PRIESTHOOD (4)
[p. 524] PRIESTHOOD (4)
2 Samuel 7:18 - 29; 2 Samuel 15:30 - 32
JT We finished this morning with the consideration of David ascending to Hebron. Following that incident we have a touch of priesthood in chapter 5. It says in verse 19: “And David inquired of Jehovah, saying, Shall I go up against the Philistines? wilt thou give them into my hand? And Jehovah said to David, Go up; for I will certainly give the Philistines into thy hand”. Then it goes on to say in verse 22: “And the Philistines came up yet again, and spread themselves in the valley of Rephaim. And David inquired of Jehovah; and he said, Thou shalt not go up; turn round behind them and come upon them opposite the mulberry-trees. And it shall be, when thou hearest a sound of marching in the tops of the mulberry-trees, that then thou shalt bestir thyself; for then will Jehovah have gone forth before thee, to smite the army of the Philistines. And David did so, as Jehovah had commanded him; and smote [p. 529] the Philistines from Geba until thou comest to Gezer”.
It may be well, before we arrive at the sixth chapter which was read this morning, just to touch on these passages in the fifth chapter which show how priesthood enters into military operations. The divine answers to the prayers disregard ordinary military tactics; we have to learn from God as to details in conflicts. We have, for instance, the sound of marching in the tops of the mulberry-trees in verse 24. David was not to go up as in verse 19, but to “turn round behind them and come upon them opposite the mulberry-trees”.
EGMcA We do not often associate priesthood with military ideas.
JT I think we should just touch on it.
WB This morning we had weapons. Now it [p. 525] is tactics.
JT That is good. We noticed that Saul’s instruments of war perished. Some of us have been occupied with the wars of the Lord in a series of meetings, and we were noticing that each battle in the wars of the Lord brings out something distinctive. In Joshua we have the first great battle at Jericho, then at Ai, then at Gibeon, and then at Merom; each one bringing out something distinctive in Joshua. The tactics at Jericho were wholly different — the marching round the city six days and then on the seventh day seven times. At Ai, after the sin of Achan is judged and Israel is restored, the instructions are very particular. The lessons that are learned are remarkable. It is said to be a small city by the spies sent out by Joshua, but Joshua is to attack with all Israel. There were certain sent as ambush; the principle of an ambush is stressed in that attack, and it is similar here; not exactly an ambush but it is a similar movement, this second instruction against the Philistines: “turn round behind them and come upon them opposite the mulberry-trees”. An ambush spiritually is some circumstance that arises in which what is of God may be concealed, designedly so, but it draws out the enemy into exposure. It drew out the men of Ai; it exposed them. The circumstance is in a sense deceptive. So that if God wishes to expose something in us that may be concealed, it is drawn out, the ambush exposes it, and it is overcome. Those tactics at Ai are somewhat similar to what we have here, and teach us the importance of warfare, as the enemy attacks, to get the mind of God; whether it is a frontal attack we make or whether we are to go behind.
JD In the history of the testimony during these last hundred years, the enemy has attacked in ways similar to what we have here.
JT I think so. Every attack is distinguished, and the battles of Ai and Gibeon were preceded by failure on the part of Israel. That had to be met. When [p. 526] failure precedes a conflict, the responsible ones have to feel that. The tactics described imply they are not so distinguished as they had been. At Ai Joshua goes down into the valley. First he lodges with the people. We have to get down alongside of the saints and be one of them, instead of maintaining great distinction from past advantages. He has to go down into the valley; he has a javelin which he has to hold out, and he holds it out until the victory is complete. It is onerous sort of work for a general to do. At Jericho it was, ‘You are not to shout until I shout’, and they did not. But now he lodges with the people and he goes down into the valley where they allowed themselves to be beaten. A very humiliating thing for a general to do but it is a wholesome experience and it all ends with the complete overthrow of Ai.
JD This attack of the Philistines was made after they had “heard that they had anointed David king”. Would it suggest that the enemy hates the idea of the saints giving Christ His place as Lord, so he attacks? It is one thing he will not stand for.
JT Quite. You will notice that it says: “And the Philistines heard that they had anointed David king over Israel, and all the Philistines went up to seek David; and David heard of it, and went down to the stronghold. And the Philistines came and spread themselves in the valley of Rephaim”. They would attempt to make a big show.
EGMcA Is the suggestion here that the priesthood never acts upon precedent, but rather upon dependence upon God?
JT That is a good suggestion. Every conflict calls for the need of fresh guidance; something is to came out of it. Why are mulberry-trees mentioned here? David has to wait to hear. The priest has to have a good ear and so has the general, but it is the priestly element underlying these military operations.
EGMcA What is the idea of the mulberry-[p. 527] trees?
JT I do not know. They are a circumstance. They are trees that grew there.
EGMcA They are not large trees. There is nothing pretentious about them.
JT No. I expect they must mean some local condition. They are not conspicuous — they are not cedars. Cedars would not do for this operation. Mulberry-trees are low and they flatten out on the top, so that there is the sound of marching on the tops of them. They are a circumstance; they afford God an opportunity to show what He is doing in giving guidance to us. They are not opposed to us.
GWH Was the defeat at Ai largely due to Joshua?
JT He is the one who is distinctively a leader, but not so much an official or dignified leader. He lodges with the people. Perhaps if he had been more among the brethren he would have discerned what Achan had done. He did not know that Achan had done this or that Israel had sinned. But he says, as it were, I think it is well to be among the brethren and be one of them as much as possible. So he goes down into the valley where the brunt of the thing is, and accepts the humiliation of being beaten. He is one that went up to the city and then retired as being beaten. That is very humiliating but it drew out what was there.
GWH “Loose thy sandal from off thy foot: for the place whereon thou standest is holy”, Joshua 5:15. When he was listening to his men was his sandal on again?
JT Yes, he had his sandal on again. The taking off of the sandal would be to place him on holy ground.
GWH He was a dependent man in that attitude with his sandal off. It says, “For as captain of the army of Jehovah am I now come”, Joshua 5:14.
JT Which is a much wider thought than the hosts of Israel, because here there was an army marching in the tops of the mulberry-trees of which David [p. 528] knew nothing. It was an auxiliary altogether outside of his forces. We recognise God in the conflict and see that He is unlimited.
EGMcA In this, “And it shall be, when thou hearest a sound of marching in the tops of the mulberry-trees, that then thou shalt bestir thyself”, the priestly instincts wait until they get something distinctive from the Lord before they make a move themselves. Often we run ahead of the Lord.
JT You are not doing this yourself. It is Jehovah. The sound of marching is on some other orders than mine. The order of march was not given by David, but by God.
Rem Referring to the thought of the general, he would not go beyond orders from headquarters.
JT Just so. He is really not a general at all. A general means complete command, so that Jehovah is really the general. David is just a subordinate officer. That is important — that God is the general.
JB He is recognised in the next chapter as “Jehovah of hosts”. In this practical way the sound of the marching would prove not only that he had hosts but that he is “Jehovah of hosts”.
JT That is the thing to get hold of. Elisha says, “Jehovah, I pray thee, open his eyes that he may see. And Jehovah opened the eyes of the young man, and he saw; and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha”, 2 Kings 6:17. So that it says in Psalm 68:17, “The chariots of God are twenty thousand, thousands upon thousands; the Lord is among them”.
SWP The enemy comes up in both these instances using the same tactics and spreading themselves in the same location, the valley of Rephaim. It says in verse 20: “And David came to Baal-perazim, and David smote them there”. Then in verse 25: “And David did so, as Jehovah had commanded him; and smote the Philistines from Geba until thou comest to Gezer”. What is the significance of the change there?
JT Notice the meaning of the word, Baal-perazim — ‘place of breaches’. The battle evidently gave the name to the place; it was a place of breaches. He called it that name. That gives him the right of way, naming the place of the battle as the name derived from his victory. In the second battle he “smote the Philistines from Geba until thou comest to Gezer”. There are the same tactics on their part but the principal feature of their tactics is to make a show, to make everything appear big. But David is out of sight in the second attack and it is God. What could they do in the presence of such power? What do they know about the sound of marching in the tops of the mulberry-trees? It had never occurred — therefore never would occur. The word was: “... then thou shalt bestir thyself; for then will Jehovah have gone forth before thee, to smite the army of the Philistines”. The second attack brings out the presence of God and keeps the servant, or leader, in his place of dependence. This second experience has more in it for David so that he would be less elated by the victory. It was God’s victory.
JD In waiting for the sound in connection with an attack on the testimony, would it test the state of the priesthood?
JT That is right. That is what proceeds. What one has observed is that God is really dealing with our state in these things. You have gained a great victory at Baal-perazim, and if you get a second like that it may take you off your feet. You want to be preserved in prayer, in priestly state. After all it is not you — it is God, as in the first word in the battles of the Lord: “Jehovah will fight for you”, Exodus 14:14. The Lord says, ‘You are so immature, so inexperienced, that I will not lead you in the way of the Philistines’. They were powerful men according to the flesh. He would not bring them that way lest they would turn [p. 530] back when they saw war. Moses says, “Fear not: stand still, and see the salvation of Jehovah, which he will work for you today”, Exodus 14:13. He fights for you, and that is how you learn war. David is a warrior but he is dependent. That is very beautiful. He is relying on God, not on his own ability; the priestly state is so much in evidence that even in that in which he excels he does not rely on himself.
WB David had slain Goliath of Gath but he goes to Gath when he is persecuted by Saul. Now we see David victorious again over the Philistines although in the meantime they had slain Saul and his three sons, and had gained a great victory over God’s people.
JT It is a great test as to where I am spiritually when an opportunity offers where I can use what I have to the best advantage. You do not rely on yourself under any circumstances. You might say, ‘Well, I can attack that; I can write something to refute that’, but the Lord may not want you to do that.
GWH “Hitherto Jehovah has helped us”, 1 Samuel 7:12.
JT Quite so. He has always helped you but still you want to be sure He is going to help you now.
JD What form do you think the sound of marching in the tops of the mulberry-trees would take today?
JT The suggestion is that it is a military movement that God Himself is making: “then will Jehovah have gone forth”. It is God’s doing; it is His way. You see the hand of God in something; you see that He is moving in the thing.
Ques Is it through the priesthood that we are brought to know the power of God? When God led the people through the Red Sea, the priesthood was established and operating and then the Egyptians attack.
JT It was God’s consideration there. It was the learning time, the initial movement, so that it is, “Jehovah will fight for you”, Exodus 14:14. He considers young christians [p. 531] for instance. He does not bring them into the conflict at once lest they turn back. Some have done that. It is well not to put too much on young people. But now we have the most skilled military leader and he is not relying on his skill or experience. He sees the priesthood is greater than military skill.
EGMcA In Hebrews, where the priesthood is brought out so fully, the apostle accuses them of being dull of hearing.
JT That is a good point. Joshua, great leader that he became, heard a sound in Israel’s camp and said it was the sound of war. Moses said it was not the sound of war at all. Joshua would have misled the people through bad hearing. We have to learn how to hear.
FRA Do we get here the difference between defeat and dislodgment? They gave way in the first instance and in the second they were defeated.
JT Yes, and the extent of the battle ground is greater in the second: “and smote the Philistines from Geba until thou comest to Gezer”. The suggestion is that the ground covered is greater. The result of the first battle is that they left their images there and David and his men took them away. There is result in the overthrow of idolatry in the first conflict. But in the second the ground gained is more extensive and definite.
EGMcA Why is it that after these two experiences under the leading of God, David takes it upon himself to bring up the ark and does it in the wrong way. One would think that his priestly instincts had been so developed that he would have known what to do.
JT That is just what we were saying; as with Joshua, there was breakdown. He is like a Philistine in using thirty thousand men in bringing up the ark. That is not necessary. He is on military lines instead of priestly lines. In chapter 6:12 it says: “And it was told king David, saying, Jehovah has blessed the [p. 532] house of Obed-Edom, and all that is his, because of the ark of God. And David went and brought up the ark of God from the house of Obed-Edom into the city of David with joy”. There is not a word about the thirty thousand men. He has come back to his priestly state. He had been very efficient as a priest. In every instance he gains through it. We have to watch that, too. I may have a reputation for spirituality and discernment and God may see fit to humble me.
JWD It says, “And it was told king David”, the challenge is as to whether he had learned the lesson regarding the assembling of the mighty men.
JT He is still king but his concern now is to get the blessing. He would say, ‘King though I am, I have been missing something. Why? Because I have failed in my priestly discernment’. As a matter of fact there was a bit of pride in the show he was making. These are very important lessons and if I am a little bit distinguished, this is the sort of thing I have to face. The house of Obed-Edom is blessed and my house is not, and I am king!
WB Why does it say, “Obed-Edom the Gittite”? That means he was a Philistine.
JT That means he was a converted one. He has not lost his public character.
GAT He was a man going on quietly with God, enjoying God’s blessing and the testimony of that went out from his house.
JT He has afforded a residence for the ark — he is getting the blessing.
GAT Like the chief man of the island in Acts 28. Blessing went out of his house and all the people come to it.
JT Just so. The barbarians showed them “no common kindness”, Acts 28:2.
EGMcA In 1 Chronicles 15:1 it says, “And he made him houses in the city of David, and prepared a place for the ark of God, and spread a tent for it”. In [p. 533] this chapter there is no preparation for the reception of the ark.
JT Chronicles brings out the bright side more. Samuel is more historical. The second book is severe on David. That is the word that runs through this second book — he should know better. In every instance it is that sort of thing. It is not a young christian failing but one of experience. It is an old christian with great experience and there is no excuse for him.
GAT Do you think the thirty thousand men would suggest the idea of protecting the ark with fleshly energy?
JT I think so. Although David had overcome the Philistines, their principles are overcoming him. So it says, “And David arose and went with all the people that were with him from Baale-Judah, to bring up from thence the ark of God which is called by the name, the name of Jehovah of hosts who sitteth between the cherubim. And they set the ark of God upon a new cart”, 2 Samuel 6:2,3. That is a Philistine thought. You would have seen them do the same sort of thing; they are handling the things of God in a natural way.
GWH Abinadab had the ark twenty years but had no sensibility as to how it should have been taken out of his house, and David was no better.
JT Abinadab’s sons drove the cart. In the fifth chapter David gained two great victories, but the Philistine influence has overcome him. Now we have thirty thousand men and a cart. That is very displeasing to God because David should have known better.
GAT If I am in system and I become exercised about the place in which I am and I leave, I might carry the same principles with me and set them up in another way.
JT That is true. The Lord, before He introduced the assembly in Matthew, not only left the Pharisees and Sadducees but He “went away”. He put a distance between Him and them. Then immediately, in speaking to them about bread, He says, “See and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees”, Matthew 16:6. You may leave them but bring the leaven with you. David certainly overthrew the Philistines and that is the principle of the thing now — leaving the thing but perhaps bringing the principle of it with us.
JB And it will work.
JT Yes. David’s action is all the more inexcusable. Psalm 132:1 - 6 says: “Jehovah, remember for David all his affliction; How he swore unto Jehovah, vowed unto the Mighty One of Jacob: I will not come into the tent of my house, I will not go up to the couch of my bed; I will not give sleep to mine eyes, slumber to mine eyelids, Until I find out a place for Jehovah, habitations for the Mighty One of Jacob ... . Behold, we heard of it at Ephratah, we found it in the fields of the wood”. That is the allusion here. If he had those thoughts in his heart, why did he allow the Philistine ideas, thirty thousand men and a cart? That shows how susceptible we are to incongruous mixtures. You see an able, godly man, yet he goes in for worldly show in his family and what not; incongruous mixtures, and we are all susceptible to these things. God knows what is in a man’s heart, and hence we have all this discipline.
Ques How should the ark have been brought up? The oxen are marked by stability but here God allows them to stumble. Was it to teach David that the ark was not to be carried that way?
JT The ark was to be borne by the sons of Kohath. Kohath was the second son of Levi, but in the ministry he has the first place. He represents the most spiritual element of Levi. When they are nearing the Jordan, the Levites are called priests, meaning that there must be spirituality in dealing with things of the Deity; the incarnation of Christ must be handled with the utmost care. This, therefore, was a gross error. Uzzah’s death, like Achan’s, was only to bring home to Israel what God thought of the whole system. And David became [p. 535] indignant! Think of a man becoming indignant because God does something! That is what we are capable of.
GAT We are not affected like that now, are we?
JT That lesson is that we should not be. These things are written, not that God would expose His servant, but that we should not fall into the same error — especially in relation to the deity and the incarnation.
GAT Any complaint that I have against God’s actings is the same thing.
JT It says: “So David would not bring the ark of Jehovah home unto himself ...”. Think of a man’s will exercised in that way — he “would not bring the ark of Jehovah home unto himself”. I am in such a state that I am not going to afford a residence for God. How solemn in a great man like David! “But David carried it aside into the house of Obed-Edom the Gittite. And the ark of Jehovah remained in the house of Obed-Edom the Gittite three months; and Jehovah blessed Obed-Edom and all his household”. As much as to say, David, this is what you are losing. My eye on the ark. You are king, of course, but the blessing is with Obed-Edom’s house.
EGMcA Again the official fails.
JT That is the thought. Now it says in verse 12: “And it was told king David, saying, Jehovah has blessed the house of Obed-Edom, and all that is his, because of the ark of God”. David had despised it.
GWH He had had three bad months after the failure in not bringing it up and not wanting it. He has three months of dreadful exercise.
JT That is right. We may be sure that God made him feel it that he was robbed of the blessing, with all his titles.
GAT What does the ark in a man’s house mean?
JT It would mean that in a lowly way it affords a residence for Christ. As we get in John 14:22,23: one says, “Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself to us and not to the world? Jesus answered and said to him, If any one love me” (that is the secret of it), “he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our abode with him”. It is a question of love. We are not told why the ark was particularly carried aside to the house of Obed-Edom, but the fact is that it was and he got blessing. If I want to get blessing I want to make tabernacle conditions. That is a fine expression. John 14 teaches us tabernacle conditions, and these conditions may be found in one brother. I am referring to Exodus which gives us tabernacle conditions. Jehovah invited up Moses and Aaron, and Nadab and Abihu and seventy of the elders of Israel. It says, “And they saw the God of Israel; and there was under his feet as it were work of transparent sapphire, and as it were the form of heaven for clearness. And on the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: they saw God, and ate and drank”, Exodus 24:9 - 11. The next chapter tells us that God says, ‘I would like to dwell among you. You have been dwelling with me, now I would like to dwell with you’. And He prescribes the conditions. The material is to come from the people. Love provides the conditions: the gold, the silver, and the copper; the blue, purple and scarlet; the goats’ hair and the rams’ skins dyed red, etc. All these materials are provided by the people to make tabernacle conditions that “I may dwell among them”. That is John 14.
GAT Could Zacchaeus tell us something about that?
JT Just so. The Lord says to him, “today I must remain in thy house”, Luke 19:5. Zacchaeus valued that and received Him gladly. He valued the thought of the Lord being in his house. The Lord says, “Today salvation is come to this house” (verse 9). Of how many houses can that be said? The ark was there. That is the point the Lord makes in John 14.
JD In regard to John 14, it is, “If any one love me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love [p. 537] him, as we will come to him and make our abode with him”.
JT The result of keeping His word, you know. First He says in verse 21: “He that has my commandments, and keeps them, he it is that loves me; but he that loves me shall be loved by my Father, and I will love him and will manifest myself to him”. The earlier verses refer to collective privilege that followed on Pentecost when the Spirit came down. Verses 21 and 23 contemplate remnant conditions and when the Lord says, “He that has my commandments and keeps them, he it is that loves me”; there you see how tabernacle conditions are reached. I begin by keeping the commandments. Then Judas says, “Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself to us and not to the world?” The Lord answers, “If any one love me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him”, etc. Keeping the word is more than the commandments. They are more what is outward but then I want to have the inward thought — the mind of God — and the word of Christ kept implies that inwardly I am in keeping with God.
JD Impartation, as you said last night.
EGMcA Do commandments set me right before the world, and does keeping His word imply formation?
JT Exactly; that I have the mind of God. “For he spoke, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast”, Psalm 33:9. The mind of God is known by the one that keeps the word. That is what I mean by tabernacle conditions, and they might be with one person in any place — a very precious thought in these days, I think.
JB “I will not give sleep to mine eyes, slumber to mine eyelids, Until I find out a place for Jehovah, habitations for the Mighty One of Jacob”, Psalm 132:4,5. Would he not learn from Obed-Edom?
JT I think he had those thoughts before, still he would no doubt say something to Obed-Edom and get [p. 538] instruction. Obed-Edom could entertain him in that he was right himself. King though he was, he would listen to Obed-Edom as to what he enjoyed as to the ark. The psalm says, “Let thy priests be clothed with righteousness, and let thy saints shout for joy”, Psalm 132:9. That is what they missed here. The historical psalms are important in dealing with this subject.
JD Will you say a word on verse 13? “And it was so, that when they that bore the ark of Jehovah had gone six paces, he sacrificed an ox and a fatted beast”.
JT That is the next thing. It seems to me the six paces would mean that we have gone on pretty well now; we are restored; God has come in for us and we are going on pretty well. But there is another pace to be taken. We have to understand the numbers spiritually. He would revert back to what happened. Discipline is beyond words if something like this happened again. When six paces had been taken he sacrificed an ox and a fatted beast. The ox is a sure-footed animal. There is no doubt about that. Good and well if the sure-footedness is transferred to a christian — if it is in me. Some people do not like the Old Testament. They forget it was written for us. If I am literal, I am using the figure instead of the substance. The New Testament is the substance. If I think of a sure-footed creature like an ox, then the point is that it is sure-footedness in myself; that I keep my foot in the house of God and that I might be more swift to hear than to speak.
GAT In contrast to “swift their feet to shed blood”, Romans 3:15.
WB In verse 6 the oxen shook the ark on the cart, but they seemed to be in their proper place in connection with the sacrifice.
JT Yes. In the end of verse 6 it says they broke loose, which is to say, it is myself — my will is in the thing. “Broken loose” would mean that the ox was [p. 539] not keeping in his place in the harness. It was David’s will, that is what is meant. The ox is good enough — not the will, but the foot. It is the sure-footedness of a saint as he goes to the house of God; he is well balanced.
David sacrifices that — he is thinking of the walk of Jesus. Mary saw those feet six days before the passover and she anointed them. They were carrying the Lord surely and steadily to the cross. David is afraid there might be another breaking forth and he sacrifices the ox and fatted beast. In faith he sees Jesus. I am not going to allow my will now — it is sacrifice, and that directs the mind to Christ.
EGMcA Walking in love.
JT Quite so. John the baptist saw the Lord walking and called Him the Lamb of God. The word ‘Lamb’ denotes what is sacrificial. That Lamb is going to die.
JD In David’s mind he identified the ox with the ark of the covenant.
JT Mary saw that His own feet were carrying Him.
GAT In verse 6 the ox stumbled. Then he sacrifices it.
JT It was not according to his nature. His nature is sure-footedness but his will is at work in the breaking loose. He was not subject.
GAT I find I have to sacrifice what would be a hindrance to me in order to go on rightly.
JT Quite so. Whatever David might have thought, the sacrifices refer to Christ. The true thought is in the sacrifice.
JD There had been a lack of priestly feelings but it says immediately, “David was girded with a linen ephod”. The priestly feelings are once more in evidence.
JT Quite so. There had been thirty thousand men instead of the ephod, which is incongruous. Why did he not have the ephod before? It is linen; it is balance you want. Linen is sobriety, self-control — the fruit of [p. 540] the Spirit.
GAT Hearing all about Christ will not do except I make it my own.
JT Instead of the great number of soldiers, you have himself active in a priestly way. It says: “And David danced before Jehovah with all his might; and David was girded with a linen ephod. And David and all the house of Israel brought up the ark of Jehovah with shouting, and with the sound of the trumpet”. The whole scene is sanctified now and instead of the power of the army it is David himself in all his might, but it is priestly might.
GAT He is in the good of what he had heard about.
JT Quite so. It is before Jehovah. His heart is drawn out and he is discrediting himself in the eyes of the natural, in the eyes of his wife, but he says, “It was before Jehovah”.
G.W.H. Why the six paces?
JT Seven is the usual number in mind in numbers given in this way. Six is more than human but it does not preclude the possibility of failure. Seven is the perfect thing. Before you reach the seventh you might fail.
GWH He sacrifices before he takes the seventh. He would secure himself there.
JT The sacrifice is the anticipation of the perfection of the walk of Christ. The gospels give us that. In going to the cross there was no misstep at all; everything was perfectly right.
SMcC In verse 12 it says: “And David went and brought up the ark of God from the house of Obed-Edom into the city of David with joy”; in the 15th verse it says: “And David and all the house of Israel brought up the ark of Jehovah”, and in the 17th verse: “And they brought in the ark of Jehovah”. Would there be progress in that?
JT I think so. It is a term of mutuality under these circumstances without mentioning the persons.
[p. 541] Just as in the singing of the hymn in Matthew and Mark; “they” sang, without saying who. It is the mutual side. A state of mutuality had developed in the procedure which is very beautiful. How all were merging in the holy feelings of the moment! We all seem to merge in the same feelings; we get into touch with one another.
WB Michal was outside. She was just in the pride of her father’s house with natural sort of feelings.
JT She was outside this “they” of mutuality and of sharing in the holy feelings that were proceeding.
GWH She thought she was right.
JT She did. She gives reasons too, “as one of the lewd fellows”. David answers most nobly; he is ready to abase himself.
Rem She was at a distance.
JT Think of her looking out on the one who honours Christ and despising him! He was honouring God in Christ.
Ques Is the mutuality the outcome of being girded with a linen ephod?
JT I think so. The linen means that whatever distinction God gives you, the greatest thing is that you are one of the brethren. There will be no distinction of gift in heaven. Love is the great thought and love will place you alongside of the least distinguished. The handmaids in the mind of Michal were of no account at all.
EGMcA She had before her the reputation of her husband, which might be the case with any of us. He had given up his dignity as king. She said, “How honourable did the king of Israel make himself today”. In the carrying of the ark and putting it in its proper place in the affections of the brethren, one’s reputation may go to pieces.
JT The circle of the brethren is such a wonderful circle. It is the circle of eternal life, the land of promise provisionally. We are told in verse 16 what was in her heart, “she despised him in her heart”. And she is awaiting her opportunity to tell him. It says in verse 17: “And they brought in the ark of Jehovah, and set it in its place, in the midst of the tent that David had spread for it”. He had made provision. Then it says, “And when David had ended offering up the burnt-offerings and the peace-offerings, he blessed the people in the name of Jehovah of hosts”. Now he is a true priest in blessing them. The Lord blessed His disciples as He ascended up to heaven. “And he dealt to all the people, to the whole multitude of Israel, both men and women, to every one a cake of bread, and a measure of wine, and a raisin-cake. And all the people departed every one to his house. And David returned to bless his household”. Michal would have come in for the blessing but she is not ready for it; her naughty will is at work. Her line is extinct, which is a result of the solemn judgment of God.
GAT If Christ gets His true place amongst us, is this the result?
JT It is. There are those that make much of David and they are despised. God hates that. Now that he has his place, David becomes a worshipper and a blesser. He almost rises to a type of Christ here in blessing everybody.
Rem “I will abundantly bless her provision; I will satisfy her needy ones with bread”, Psalm 132:15.
JT That shows how that historical psalm covers the whole position. The bread is being distributed and poor Michal is going to miss the blessing.
SWP It is distributed to both men and women.
Rem She had only seen things through the window. It must be a dangerous place in which to be.
JT Yes, indeed. Through a window is not the way to look at Christ.
GWH Would the Supper lead to these conditions of mutuality and [p. 543] response?
JT That is the intent of it. After it was finished, they sang an hymn. Now what part does the Lord have in that? They sang it.
Ques You remarked that the circle of the brethren is a great thing. How is it great?
JT It affords a heavenly atmosphere — the land of promise — where divine things are enjoyed.
JD That hymn has been kept from us.
JT Yes, it has. The Lord says, You do likewise. They did it — it is what they did. In meetings like this we talk about those who minister but the thing to reach is everlasting life, of holy, mutual feeling, alongside of one another in the Spirit.
EGMcA Would you say a word as to eternal life being connected with the circle of the brethren?
JT We were speaking last night about the realm of salvation. “I will give salvation in Zion”, Isaiah 46:13. I will give it there, “thou shalt call thy walls Salvation, and thy gates Praise” (Isaiah 60:18), meaning that the thing is there. When a name is given it means the thing is there. Salvation is there; who can question it? It is not a matter of doctrine but of fact. Every young christian, if he is sincere, proves it. How different it is in the brethren’s houses and the meetings, from the workshops or the street! There is a different atmosphere. I am not tempted to do things amongst the brethren — out in the street I am. It is the power of Satan out there. The walls are called Salvation. So in regard of life eternal; it is “like the precious oil upon the head, that ran down upon the beard, upon Aaron’s beard, that ran down to the hem of his garments; As the dew of Hermon that descendeth on the mountains of Zion; for there hath Jehovah commanded the blessing”, Psalm 133:2,3. There it is — He commanded it there, “life for evermore”. The circle of the saints is like all those wonderful things: “Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!”
EGMcA God exceeds David’s request. He says: “I will clothe her priests with salvation”, Psalm 132:16.
JT He does, and Psalm 133 follows immediately upon that passage.
GAT He provided a place for the Lord to sing.
JB The singing would be typical of heavenly joy — the joy of heaven brought down.
JT The subject of worship comes in properly in chapters 7 and 15 so that, if the Lord permit, we might finish with that and link it on with the New Testament tomorrow afternoon.