.
RB Do we get the Hebron position in “having marked us out beforehand for adoption” (Ephesians 1: 5)?
JT Yes, it was “built seven years before Zoan in Egypt”, that is, it was before the world. “That wisdom ... which God had predetermined before the ages for our glory”.
ESW What is suggested by the change of name which is specifically recorded twice in the Scriptures, Kirjath-Arba and Hebron?
JT It is just to bring out the importance of Hebron. Hebron is mentioned in Genesis, and then in connection with the spying out of the land, it is stated that it was built seven years before Zoan in Egypt (Numbers 13: 22). It is the Spirit of God bringing that great thought to us in Numbers as in Corinthians. God had His own thoughts before the world came into view; wisdom ordained for His people, that is the thought of it. Paul says, “we speak wisdom among the perfect” (1 Corinthians 2: 6); he could not speak it at Corinth. Spiritual growth is in mind, so that the idea of Hebron should be opened up to us, that is, what God had in mind before the world for our glory.
GCH Is it a change over from Kirjath-Arba? The New Translation says: “the great man among the Anakim” (Joshua 14: 15).
[p. 324] JT Yes, it is the power of the world, it is the city of Arba, the city of the great man of the world. You might say, a city where the sort of power is that the people of Corinth were aiming at, and therefore the reference to what God had ordained for us before the world. That is why I think the head of Goliath is cut off, it is a question of the wisdom of the world being judged.
ESW Is our right to the inheritance contested by spiritual wickedness?
JT That is exactly the position; the inheritance that God designs for His people is being laid hold of by men’s minds, and satanic powers have got into it, and these have to be dislodged.
RM Is the conflict referred to collectively?
JT It is collective, the saints are all brought into it. That is the saints viewed, not in their external position, but in their spiritual relations, a very important thing to get hold of. Perhaps few of us have got hold of it, but we have to learn to take account of each other spiritually. It is a question of the spiritual, and whether we are being led on in the collective sense. Even although we have not all the brethren with us, it is for us at least to include them in our affections; it is “with all saints”. God would not have it otherwise, so that when they were about to enter, the two-and-a-half tribes must be represented: the twelve tribes are there in principle. We must have all the saints, God will have it that way, and if we love the saints we want them with us. Joshua and Caleb appreciated the inheritance when others despised it, but even in our ordinary assembly meetings we are to “wait for one another;” we must have all the saints, we do not want to go on in independency in any way. God has “raised us up together, and has made us sit down together in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus” (Ephesians 2: 6).
WJH So that a lead in the right direction is of great [p. 325] value.
JT That is right, and to see the thing exemplified in one human heart; one man that values what is divinely promised to him. He says in effect, I am equal to it, I am as able now, I am as strong as I was forty years ago. He retains his spiritual energy, he does not grow old spiritually, for none of us should grow old spiritually, although we grow old physically.
HSH Caleb’s desire was delightful to Joshua, for it says that Joshua blessed Caleb.
JT Quite so, for Joshua has an exalted place here, representative of God.
Finally, the position of Phinehas brings us to a very practical side of our subject, that is the man that is in the inheritance. The saints in the inheritance would have it in peace, would keep it free from war, for we shall lose the sense of it practically unless we are maintained in unity. So that I think Phinehas becomes a remarkable witness to what is needed in the inheritance, that is ability to keep the peace, but not at the expense of righteousness. Phinehas has a great place in the Scriptures, and represents an element that we cannot get on without, a man that stands in a crisis and knows what to do.
LF In your reference to Phinehas, have you in mind the incident of Baal-Peor, in Numbers 25?
JT Yes, that is where he shines first of all, he shines in a crisis with his javelin. Phinehas properly belongs to the ministerial side of the truth, he was properly a priest. In the genealogy of Israel in Exodus 6, the Spirit of God takes Reuben, Simeon, and Levi. He comes to Levi and his sons till He comes to Phinehas. He was bringing out the lineage of Moses and Aaron, and stops at Phinehas, because Phinehas was to have an everlasting priesthood. He represents the priesthood, serving in an emergency, so that the saints should enter on the inheritance (Numbers 26). He is also seen in Joshua 22 as saving the people for the inheritance, as in it, but in danger of being disrupted [p. 326] by war; he saves them from that, at least he is presented in that way.
GAvS Was this a more complicated situation than Baal-Peor?
JT Well, it was. It was a reasonable sort of thing, as the two-and-a-half tribes would make out. But I think there was an element of pride in building the altar of grand appearance; it was a conspicuous sort of thing. It is to be noted that they were conscious of their poverty spiritually, as over against those that were in the land, the nine-and-a-half tribes, and hence they have to resort to a material testimony to their claim. Why should I want such a testimony to my claim if I am in the land, enjoying it? If I am in the possession and enjoyment of my heavenly portion I do not need an artificial testimony to my right there.
GAvS Does the altar indicate that the positive enjoyment of the inheritance was lacking?
JT That is what I thought. Constant troubles are arising amongst us, little things sometimes that are of no importance, but they cause a cleavage. Why do we not go on with the positive things and thus not have any disturbance amongst us?
JJJ Why are the ten princes brought in?
JT “With him ten princes, of each father’s house a prince, out of all the tribes of Israel”. You have in your mind then, why not twelve princes? Numbers 31: 4 - 6 says, “of all the tribes of Israel, shall ye send to the war. And there were levied out of the thousands of Israel, a thousand by tribe, twelve thousand armed for war. And Moses sent them to the war, a thousand by the tribe, them and Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, to the war”. Now it is interesting to compare these two incidents. Phinehas is in both cases, that is, he is a man for a crisis, and all Israel in their twelve tribes must be brought into the conflict with Midian, following up the great act of Phinehas against the Midianites. Here in Canaan it is the ten [p. 327] tribes (or rather nine-and-a-half) that are in the land. The other two-and-a-half had built the altar, and what is to be done has to be faced, but this can only be by those that are spiritual, for it is a priestly matter. If the heavenly inheritance is to be maintained in any practical way we must have the priestly element; here it is to keep the peace, and that is the point. The meaning of the action of the two-and-a-half tribes is not so serious as was thought. The lesson being that we must consider each other, what is in a brother’s mind. You may have a difficulty with what is said, but let us find out what is really in his mind. It may seem wrong, but what is in his mind? Then can we not modify what is in our minds, and generally there is really no cause for difficulty at all if we understood each other’s minds. That is, I think, the idea, and that is what Phinehas represents; a man who is spiritual enough to be able to get the minds of others and there may not be need for war at all. The two-and-a-half tribes were spiritually poor, and we may be sure that spiritually poor people will do something to cause anxiety, something to disturb will be constantly springing up where people are not in the current of the Spirit, but usually when you look into it there is no cause for cleavage. If there is no will at work, we ought to be ready for modifications. Often a thing is not so serious as we thought.
JJJ We may have to move on sometimes although we cannot carry all with us.
JT That is true also, we cannot wait for unanimity; as regards discipline. The matter should be done, it is a question of “the many”, the rebuke inflicted by “the many” (2 Corinthians 2: 6). In the inheritance we want all the brethren, our outlook is that not one is left out.
Ques Is that why the apostle introduces such qualities as lowliness, meekness and longsuffering in connection with the keeping of the unity of the Spirit?
JT Quite so, “bearing with one another in love”.