THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST IN DAVID (2)
[p. 260] THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST IN DAVID (2)
1 Samuel 17:55 - 58; 1 Samuel 18:1 - 4; 1 Samuel 19:18 - 24; 1 Samuel 20:41,42
JT What I am exercised about, as I said before, is to call attention to the spirit of David in his relations with those who had the place of being the Lord’s people. It is not in mind to dwell on his prowess as a warrior, nor his attitude towards the enemies of God’s people. I think the greatest test comes to us in those who have relation to God as His people; so I think the end of chapter 16 and chapter 17 serve to show how the spirit of Christ manifested itself in David in regard of Saul and in regard of his own brethren after the flesh; and then how it shows itself towards the saints who occupy a false position as is represented in Jonathan. If we take up these scriptures on these lines we might get help as to how we are to move on in relation to each other. What is stated as regards David’s spirit towards Eliab and his two brothers is a model for us. He speaks with becoming humility to them as younger than they were, while maintaining what is right in what he said. There was a cause for what he was doing, but at the same time he holds to his point, to the right principle, with a becoming spirit. In regard to Saul, at the end of chapter 17 we see pronounced superciliousness in the way in which he refers to David. Although there had been exhibited before his eyes most remarkable prowess on behalf of God’s people, yet he refers to David as a “stripling”. And when David draws near he addresses him as if he had never known him; a very cutting thing, for he had had good opportunity of knowing him.
TMG “Whose son art thou, young man?” is the way he addresses [p. 261] him.
JT It was unworthy of the occasion, and brings out the moral state in which Saul was. He was marked by self-consciousness and occupation with his personal office, rather than discerning the moral superiority of David, the one who had saved everything. And yet there is not the slightest evidence of complaint or resentment in David’s reply. He simply says “I am the son of thy servant Jesse the Bethlehemite”. He simply takes the place given to him. And the Spirit of God sets it all before us to call attention to the spirit in Saul and the spirit of Christ in David.
WH He is maintained in the spirit of Christ throughout.
JT That is the point to observe. These things are skilfully presented by the Holy Spirit to bring out the spirit of Christ in these trying circumstances as a model for us.
WL Are you looking at David as typical of Christ personally or more as a man of God?
JT As both. Because it is the same spirit whether in Christ or in us. It is the spirit of Christ. It is said, “but if any one has not the Spirit of Christ he is not of him” (Romans 8:9). David, I think, is both in that way, but in chapters 16 and 17 he is specially a type of Christ, that is, as anointed, and as slaying the giant. The Acts and the epistles, especially the former, show that the same spirit was found in the Lord’s followers, especially in Stephen. The thought of God is the continuation of Christ here in the saints through His spirit.
JPW Is it the grace of David’s answer to Saul that affects Jonathan?
JT I was thinking that, because it goes on to say, “And it came to pass [p. 262] when he had made an end of speaking unto Saul”, as if the peculiar grace of his demeanour had affected Jonathan. It was “when he had made an end of speaking unto Saul” that Jonathan’s soul was knit to David.
TMG The grace that was seen in him affected Jonathan.
JT It brings out the genuineness of Jonathan. He was typical of a genuine believer in the so-called denominations, one who holds to the house of Saul, and yet who loves Christ. I think his genuineness is very strikingly illustrated in the opening of chapter 18. He discerned the grace in David’s demeanour and speech.
WL His heart went beyond his feet.
JPW What was the lack in Jonathan’s case? He stripped himself of all, and yet there seems to have been some lack.
JT Yes, there was. Although in a right position, one is put to shame sometimes by the godliness and devotedness of those who are not in the right position. I do not say that to justify Jonathan, nor do I say that his false position is seen in this chapter; but that is the line he went on. In this chapter it is the genuineness of his love and appreciation of David that is before us.
JPW The last passage you read was, “He went back into the city”.
JT Yes. And then, further, he goes home. He was a man who, although typically a true lover of Christ, retains his position in relation to an accredited religion in the world. Accredited religion is a great snare, because as in it you do not require to lose your personal status as a man of the world. So Jonathan went back to the city, and, his last interview with David ended, he went home. He evidently had forsaken the city, but he had not identified himself with David. Jonathan began well. The Spirit skilfully brings before us not only the great military powers of David, but his demeanour and speech in these passages.
WL [p. 263] Would you say that it is one thing to strip ourselves to put off, but that is only the negative side? There has to be the putting on. Did not Jonathan stop short of that?
JT I think he did. I do not think, speaking typically, that he put on Christ. In Romans 13:14 it is said, “Put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ”. That Man is to be seen in you, not yourself; and, as you progress, you are to put on the new man.
WL That would save us from going back.
JT Yes.
EH Speaking of the spirit, there would seem to be formation, so that the spirit of Christ is characteristic of one.
JT Yes; it is more than the mere possession of the Holy Spirit, although no doubt it depends on that; but it is formation in the spirit of that Man.
TMG “If any man have not the spirit of Christ, he is none of him”.
EH You first put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and as you progress, you put on the new man.
JT Well, Romans is that you put on the Lord Jesus Christ. It is the profession of Christ, known by His full title, “Lord Jesus Christ”. The thought in Romans 13:14 is the attitude you take up; you “make no provision for the flesh”. It is not yet “mortify therefore” (Colossians 3:5). It is simply “make no provision for the flesh”; as if the Spirit graciously takes account of where we are, and does not put on us more than we are equal to. But in Colossians 3:10 it is, having “put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him”.
WL Is the point in Romans that we come out here in righteousness, but in Colossians in the character of the heavenly man?
JT That is what it is. So that in Romans, as I understand, it is recovery without [p. 264] addition. What is lost is recovered; whereas Colossians and Ephesians imply increase.
JM I suppose Romans would give you the kingdom side, and the other the thought of new creation?
JT Colossians and Ephesians give you new creation.
JM Romans would give you recovery, and that is connected with the kingdom.
JT Colossians is “after the image of him that created him”; that is Christ. Christ there is all and in all; whereas in Ephesians 4:24 I think it reads “which according to God is created in truthful righteousness and holiness”. And that is said to be “as the truth is in Jesus” (verse 21). It is more God and man in Ephesians, the full divine thought. All that we get in Ephesians is complete. Things are presented in their completeness, because it is not so much a question of recovery in Ephesians but the presentation of the full divine thought and purpose in Christ. In Jonathan we have what is simply negative; so far as he himself is concerned, he did not put on Christ.
SM What is the thought in recovery?
JT That Satan has gained nothing in spite of all his activities. David recovered all (1 Samuel 30:19).
TMG A man suitable for God is secured in Romans.
SM Is recovery in view of defeating Satan?
JT That is one idea in it. In Romans man is set up before God in righteousness. The righteous requirement of the law is fulfilled in him, and he cries “Abba Father” by the Spirit (chapter 8:15). Whereas Ephesians presents the accomplishment of divine counsels which were before sin.
SM Ephesians speaks of what was before the foundation of [p. 265] the world.
JPW If Jonathan had identified himself with David he would have been preserved.
JT Yes; he would have come under David’s influence and spirit. See what Jonathan lost! He retained his status in the house of Saul; he never gave that up, hence he never came under the influence and teaching of David, whereas others did. However disreputable David’s followers may have been, they all came under his teaching and influence, hence they became mighty men.
TMG They were in the right place.
JT Not that they had any more affection, because Jonathan is distinguished for his affection. It is most remarkable that one can have such affection for Christ and yet retain a place in the world.
WL And in that place there has to be a second stripping.
JT Very solemn; that is mount Gilboa!
EM You connect the thought of Jonathan remaining in the house of Saul with people remaining in established religion?
JT Yes, that is it. They have true exercise to a point, and have no sympathy with the spirit of opposition to Christ, and yet they are publicly identified with it. Jonathan never gave up his status in the house of Saul, but he defended David as far as he could. Anyone reading this narrative with an unspiritual mind might look upon Jonathan as the most remarkable of David’s lovers, and yet the spiritual man would see that Jonathan missed it at the very outset.
WL He avoided the outward reproach.
JT And what ought to be recognised in regard to our brethren who do not take the place of rejection is that although they lose so much yet they do not escape suffering. They suffer from the existing evil. But in God’s scrutinising judgment all that is taken into account; not one bit of vexation of soul that a [p. 266] man goes through in a false position is overlooked by God. You see that in the case of Lot. The government of God is most accurate in the credit side of its book as well as in the debit side. Lot is called a righteous man in 2 Peter, a book that treats of God’s righteous government; whereas if it were a book that taught discipline in the house of God he would have been said to be out of fellowship, as we speak.
RL Jonathan lost the kingdom.
JT And lost companionship with David. His thought was to be next unto David, but that is a place that belongs to divine sovereignty, and not to our choice.
EM He did not get compensation for the vexation that he went through.
JT Because the government of God is true to Himself; he could not possibly get it on account of the place he retained outwardly.
JB It speaks in 2 Peter of “brotherly love”.
JT If Jonathan had typically brotherly love he would have been with the brethren, David’s men.
TMG He would have loved his brethren, and so would have been with them.
JT Yes. I only thought of the beginning of chapter 8, because it shows the commanding position that David, through his grace, had for such a man as Jonathan.
TMG He had seen how he acted in regard to Saul.
AD Is it possible to love Christ and still to remain in worldly associations?
JT I think so. I think that is the point here, if not elsewhere. In speaking in this way one may be thought to justify such a course to some extent, but there is no justification for it, and mount Gilboa is a solemn witness to that. Under the government of God such a course cannot but end in disaster.
[p. 267] The only safe place is with David, as he said to Abiathar, “with me thou shalt be in safeguard”. That is the only safe place.
JM We could not doubt that in the systems around there are many of the Lord’s people who love Christ.
JT And the comfort is that the Lord knows them, (2 Timothy 2:19).
JM The Lord would exercise us so that we might help them.
JT It is really impossible to determine why it is that certain ones remain where they are.
WH They have no idea of moving, and yet it is clear when one meets them that they have sympathy with what is of Christ.
JT Just as we see in Jonathan here.
JM I suppose it would be in identification with David and his company that one would partake of his spirit.
JT That is the point. Later on when he is rejected David becomes a centre. That was the test for Jonathan. That is the reason I read the passage in chapter 20. It sets before us the ground which Jonathan took up in regard to David. It was to be marked by distance. “Artillery” is not literally the correct word to use, but it conveys pretty much the idea, the bow and arrow implies distance. He is dealing at a distance. That was the parting circumstance between David and Jonathan. It was Jonathan’s arrangement; David submitted to it, and that is the reason I read it. It is said that David exceeded Jonathan in his weeping; and moreover, he arose from the earth and bowed himself three times in the presence of Jonathan. Such love and grace expressed in David should have overpowered Jonathan. He felt it deeply; but although he felt it, he went back to the city, like Orpah, who kissed her mother-in-law and went back [p. 268] to Moab.
WH Your thought, then, is that we should seek to be maintained in that spirit of grace in dealing with those who love Christ but still remain in a false position.
JT David’s conduct before Jonathan was calculated to overpower him, so that he should never leave him. If he left, it was not because of David’s spirit.
WL In chapter 18, Jonathan’s love seems to be the prominent thought, but here in chapter 20 Jonathan’s love breaks down, and David’s exceeds.
TMG Jonathan’s going back was a great trial to David; and it makes one feel what it must be to the Lord when His people go back.
JT Note the gentleness of spirit that is seen here in David: there is not the slightest evidence of any complaint, or as if he said, ‘Jonathan, you ought to come with me’. Not a word of that.
RL That comes out also in chapter 17. David gets no credit for the victory at all, yet he makes no complaint.
SL Would you say there are people before whom the Spirit of God would not lead you to put separation truths? David did not say to Jonathan, “Come with me”.
JT No; I think there are circumstances in which it is better to simply present the grace of Christ, for if anything will touch the heart it is that. The principle of separation appeals more to the conscience: “Come out from among them and be ye separate” (2 Corinthians 6:17). That is said in connection with the inconsistency of connecting idolatry with the temple of God. The spirit of Christ is that which affects the heart. I think that these things are to show us, as regards Saul and Jonathan, the state they were in, and that it was impossible to affect them, if David did not affect them. There is nothing said as to what regrets David [p. 269] must have had.
EM But he suffered.
JT He must have suffered. Distance is intolerable to love; and yet Jonathan acquiesced in the distance. David must have felt that.
JM It was the spirit of David before Saul that should have affected him; but what is prominent in Jonathan is his love.
JT I was referring to chapter 19 to show how David, as rejected and persecuted, instead of forming a party and defending himself, or resorting to human methods, retires to the prophet. He retires under the divine wings, the wings of the Almighty. That is ever the refuge of faith, and the result showed the wisdom of it — not only the advantage to David for the moment, as in company with Samuel, but even Saul and his messengers come under the influence of the Spirit of God, which was a remarkable triumph!
EM And yet though Saul was amongst the prophets, he was naked.
JT That showed where he was spiritually; he was exposed; but owing to the overwhelming power that was there, he could do nothing against David.
JM I suppose if David had been at all marked by the same spirit he would have set up in opposition to him to try to defend himself.
JT Whereas it was with him: “The eternal God is thy refuge” (Deuteronomy 33:27). Samuel had wisely returned to Ramah when he saw the Spirit of God come upon David, but he continued his ministry; he did not surrender his ministry. He had retired from the government, and having anointed the king, he retires to Ramah and carries on his ministry. The Lord is with him. The word “president” is used in the New Translation in 1 Samuel 19:20; Samuel, it is said, was over the company of prophets as president; that was his office now.
AD [p. 270] Would going to Samuel be like going to the priest?
JT Samuel was scarcely a priest; he had officiated as priest; but he was really a Levite. His position is rather that of a prophet. The priest represents what man is Godward, but the prophet is what God is to man; how God comes in, and this David recognises; he recognised that God was there.
JM That God would be with Samuel, and that was a very important thing for David.
JT So that instead of going to this brother and that brother to support you to get through things, you retire to where God is: “The eternal God is thy refuge”. That saves the situation; it leaves things in the hands of God, who is unerring in His judgment.
SB That would mean you have no will in the matter.
JT It was as if David said, ‘God through Samuel anointed me; it was not my choice; I had no will in the matter’. He retires to that point. It is for God to undertake, and God does undertake for him, and undertakes for him in a most remarkable way. Instead of Saul being destroyed, he comes under the influence of the spirit of prophecy.
JM It is very marked as the spirit of Christ, what is seen in David there; he retires to God, as it were.
JT Quite so; and he dwelt there. “He and Samuel went and dwelt in Naioth”. What a retreat from the scene of strife in the house of Saul, to dwell with Samuel at Naioth!
WH It is still open in principle for us.
JT That is the point in it: you are to dwell there, and He keeps you safely in His pavilion.
WH You do not strive; you retire in the spirit of Christ.
JT Yes; you leave the issue with God.
TMG “He that dwelleth in the secret place [p. 271] of the Most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty” (Psalm 91:1).
EM So the Almighty will see after you.
WL Would you say that is the way God vindicates one who puts his trust in Him now?
JT You would rather see a brother who opposes you remain in fellowship than that he should be forced out by discipline. That is very much happier! And I believe it is brought about by retiring under the wings of the Almighty.
EM Was not that very manifest, too, in the apostle Paul? He looked for the recovery of those who opposed him.
JT I think that was the ground on which he wrote his first epistle to the Corinthians. He wanted to recover them without the rod. The second epistle is the flowing out of grace.
WH The word to Timothy is; “the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle” (2 Timothy 2:24).
JT We see how David is qualifying himself here for the kingdom. He could rule his own spirit.
JM It is the spirit of suffering.
JT Yes. “Lord remember David and all his afflictions”.
EM “If we suffer, we shall also reign with him” (2 Timothy 2:12).
JM It is remarkable that all this is in connection with one another. We get plenty of opportunity to manifest the spirit of Christ. It is not what we are in the world here; it is what we are with one another.