THE AUTHORITY OF CHRIST IN THE ASSEMBLY (1)
[p. 144] THE AUTHORITY OF CHRIST IN THE ASSEMBLY (1)
JT This chapter is universal in its bearing and deals typically with the great rebellion which has occurred in the history of Christendom, against Christ, as Apostle and High Priest. The attitude of Moses and Aaron in meeting this rebellion is noteworthy; in verse 4 it is said, “When Moses heard this, he fell on his face”. Later, in verse 45, it says, “And they fell on their faces”, that is, Moses and Aaron did so; then Moses provides in his love and forethought for the people. It says further, verse 46, “And Moses said to Aaron, Take the censer, and put fire thereon from off the altar, and lay on incense, and carry it quickly to the assembly, and make atonement for them; for there is wrath gone out from Jehovah: the plague is begun”. Aaron did this; it says he made atonement for the people and stood between the dead and the living, and the plague was stayed. Christ typically, in His authority and priestly grace, maintains the assembly characteristically. Although many are lost, yet the assembly is maintained; verse 42 says that the cloud covered the tent of meeting and the glory of Jehovah appeared; the tent of meeting is preserved, and taken over by God in the midst of all this defiance, and the service goes on. Then we read, verse 43, “Moses and Aaron went before the tent of meeting”; there is thus complete recovery of the position.
AFM Do I understand that recovery was made, but under limited conditions on account of what had come in?
JT Yes; it was an extraordinary experience. Moses had to take the position of withdrawing in verse 26. Jehovah said, in verse 24, “Speak unto the assembly, saying, Get you up from about the habitation of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram”, and then it says in verse 25, “And Moses rose up and went to Dathan and Abiram; and the elders of Israel followed him. And he spoke to the assembly, saying. Depart, I pray you, from the tents of these wicked men, and touch nothing of theirs”. That is, he had to request the assembly to depart from the habitation of these persons. Earlier there is the thought of withdrawing from the assembly in verse 21: “Separate yourselves from the midst of this assembly”, but in verse 26 it is, “Depart, I pray you, from the tents of these wicked men”. That humiliating experience had to be gone through, but through the intercession of Moses and Aaron, and through the atonement effected, the assembly was preserved and goes on.
AFM In the first instance it seems that God would destroy the whole assembly. It says in verse 21, “Separate yourselves from the midst of this assembly, and I will consume them in a moment”. But the intercession of Moses limits the destruction.
JT Yes, the intercession of Moses and Aaron, as already said, effected the change; they say, “shall one man sin, and wilt thou be wroth with the whole assembly?” They are thinking of the assembly; then Jehovah spoke to Moses saying, “Speak unto the assembly”. First Moses and those with him were to withdraw from the assembly; it is changed, however, through this intercession. Every man that loves God will wish to preserve the assembly, and that is what the thing resulted in; the assembly was preserved.
CHH This passage corresponds with 2 Timothy 2:19 “Let every one who names the name of the Lord withdraw from iniquity”.
JT In verse 21 it says, “Separate yourselves from the midst of this assembly, and I will consume them in a moment”. Verse 19 of 2 Timothy 2, “Let every one who names the name of the Lord withdraw from iniquity”, would refer to something collective, what is leavened with evil. Then it says, “If therefore one shall have purified himself from these, in separating himself from them” (2 Timothy 2:21), that is, from vessels to dishonour; there you have persons separated from — vessels to dishonour.
AFM Can you separate the two? I was thinking of what you said in those two passages in 2 Timothy 2, the one referring to evil principles and the other to persons that hold them.
JT Yes; I think separating from iniquity would be collective, some evil maintained in that way, whatever it might be. The persons are then alluded to as in “the great house”, and it would be what they have done or are doing, involving what they are. You have an example in Hymenaeus and Philetus, in what they were saying. What a person is, of course, comes out in what he does and says. We discern them by what they do and say.
JEH Would you say that the movement of about one hundred years ago was on the principle of what is suggested in the first scripture?
JT Yes; that is, verse 21 says, “Separate yourselves from the midst of this assembly”; then the time came when persons had to be separated from, so that they are named: “Depart, I pray you, from the tents of these wicked men ... And they got up from the habitation of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, on every side”.
AR Verses 21 and 41 refer to what is general, the assembly is in view; in verse 26 it is “these wicked men”.
JT “And the whole assembly of the children of Israel murmured on the morrow against Moses and against Aaron, saying. Ye have killed the people of Jehovah” (verse 41). Their attitude arises from what had happened — the judgment executed; this is common, alas, when discipline has [p. 147] to be imposed.
ANW Which of these comes closer to us, practically, here today?
JT Well, we need instruction on both sides; what it is to withdraw from a company where iniquity is maintained; and then, withdrawing from persons without leaving the company. I think we need instruction as to how the truth of the assembly is maintained in such circumstances. It is very wonderful to see the grace of Moses and Aaron, how they take things, and serve, so that there is the least possible lost, and the assembly characteristically is preserved.
CAM So that there seems to be the two appeals. The second appeal (verse 26), is final. The sentence was about to be executed, and this warning was given to all on that account.
JT I think it is instructive and exemplary, to see how Moses and Aaron meet the wrath; how they fall on their faces and intercede. Then the sentence is changed to men and their habitations, instead of to the whole assembly. In the second instance (verse 41), the whole assembly is said to have murmured against Moses and Aaron. Here Jehovah intervenes and takes charge of the tent of meeting. That helps as to the idea of the assembly as being the vessel of testimony. God takes charge of that by the cloud and protects it with glory; then Jehovah said to Moses, “Get you up from the midst of this assembly, and I will consume them in a moment”. The same decision is stated by God again, which Moses and Aaron meet; it says, “they fell on their faces”. Then Moses proposed to Aaron to “make atonement for them”, by bringing in what is positive; the censer with fire from the altar and incense upon it, referring typically to Christ. Aaron was directed to go with it quickly into the midst of the congregation. The fragrance of Christ thus presented, stays the plague. Aaron “stood between the dead and the living; and the plague was stayed” (verses 46 - 48).
CAM [p. 148] Was it because of reaction among the people on account of the extreme severity of the judgment, that they murmured?
JT Exactly; that is what we have to contend with at the present time; the reaction against those who had to exercise the discipline, because of assumed severity, but here it was God who directly inflicted the judgment. The renewed threat against the assembly (verse 45), is met by the immediate intercession of Moses and Aaron; they fell on their faces, and Moses proposed the censer and the incense, and that Aaron should go into the midst of the congregation. What is needed today is to get the brethren right, by bringing them under the fragrance of Christ brought out by the fire from the altar. He had to suffer. You could not have this fire and incense aside from the cross. If we judge sin as God sees it, we shall be slow to speak of severity in regard of judgment exercised on account of evil amongst saints. Nothing could be more severe than the judgment of God at the cross; sin is lawlessness — it is the exercise of will against God’s commandments. It is seen in Matthew 18:15 - 17, particularly in refusing to hear the assembly.
AFM How do you apply the idea of Moses and Aaron falling on their faces?
JT I think Moses and Aaron represent the spirit that is needed today in these circumstances. Jesus fell to the earth and prayed as anticipating death in Gethsemane; so that it all comes back to what the cross means; how fragrant as seen there is Christ to God, and how we, too, come into that fragrance! So Aaron stands between the dead and the living; and though a good many are lost, yet the assembly is preserved characteristically.
AFM Would you tell us the difference between the two hundred and fifty copper censers and this one golden censer?
JT [p. 149] The former were used by the two hundred and fifty men, and were taken and used for the covering of the altar as a memorial to the children of Israel, that no one but the true seed of Aaron should offer incense. These broad plates thus became a sign to Israel, that they be not as Korah, and as his band.
JEH Would you mind telling us what this crisis was?
JT Well, it arose through Korah, a leading Levite, and Dathan and Abiram, who were sons of Reuben, the eldest son of Israel. These sons of Reuben were in the camp, south of the tabernacle, and this section of the Levites served in that locality; all were in a favourable position; thus it was a party formed by persons because of their contiguity to one another; this combination of evil is often seen in localities.
AFM It says of Korah in verse 1 that he made bold. Is that not the secret of this whole movement?
JT Yes; the mustering of natural courage to attack what is of God. We know it is that which marks Christendom. It is particularly that brazen thing in Rome; persistent in boldness.
GMacP Was there not a semblance of truth in what Korah and his company said?
JT They say all the Lord’s people are holy. Moses on hearing this “fell on his face”, and “spoke to Korah and to all his band, saying. Even tomorrow will Jehovah make known who is his, and who is holy” (verse 5). That is a most comforting thought — what God will do “tomorrow” in such circumstances.
JTJr We get the position narrowed down to two — Moses and Aaron, do we not? — those who are holding the position for God?
JT Yes; of course they represent Christ as Apostle and High Priest, but still as men of God they hold the ground; they become most exemplary in the way [p. 150] they do it. Their service in preserving the assembly in its entirety at the end is striking, for the attack was immediately directed against them; they were the issue.
JTJr Do they not also represent the way the truth is held today down here? I thought the position was held by these two men in the camp itself.
JT Yes; it is a most stimulating account as to what two men can do, and I think it might be rightly linked on from that point of view with Matthew’s gospel, which tells us about two demoniacs who were so bad that nobody could pass that way — terrible opposition, but “two of you” is over against that — two of the assembly, and what is needed is done.
AP The opposition was in laying claim to the whole assembly in verse 3. “It is enough”, they said, “for all the assembly, all of them are holy” (verse 3).
JT Yes; the frequency of the word “assembly” throughout the chapter is remarkable. The tabernacle, of course, is typical of the saints, but the word “assembly” is very striking as seen throughout this chapter.
AFM Would not the thought of assembly and congregation compare with what we get in Exodus 12? I mean, “congregation” is the people as numbered, whereas “assembly” would be the spiritual setting of the congregation.
JT That is the meaning J.N.D. gives, and it seems to be borne out. The word “congregation” in Exodus 12 is a word usually having a concrete significance; that is, the actual persons; whereas the other is also persons, only having the force of a moral whole, a corporate person before God, not necessarily including all, but maintaining the thought of what God owns.
CAM As I understand it, the latter idea is what the gates of hell cannot prevail against.
JT Yes, as in remnant circumstances. “The virgin-daughter of Zion” despises the enemy, “the daughter of Jerusalem” shakes her head at him. It was the word in Hezekiah’s day in spite of the weakness (see Isaiah 37:22).
CAM As I understand, that is, in principle, what is emphasised in this chapter, as the thing to be maintained.
JT Quite so; then the tent of meeting (verse 42), more particularly referring to the divine dwelling, and where the saints met with God and one another; the cloud covers and guards that.
CAM The other dwellings — those of the rebels — have disappeared. They could not stand in the light of God.
JT That is solemn. God maintains His dwelling; in it is His testimony; He protects it with the cloud; God was, as it were, saying, I am taking over all this, whatever the opposition may be; and then the glory appears, which today would mean the manifest presence of God in the assembly convened, in connection with which such an attack takes place.
AFM The door of the tabernacle would be the meeting-place generally. When Jehovah comes down He appears at the door of the tabernacle.
JT Quite so; and so He continues to meet with Israel. He met Moses at the mercy-seat within, and the people outside. The tent of meeting had both in mind.
AR Would the last verse of the chapter confirm what you are saying, that Aaron goes between the dead and the living, and returns to Moses, who was at the entrance of the tent of meeting?
JT That is it. The position is maintained; that is a good reference.
JS The tent of meeting is really where God is, is it not?
JT We want to hold to that; to be in keeping with it. That is what the chapter would teach us, that we should hold things for God in [p. 152] a crisis.
AP It is said that Jehovah would make known who is His and who is holy (verse 5). Does that compare with Corinthians, where Paul speaks of the approved becoming “manifest among you”?
JT Yes. “There must also be sects among you, that the approved may become manifest among you” (1 Corinthians 11:19); so that “tomorrow” is a word to be noticed: “tomorrow will Jehovah make known who is his, and who is holy; and he will cause him to come near to him; and him whom he has chosen, him will he cause to come near to him” (verse 5). I think the idea of tomorrow is, you go through the night God gives time for reflection, and He works, too. We learn in the book of Job, that God speaks to man in the night, so that he might judge himself in the night; the next day brings out the result.
CAM Well, anyone that did not feel the intense solemnity of this pronouncement that the morrow would declare God’s mind would be very brazen.
JT I thought that; how would we go to bed? What anxiety would there be as the test is gone through over night. In chapter 17 we have the decision as to Aaron’s rod; it was laid up with the other rods over night. God gives decision in these matters, but He gives it in relation to our exercises.
JS So that the night season would be spent with God. Is that the thought?
JT The Lord Himself in a beautiful way says in Psalm 16:7, “Even in the nights my reins instruct me”, that is, the inward parts instruct you. Romans 7 is the antecedent to the reins; the Lord did not need Romans 7, of course, but our inward automatic organs need to be purified, as with the woman at Sychar’s well; so that the fountain of water might spring up in her. If I am to be tested by the night, I certainly ought to search myself in the evening, so that I am not governed by any [p. 153] bias or any personal feeling, or any natural influence, but that I am wholly transparent before God, and desire to be only for God and what is of God.
AFM So we have to maintain the last verse of Romans 7, as distinguishing between God’s law and sin’s law, by being on the side of the Spirit. That is the divine standard by which we should ever abide.
JT That is right; so you can see how the woman at Sychar’s well would act when she departed from the Lord after the conversation with Him. She left her water-pot, and as she got back to the city she knew what to do, for she was wholly free from natural influence. She went to the men and said, “Come, see a man who told me all things I had ever done” (John 4:29). Christ was forthwith the Man for her.
ABP The end of verse 3 of our chapter suggests that the rights of Jehovah were questioned. It says, “And why do ye lift up yourselves above the congregation of Jehovah?” They had not discerned that God had lifted up Moses and Aaron.
APT Would verse 11 supplement what our brother remarked? “For which cause thou and all thy band are banded together against Jehovah”. It was really against Jehovah. I suppose that was really the position; the opposition is always against the truth.
JT I am sure that is right. Moses and Aaron, as has been remarked, were Jehovah’s choice, and were taken up in a most remarkable way, according to divine wisdom. They represented God. It was said of Moses that he was to be God to Pharaoh, and Aaron was to be his prophet; so there was complete representation of God there.
CHH Does that not, in principle, correspond with Acts 4? They were gathered together against the Lord and against His Christ.
JT Well, there it is again. They were banded together, as the rebels [p. 154] here were.
AFM Do you think the thing we are speaking of is emphasised in verse 28: “And Moses said. Hereby shall ye know that Jehovah has sent me to do all these deeds, for they are not out of my own heart”?
JT He places himself there in the hands of Jehovah as to what he was to do in the way of judgment — a most solemn matter, for God will vindicate those who are right, in some way or another; not always in this signal way, but He will do it.
JTJr In a previous chapter the assembly carries out judgment, but in this chapter God does it directly. Will you say a word as to the difference?
JT That is, in the case of the man gathering sticks on the sabbath, which is like 1 Corinthians 5. It is a most remarkable contrast. These two chapters helped us greatly in a crisis about seventeen years ago. Numbers 15 corresponds with 1 Corinthians 5:13, where direction is given that a wicked person is to be “put away from among yourselves”, whereas chapter 16 is more 2 Timothy. Both chapters hold; they are Scripture, and are divine light for us. Only it is a question of comeliness now in having to separate from persons, not only individuals doing it, but the whole assembly doing it, and God deals with them. We do not put away or deliver them to Satan; we withdraw from them. God judges them, but in doing so He vindicates those that stand for the right; we may always expect Him to do this.
AFM The point in 2 Timothy is to get right oneself; it is an individual thing. I was thinking about authority as seen in Moses entering into all that he did in our chapter. Those who submitted to Moses bowed to the Lord’s authority. That was delegated to him, he did not need to make bold; he stood there with the conscious support of Jehovah.
JT Moses fell on his face; representing those who feel and acknowledge the current evil, but the others [p. 155] stood with no acknowledgment at all. That was the cause of the judgment being executed.
ANW Perhaps, then, there is a blending of 1 Corinthians 5, 2 Timothy 2, and Matthew 18, divine authority entering into all.
JT I think there is. We want to see that we are in remnant times, and that we cannot speak in the full way, as they could earlier, of the assembly doing things, because we do not have the assembly in that complete sense, and so should move in comeliness. I believe the Spirit of God has provided scriptures for us to help us to act in remnant times, in dealing with evil. We should rather avoid the use of the word “assembly”; it being perhaps a little pretentious to say. The assembly is doing this, or This is an assembly action. There is no such thing, properly, today, as an “assembly action”, because we have no assembly in that sense, but there is such a thing as an action that may be in principle the same thing, and God recognises it. We avoid the use of the word as the Scripture does; so in Matthew 18:19, the Lord says, “Again I say to you”. He had already spoken about the assembly and its authority, but now He says, “Again I say to you”, as if He is contemplating another, a remnant state of things; “If two of you shall agree on the earth concerning any matter, whatsoever it may be that they shall ask, it shall come to them from my Father who is in the heavens” (Matthew 18:19). Now that little word ‘you’ is intelligible to a spiritual person. He understands that the Lord is accrediting those two with being of the assembly, without mentioning it; and then again, “Where two or three are gathered together unto my name” (Matthew 18:20), that is a very unpretentious thing, but we must recognise the Name, the name of the Lord Jesus, or we are not Christians at all. There is no ecclesiastical assumption in that, but yet the Lord says, I am with you; I am there in the midst of them. The personal pronouns are most interesting, and so the power proper to the [p. 156] assembly is there. We can understand that the power is there and what is done is according to the assembly. Heaven understands it, but for the sake of seemliness and humility, we avoid official terms. We are not the assembly, but still the personal pronoun identifies us with it. It is a question of spiritual understanding and humility.
JS Is it the result of prayer?
JT I think so. It is very comely, and always right to ask God to act for us. No matter what is against those of the assembly, this united prayer will bring in deliverance.
CAM Asking seemed to bring in the very spirit here that was so wonderful.
JT I think it enters into Moses and Aaron falling on their faces. Then we come to 2 Timothy, where we have the firm foundation of God. There is no pretension in speaking of God’s foundation. It does not say. The firm foundation of the assembly. That is implied, but God brings in the moral thought. If we do not bring God in, we are not acting as Christians. “The firm foundation of God stands, having this seal,(2 Timothy 2:19)” it says; that is, the foundation has the seal, which is, “The Lord knows those that are his; and. Let every one who names the name of the Lord withdraw from iniquity”,(2 Timothy 2:19) which means that we are owned of the Lord as in remnant times.
AFM Would there be a distinction between Matthew and John? The local assembly in 1 Corinthians 5 was to remove the wicked person from amongst themselves. Those that did so would answer more to Matthew when the assembly was intact; the withdrawing of today would be more like John. We do not get official names in John’s gospel at all, but you have the thing itself.
JT That helps greatly. John’s gospel avoids anything that would give us official status, and yet it [p. 157] makes plain that the things are there. We know that all that enters into the assembly remains here, since the Spirit remains here.
AP In connection with the character of a meeting for discipline, would it be right to say at the beginning of the meeting, ‘We are together in assembly character’?
JT Yes; provided the announcement is thus carefully worded; so that people do not get the impression that we are the assembly or assume the position of being the assembly; and yet we may know that God is with us.
ANW What about the authority of Mark 13:34? That was vested in the bondmen; the Lord gave to the bondmen the authority.
JT I think that is a moral thought connected with the servant’s responsibility, as also the bondmen in the introduction to the book of Revelation. The book is on that level: “To shew to his bondmen” (Revelation 1:1). I think that may be rightly taken up. ‘Bondman’ is not an official word; it conveys a lowly thought. The principle of obedience is involved in it, which affords the qualification to have the authority. He gave them the authority; that is, the whole of it. The whole thought now is linked up with obedience — subjection to Christ.
CHH I thought the idea of authority also comes to light in 2 Timothy.
JT There is a mandate in the foundation in that epistle: “having this seal”, that is, the foundation has it. And the idea of the seal, I think, is mandatory. The Lord knows them that are His, but we admit that we are in remnant days, so that our responsibility is to withdraw from iniquity; then in regard to dishonourable persons, we are told how to purify ourselves from them, that is, by separating from them; then what we do positively is to pursue righteousness, that is the leader, and then faith, love, and peace with those that call upon the Lord out of a pure heart.
JEH How would you know the “two of you” that were of the assembly? What features would you look for in them to convince you that the Lord was with them?
JT In the gospels we see what marked the disciples, and how they stood out in the testimony in the beginning of the Acts. Such features are to be found among the people of God today. The one hundred and twenty of Acts 1:15 would be good models for us.
AR They would regard the authority and the priesthood of Christ?
CAM In connection with our brother’s inquiry as to how those of the assembly are known, what you said earlier should help; that the two in Matthew 18:19 were, as it were, set over against the two demoniacs of chapter 8:28, where we have a combination of what is against God.
JT Quite so. Matthew has in mind to furnish material for the assembly, in that sense; so that chapter 18 begins with a little child. The personnel of the assembly is set out in chapter 17. We have the foundation material in chapter 16, but the personnel of the assembly is set out in the heavenly scene on the mount, then later in chapter 17, sonship is attributed to the disciples. In chapter 18 they say, “Who then is greatest in the kingdom of the heavens?” (Matthew 18:1) They were saying this, which of course does not characterise those of the assembly. When it is a question of the assembly, the Lord calls a little child to Him; such a one would be amenable to the Lord’s call. And He “set it in their midst” (Matthew 18:2). That is important; indeed, I think, the whole chapter is to bring out what the child represents — what “two of you” are characteristically.
CAM It would seem that as soon as the Lord has brought into view these glorious things, Satan makes an effort to spoil it: he does it in chapter 16 [p. 159] and at the end of chapter 17. The Lord had just spoken about the liberty of sonship, when Satan makes an effort to foster rivalry.
JT That is right; the dignity of sons, I think, is seen on the mount in chapter 17; the relation of sonship, when they come down from the mount. The sons are free, the Lord says: we are in liberty inwardly, as before God, but then how do I deport myself among the brethren? The Lord takes the little child and sets him among the disciples. He is there for everyone to see. The Lord says, “Unless ye are converted and become as little children, ye will not at all enter into the kingdom of the heavens” (Matthew 18:3). We learn thus something of the meaning of “two of you”. The greater I am inwardly according to chapter 17, the smaller I can be outwardly.
TEH Would this connect with the beginning of Matthew’s gospel: Joseph was commanded to take the little Child and its mother? Should that mark the period we are in?
JT Quite so.
APT In Acts 3, you have Peter and John going up to the temple to pray.
JT They certainly represent “two of you”; perhaps in a greater sense than that of which we are speaking, because they were apostles, but they call attention to “us”; Peter said, “Look on us”, doubtless because of what they were.
AP I was wondering, since Paul brought out the truth of the assembly, whether Timothy and Titus might not represent “two of you” in a day like ours; for instance, he could speak of Timothy as being “like-minded”, as caring for the saints, and Titus brought an encouraging report about the Corinthian saints.
JT I think the comparison and use of the numerals two and three in the Scriptures are most interesting. The Lord brings the number down to two, and John brings it down to one. John shows how one person [p. 160] qualified becomes an abiding place for divine Persons; two is Matthew’s number; his instruction shows the workableness of the Lord’s thought even with two or three.
JS We see how heaven would act for the two: “It shall come to them from my Father who is in the heavens”, (Matthew 18:19).
JT It comes by something happening in the locality, in response to the prayers of those taking account of things; feeling as to them, and waiting upon God about a low state among the saints. God has His way of coming in, and He will give such to understand that in coming in He is answering their prayers. I am sure you and I have seen that in this city, how God comes in at a difficult time, and gives us to understand that He has heard us.
JEH It proves that the heavens do rule.
ABP I was wondering why you emphasised the thought of calling the little child.
JT I thought of it as indicative of the humble state of one as available for the Lord, who knew him beforehand. Of course. He knows all about each of us. I believe in the history of the testimony that is to be seen over and over again. The most unlikely person is called and set down, as it were, in the midst of the brethren at a juncture.
APM What have you to say about the climax here? We have already referred to it in part, that Aaron stood between the dead and the living, and the plague was stayed; then after enumerating the dead, it goes on to say that Aaron returned to Moses to the entrance of the tent of meeting, and the plague was stayed.
JT You have these two representative men together at the entrance of the place of meeting. I think it is most suggestive that the end reached in al this is that the service of God goes on. The tabernacle of God is secured. God’s wrath is appeased through the [p. 161] atonement, and now Moses and Aaron are at the tent of meeting, which means that the service is to go on. The brethren, too, can meet together.
JTJr It says that Aaron took the censer and ran; the thing is done quickly. Do you think that feature comes out in Mark’s gospel? Mark tells us that things are done immediately?
JT Yes. Haste is certainly important in these circumstances; we are not to delay, because the matter is most urgent. It is very remarkable that the running is by Aaron; no doubt to bring out the sympathy side on the part of the man who serves, because you cannot afford to lose a brother or a sister. The plague had started; people may be floundering about and hiding behind their ignorance, and thus be lost in darkness, but the true priest would do what he could to save all. It is solemn because the judicial acts of God enter into all this.
AFM You make reference to darkness, what is in your mind?
JT People by disregarding right principles through bias on account of persons they like or dislike may thus become dark, ceasing to have part in what is living. It says that Aaron stood between the dead and living and the plague was stayed, although fourteen thousand seven hundred were lost. I think it is to be solemnly noted that there were so many lost, in spite of the efforts to save all.
AP If Aaron had not run, there might have been three or four times as many die of the plague.
JT Yes, and we ought to be on our guard in such circumstances to see all things clearly because they may be thus seen. Righteousness is our leader, and where it exists it may always be seen — thus to fail to see it is either negligence or wilfulness on our part.
AFM When things are plain, above-board, and clear, why do I not [p. 162] see?
JT Quite so; others see it, why cannot I? God may allow darkness, or even send it, because of a previous course. Here in spite of all the efforts put forth, and it is most remarkable the way Moses and Aaron acted in this terrible crisis, there were fourteen thousand lost.
TW Why is it that the whole assembly said of Moses and Aaron, “Ye have killed the people of Jehovah” (verse 41)?
JT It illustrates how quick we are to blame unfairly those who have to exercise discipline. ‘You have been too severe’, people say; whereas what was done was right, and I ought to know it.
APT In Galatians 2 in connection with the matter of circumcision it says Peter separated himself; he knew the truth, but acted contrary to it. There was no excuse for him in what he did.
JT Exactly, and Barnabas was carried away too.
Rem When Paul would correct such conduct, he says, “So I have become your enemy in speaking the truth to you?”. (Galatians 4:16). I suppose Moses and Aaron were really regarded as enemies of the people because of what took place here.
JT When in truth they were serving the testimony and the people with might and main. It is very beautiful to see how they fell on their faces, and how Aaron ran to save the people, and stayed the plague.
JS His haste was to bring in that which spoke of the fragrance of Christ, on account of which the plague was stayed. I suppose we help one another by bringing Christ in.
JT We have “atonement” here, through the holy fragrance thus brought out, which speaks of Christ as entering into death to appease God, as dealing with a condition utterly intolerable to Him. The incense on the fire from off the altar placed in the censer denoted this. All is fragrant, so the plague is stayed; God was appeased in that most significant [p. 163] way.
WB-w At Galatia, there was another plague introduced by the judaisers. Paul said, “Far be it from me to boast save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ”, (Galatians 6:14). Paul uses the censer with incense on the fire there.
JT I think so. You feel how Christ seen thus is needed under these circumstances when there is a bad odour. The fleshly feelings of the people in Numbers 16 prevailed; evil personal feelings arose; there must have been awful feelings among the people in this uprising. There were probably two millions there. What bitter remarks would be heard as one went around the tents! ‘Think of what Moses has done! He slew all these people. I knew many of them, they were godly men’, and so on. Of course, they were princes whom Moses used to summon to the council, but what were they doing when the judgment fell? They were banded together against God, against His servants and the testimony. The incense that Aaron brought in among the people was fragrant. This overcame the noisome odour that had permeated the camp, and God was appeased; thus Israel could go on, having God with them, and the plague was stayed.
APT Moses could not prevent the ground from opening its mouth; he was unable to do anything there. That judgment was determined of God, and it must go through; Moses could but acquiesce in what Jehovah did.
JT Quite; that is the thought; although some blamed Moses and Aaron for it.
APT The judgment determined was executed by God, but there was help for those who murmured.
JT Yes; “The whole assembly of the children of Israel murmured on the morrow against Moses and against Aaron, saying. Ye have killed the people of Jehovah” (verse 41). They would make them guilty of murder, charging them with killing the people of Jehovah. How extremely unfair! It was God who did it.
[p. 164] But I think, over against this, it is beautiful to see how Aaron and Moses meet the situation; the result is that the plague was stayed and the people saved; and they are at their appointed places at the tent of meeting, so that the service of God continues.
ANW Jehovah’s presence was manifestly there.
AR The authority of Christ would be seen in Moses remaining before the tent of meeting, and in Aaron returning to it; hence the priesthood is also preserved and active.
JT Quite so; nothing is lost in that sense.
JS The confirmation of what is right, I suppose, is in seeing where the glory rests, in any of these issues. It says in verse 42 that “they looked toward the tent of meeting, and behold, the cloud covered it, and the glory of Jehovah appeared”.
JT I think that is a very beautiful picture; Jehovah covers the tabernacle, as much as to say. This is mine. “Make me a sanctuary” (Exodus 25:8). He had said, and then His glory appears there, too. Who can dispute that He is there?
CAM I think that if every one of us would keep our eye on the presence of God, we would be helped, and be preserved from distraction. We must recognise His presence.
AFM What would you say about the choice of Aaron’s staff, as coming in on the principle of life out of death?
JT There we have another night of exercise; the priesthood is now set up in a living way. Who could dispute Aaron’s priesthood after this? Truly, that is the test today; where life is, that is where priesthood is!
AR In the cloud covering the tabernacle, does that infer that God will protect the position?
JT I think so. He takes on the securing of it. The glory appearing is a witness of His presence, as supporting those who are standing by His rights.