LIFE AS SEEN IN THE MINISTRIES OF ELIJAH AND ELISHA (2)
[p. 49] LIFE AS SEEN IN THE MINISTRIES OF ELIJAH AND ELISHA (2)
2 Kings 4: 38 - 44; 2 Kings 6: 1 - 7
JT We have had the early part of chapter 4 before us, and the object of this reading is to pursue the thought of life, as seen in this book.
It will be known to most of us, that the Jordan has a prominent place in it. It is symbolical of death, and the miracles recorded denote the power of God exercised in resurrection, shown first by Elijah and then by Elisha. Elisha represents the presence of the Spirit here enabling us to enter into the effect of Christ’s resurrection, and indeed to join Him in it by faith. The raising of the Shunammite’s son is symbolical of this life, which we have in Christ by the power of God; and the place the sons of the prophets have in the book is another feature to be noticed. We see in these two passages how they come into the thought of life, in the meal put into the pot and then in the iron swimming in the Jordan — life in the midst of death.
These verses in chapter 4 set before us the sons of the prophets, alluding to the young men who would serve amongst the people of God. As they are moving in a general way with Elisha, they are tested. In such meetings as we have, or in readings such as this, we have what answers to the great pot set on by the direction of the prophet, marked by certain wild contributions. The great pot suggests some occasion when contributions may be made by anyone present, but the contributions bring out that to which we are exposed. In what we call Bible readings, or in ministry meetings, as they are called, we are directed that everything is to be under control, what is said is to be tested, or we may get something that poisons.
Ques Might such a contribution be something that does not tend to feed, but rather to poison what is there?
[p. 50] JT That is what is before us. It is manifest in what we read. Elisha ordered the pot to be set on, and prescribed what was to be done. “Set on the great pot, and seethe pottage for the sons of the prophets. And one went out into the field to gather herbs, and found a wild vine, and gathered thereof wild gourds his lap full, and came and shred them into the pot of pottage: for they knew them not” (verses 38, 39).
FJF Would the wild vine suggest that they are not under culture, and not controlled?
JT “Wild” is the key-word. It gives the clue to what is meant. We are apt to be governed by our own thoughts and to fail to test them by the divine standard. The wild contribution implies what he has; the allusion is to the state of his soul. What he contributes is according to that. The dearth in verse 38 signifies God’s government. It is usually the outcome of some low state of soul among the brethren, so that the Spirit of God is not free, is grieved or quenched, and there is no food.
Rem It says, “one went out into the field”.
JT Yes. The words would indicate that he is acting independently. Elisha himself is not taking any part, except to direct what was to be there — pottage. This contribution was not that. It was not as he directed. The wild vine is not pottage, it is something different. The man did not intend to poison his brethren. He did not know what it was himself, but in doing the thing, he is acting on his own initiative. We may not mean it, but we may act very dangerously, so as to poison our brethren. We must be in subjection, not independent. The mind of God must be sought. It ought to take on the character of the temple, where the mind of God is.
Rem The man who brought the wild gourds was not using the unction by which we know all things.
JT You are alluding to John’s epistle. This man should have known that it was poison. It is quite manifest that the Lord set up in the assembly the means of keeping all under control. The principle of control [p. 51] runs throughout the Acts. Although a large number were added, they persevered in the apostles’ doctrine. The Spirit continues that and occupies us, therefore, with the need of being in subjection to Christ and to one another.
Rem It is independency of action that has brought in all the trouble.
JT Men have broken away from control, and hence the poisonous things have come in. Rome has introduced control of its own kind. It is most vicious and displaces Christ and the Spirit. Here it is Elisha — what he directed.
Ques What would Elisha represent in this connection?
JT He represents the spirit of the dispensation. It is the ministry of the Spirit, but there is the authority of the Lord in it. There is that which is operative in us, by the Spirit’s power. It is not simply that the Lord is in heaven, and that we go by the letter of the Bible, but that the Spirit is here in power. The spirit of life runs through Elisha’s ministry.
Ques Whom would his servant represent (verse 38)?
JT All of us, as moving under control; that is the principle here. A servant is to be subject, not acting independently. We are to be acting in subjection.
Rem The man appeared to have a great deal. His lap was full.
JT We ought to test everything. If a brother gives out a great deal in a meeting, that is, has a lap full, we ought to test it as to whether there is a want of care or elevation in it. A “lap full” is loose. There was plenty of it, and he shred the gourds into the pot, without anyone questioning him apparently. This was worse still. Things are allowed to go on without being detected. Independence is not right.
Rem We should have an intelligent understanding and see that what we are administering is good food which will [p. 52] nourish.
JT That is right. We have tested it. You may not get things directly from the Lord. The full ears of corn come directly from Baal-shalishah, which alludes to the place where the Lord is, where there is authority. Things are not done there independently, so that the general thought is that the contributions are already proved. The Bereans searched the Scriptures daily. We are to prove all things, and hold fast all the things that are good. We are to cut in a straight line the word of truth, knowing how to apply parables and the like, understanding dispensational truth, and knowing how to distinguish it..
Rem He did not know what he had brought; we should prove what we bring.
JT We must not minister what we do not know ourselves experimentally. We should always be subject to correction. The principle of ministry, especially collective ministry, is the temple. “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?” The natural mind does not understand the mind of God. “But”, he says, “we have the mind of Christ”, that is what we must understand. The Spirit discerns all things. If we make room for the Spirit, we get the truth. The Corinthians were like this man. They were bringing in terrible things. Some were saying that there was no resurrection from the dead.
Rem This man was not told to go out and gather these gourds.
JT No; and not only so, they were not what the prophet directed. The food was there as directed by the prophet.
Rem Verse 38 says, “seethe pottage”. There is that which is ready to hand.
JT Yes. The suggestion is that it was there.
Ques Would this indicate lack of spiritual sight? They should have seen what was being put in.
JT It shows us what young brothers may do. Although they are there and sitting before the prophet,
[p. 53] one of them is doing this sort of thing. Chapter 6 shows that they may have the best desires and thoughts, yet things are not just right. They attempt to work with a borrowed axe, with what is borrowed from others. We are to get things from the Lord, testing them out for ourselves. They are to belong to us; they are our own, as our brother pointed out in John’s epistle, chapter 2: 20, where it says, “But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things”. There is another word to be observed: the Lord says, “Will ye also go away?” Peter says, “Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast words of life eternal; and we have believed and known that thou art the holy one of God”, John 6: 67 - 69. Peter had proved that the ministry is to be in holiness.
Ques Would you say that this is largely taking place in christendom?
JT Yes, christendom is full of poisonous things, things not detected as poison. They are standardised, and labelled good food, and people are dying morally from them. This passage is directed towards us, for the prophet is there, and things are generally right. The sons of the prophets are there, they follow on a generation of those who were right. Other men have preceded us; we have followed on, and these scriptures are to show us that we must test what is presented to us as food; we must prove all things and hold fast what is good.
Rem An argumentative spirit, and also a worldly spirit, in the meeting would produce wild gourds. The contribution must be definite, not things left in the air, so to speak.
JT Yes. Things must be proved sound, because even though brethren may not be carried by what is said, wrong doctrine must be exposed, for some young person may take it in. A person who contributes is responsible.
Ques Did he not go in the wrong direction to get the food? He went into the field.
JT Yes. The point was to get the pottage, and it [p. 54] was to the servant that the order was given. We need the principle of the servant, of subjection, and this will preserve us from wildness. The prophet did not direct them in a general way. He says to his servant, “Set on the great pot, and seethe pottage for the sons of the prophets. And one went out into the field ...” It does not say the servant did it. It was someone who had not been directed to do anything.
Ques Why was it not detected when it was poured out?
JT “So they poured out for the men to eat. And it came to pass, as they were eating of the pottage, that they cried out, and said, O thou man of God, there is death in the pot”. That is, it is the eating of the thing that showed it to be poison. It is good that they discerned it and did not swallow and assimilate it. The palate in the mouth is to discern the food. It is a safeguard. Taste is an important sense.
Rem They all seemed to detect it. It was not the thought of one only.
JT It shows there is a healthy state of things generally.
Rem It is a happy state when the whole meeting detects and refuses evil.
Rem I suppose these poisonous things are swallowed by those whose taste is worldly.
JT There you have the principle of the swine. It swallows things down without tasting them. Young people, even young children, acquire the habit of proving things. The earlier children come to the meeting, the better for acquiring the way of testing.
Ques What would the meal set forth?
JT That is another thing which the prophet directs. They cried out, “O thou man of God, there is death in the pot”. They made haste to make it known, and they put the information where it belonged. Then he says, “bring meal”. The prophet has a remedy. There is no thought of christianity being driven to the wall in any [p. 55] circumstance. There is no suggestion that there is no meal. It is not, ‘Bring if there is any’. It was there. That is, the saints are of the order of Christ’s humanity, the idea is of the meat offering. The general state among the saints is right, therefore there is a means present of meeting this condition.
Ques Why are there two pourings out?
JT Elisha said, “Then bring meal. And he cast it into the pot”. That is, he did not leave it to anyone else. He took control himself. The matter is urgent. This element of control has to be noticed, the element of the spirit of control as in the Acts. So here it is Elisha who pours out the second time or gives direction. He says, “Pour out for the people, that they may eat. And there was no harm in the pot”. Where Elisha is in control you are safe, things are wholesome; but without it (for us the “unction”) you are not. You are exposed to danger.
Rem We must not make wild statements when ministering to the Lord’s people.
JT You do not trust your own mouth. Even Paul’s preaching was tested. Like him, we must be concerned to speak “words of truth and soberness”.
Ques Does Paul bring in the “meal” in his corrective epistles?
JT Always. It is the bringing in of Christ. It says, “other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ”. That is typically what is meant by the meal — the state of things among them — for they discerned the poison. There is salvation in that. There are those who do not hold their tongues when things are not right. Here they cried out about it to the right person, that is to Elisha. Many things are allowed to pass for the sake of peace or through carelessness; young people may get damaged if you hold your peace and do not let it be known. You find that if in a meeting a thing is said which is not right, if it is called attention to in dependence on the Lord, the truth becomes clearer than ever.
[p. 56] Ques Do you think it takes a man of God to deal with a difficulty like that?
JT Well, it is that element. When the general state is wrong, the man of God comes into prominence. Timotheus is the only one called the “man of God” in the New Testament. The man of God stands at all costs. The term fits when things generally are going wrong.
Ques Why is it poured out for the people when the meal is put in?
JT You have in verse 40, “they poured out for the men”. It brings out the care there is, and the interest of Elisha in the people. Ministry is for the edifying of the body of Christ; one is thinking of the saints all the time. The Lord draws attention to the faithful and wise steward who gives the portion of meat in due season.
Ques Do the sons of the prophets represent young believers particularly?
JT In the sense of belonging to a generation of accredited persons. We have come after a generation of faithful men, and have come into a generation of the sons of the prophets. Our position is very much akin.
Rem They seem to know a good deal according to chapter 2.
JT They know a good deal, but are not affected by it. They can tell Elisha that Elijah is about to be taken from him. He says, “Yea, I know it”. There are brethren today who go in specially for prophecy. They write books on it, but they do not know anything about the assembly. Anyone who knows Christ and the assembly could say to such, I know more than you do, for the coming of the Lord refers to the assembly. The assembly knows intuitively what is coming; it is not governed by what is happening in Europe. These sons of the prophets knew Elijah would be taken away and they said so, yet when it happened they did not believe it, and they went to seek for him. They darkened even Elisha’s mind. One must watch those people who introduce books on prophecy and who do not know the assembly. Such [p. 57] books on prophecy cannot be trusted. Only those who apprehend Christ as the Head of the assembly can be trusted in the truth. It does not mean that all the sons of the prophets were wrong. Elisha used one later to anoint Jehu king over Israel. They are generally right in chapter 6 too.
Ques The contents of the pot were poured out for the men first, and later for the people (verses 40, 41). Would it suggest that contributions are subjected to a maturer element before being presented to the people?
JT Verse 40 is just a fact that they poured out for the men to eat, and in the next verse we have “Pour out for the people, that they may eat”. The sons of the prophets represent one thought, men another, and the people still another thought.
Ques Is there adjustment in verse 42?
JT Yes, it says “there was no harm in the pot” at the end of verse 41 — we have this matter adjusted, and now we can go on to a higher level. We are told that a man came “from Baal-shalishah, and brought the man of God bread of the first-fruits, twenty loaves of barley, and fresh ears of corn in his sack”. We have authority here, for the name of the place indicates authority. The Spirit of God gives us these terms so that our minds might take in the meaning. We have a definite number, twenty loaves, and the corn is fresh. It is kept from harm in his sack. It does not say simply “a sack”, but “his” — the man’s sack; that is, like Mary of Bethany, he preserved what he had. No doubt Mary is the woman of Mark 14 who had the ointment. She kept the pound of ointment in an alabaster box, meaning that it was kept from contamination. You can see the difference between this instance and the previous one, the pot. The contribution in the previous one was loose; this from Baal-shalishah is compact.
Ques Does this incident bring in lordship?
JT It is the authority of Christ in another sphere. Baal-shalishah indicates that it is under control. The [p. 58] Lord has supreme sway there; that is, it is a state of spirituality, and probably alludes to heaven. The first-fruits would show that it is typically Christ risen from the dead.
Rem The man with substance waits for the moment when it should be given out, that is, the right moment.
JT Yes; it is kept till the right moment and given to the right man, the man of God — put into good hands. It came from the right source and is kept intact and delivered over to the right person; all is marked by care. Care is important. As already remarked, Mary of Bethany in Matthew and Mark is a good example of this. She has the alabaster box, showing that she was careful as to the ointment. In John the alabaster box is not mentioned, suggesting that she was it herself. The point there is that she kept it, and kept it for a purpose, and applied it at the right time as opportunity offered. Here the good food is put into the right hands, having been carried intact, and there was a possibility of increase. If you get ministry from the right source and it is kept under control, there is a great possibility of increase. So there is more than is needed, one hundred men are fed. The servant may wonder how he could feed so many, but the word of Jehovah (verse 44), through Elisha spoke of enlargement, as by Christ in the gospels. In John 6 things were in the hands of a little boy. It is in that chapter you have the feeding of the multitude and the increase.
Rem The little boy in John 6 kept the food intelligently.
JT He had it. He was a little boy in the minds of those who spoke of him, Andrew and Philip, but they knew he had something. It seemed diminutive to other minds, but the Lord used it, and there was plenty.
Ques The ministry increases and enlarges. Is the meat offering suggested in the meal, then Christ in resurrection, and Christ in glory in the food from Baal-shalishah?
[p. 59] JT Yes. The barley refers to Christ in resurrection. He is the first-fruits. According to Exodus, it is the earliest crop. The fresh ears of corn allude to the energy of life by the Spirit. We can only have freshness down here by the Spirit.
Ques Does this man suggest Paul coming to Ephesus through higher regions?
JT Yes, it is the heavenly side of things, where Christ is supreme. Paul’s ministry comes expressly from heaven. He received it from the Lord, and passed it on. He says, I have received of the Lord, and what I received I give to you. He passed it on, unadulterated. If we get things from the Lord, we should see that they are kept, and not damaged in transit.
Ques What would twenty loaves set forth? There are five loaves in John, but here twenty.
JT The number would indicate a good supply for one man to bring. We must not always complain of ‘one-man ministry’. Sometimes it is better than more! The thing is to have things under control. This man is a trustworthy brother to whom something is committed. So with Mary Magdalene, who went and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and He had said these things to her. She did not add to the message. She brought it intact. It is very important to get things intact and hold them by the Spirit. There are a hundred men — out of proportion to the supply. It is a matter of great exercise how the saints are to be ministered to, but, as the Lord is owned, the supply is always sufficient to meet the demand. There is always good measure.
Rem This was not a small meeting.
JT You are not meaning to say that we ought to have local meetings of this size? You can minister to five thousand, but a meeting of this size would be impracticable for assembly services. In feeding the large numbers the Lord made them sit down in fifties.
Rem It is a question of administration, is it not?
JT This would come out in the Lord’s feeding of the multitude. The Lord said, “Make them sit down in companies by fifties”. The Lord saw that they were all fed.
One has often thought of the early days in Jerusalem; there must have been about a hundred meetings in Jerusalem at one time, as there were five thousand or more saints there.
Rem Obadiah must have known that principle, when he hid the prophets in the cave by fifties. He fed them with bread and water.