THE AUTHORITY OF CHRIST IN THE ASSEMBLY (3)
[p. 185] THE AUTHORITY OF CHRIST IN THE ASSEMBLY (3)
Numbers 8:5 - 26; Deuteronomy 33:8 - 11
JT The passage read in Numbers 3 at our last reading shows how the Levites, as qualified according to what we have in Exodus, are taken on by Jehovah. It says in Numbers 3, “Bring the tribe of Levi near, and present them before Aaron the priest, that they may minister unto him; and they shall keep his charge, and the charge of the whole assembly, before the tent of meeting, to do the service of the tabernacle. And they shall keep all the utensils of the tent of meeting, and the charge of the children of Israel, to do the service of the tabernacle. And thou shalt give the Levites to Aaron and to his sons: they are wholly given to him out of the children of Israel. And Aaron and his sons shalt thou appoint that they may attend to their priest’s office; and the stranger that cometh near shall be put to death” (Numbers 3:5 - 10), And then it goes on to say, “I have taken the Levites from among the children of Israel instead of every firstborn” (Numbers 3:12). And then again, “and the Levites shall be mine”; and again, “On the day that I smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, I hallowed unto me all the firstborn in Israel, both of man and beast; mine shall they be: I am Jehovah” (Numbers 3:12,13). And then they are numbered and their names are given.
It will be observed that there were three families of the sons of Levi: the Kohathites, the Gershonites, and the Merarites. The remaining part of chapters 3 and 4 is taken up with their services; they were to be subservient to the priests; that is, those of us who serve, and of course, all the saints are serving. It says, “To each one of us has been given grace according to the measure of the gift of the Christ” (Ephesians 4:7), this having our service in view. But we are subservient to [p. 186] the priests. The anointing is of the priesthood, and the Levites are united to Aaron, so that they come in subordinately; there is thus to be no independency in our service. Paul, the most exalted servant, viewed in this light, is the servant of the saints, as he said, “ourselves your bondmen for Jesus’ sake” (2 Corinthians 4:5). The directions given keep those who serve in their proper relations; then in the services appointed in chapter 4 Kohath is put before Gershon, showing that the sovereignty of God enters into this matter of service; whether our service be small or great, it is a question of God’s sovereignty, but on the moral line, all being based on qualification; it means that we have qualified in coming to the Lord at the gate of the camp, with our weapons of war. And then the service is being effected as in chapters 3 and 4.
The three chapters intervening between 4 and 8, namely, chapters 5, 6, and 7, have to do with conditions amongst the saints, so as to make way for the service of the Levites. Hence all impurities in the camp are dealt with, and all lepers are put out, all trespasses must be dealt with, also all unfaithfulness to Christ, as in the woman whose husband becomes jealous of her. All that is seen in chapter 5. The nazarite’s vow comes in in chapter 6, which is another side of the position, suggesting entire devotedness to the testimony; then comes the unity of the tribes in their substantial giving, included in which is the provision for the Levites: all this is to have its fixed place in our minds. We are thus prepared for being presented to God, as in the chapter we read. It is said the Levites were to be offered up. “Aaron shall offer the Levites as a wave offering before Jehovah” (chapter 8:11). Prior to this, they were to be cleansed as has been noticed. “Take the Levites from among the children of Israel, and cleanse them. And thus shalt thou do unto them, to cleanse them: sprinkle upon them water of purification from sin; and they shall pass the razor over all their [p. 187] flesh, and shall wash their garments, and make themselves clean” (verses 6,7). So that now we are set before Jehovah, and offered as a wave-offering, but as cleansed; not washed exactly, but sprinkled for public service. Moses is to do that, and they were to shave themselves all over, meaning that in our external appearance, what we are in life, everything is to be purified; whether it be ourselves, our business, all is to be purified.
CAM This matter of purification is stressed in 2 Corinthians 7; we are to purify ourselves from every pollution of flesh and spirit. The matter of jealousy you referred to, in the intervening chapters, seems to have been met at Corinth in the first epistle, so that levitical service can be stressed in the second.
JT I think that is good. The apostle is relieved in the second letter, so that he is freer; his mouth is open to them. So long as the conditions at Corinth were as before Paul wrote his first letter, there was but little room for the exercise of ministerial service. What helps in chapter 5 of Numbers is that in the camp of God — as we might say, in the assembly — nothing is to be left unsettled. It says first, the lepers and other unclean persons are to be put out; and then it says, “And Jehovah spoke to Moses, saying. Speak unto the children of Israel, When a man or woman shall commit any of all the sins of man to work unfaithfulness against Jehovah, and that soul is guilty, then they shall confess their sin which they have done; and he shall recompense his trespass according to the principal thereof, and shall add unto it the fifth part thereof, and give it unto him against whom he hath trespassed” (Numbers 5:5 - 7). This is a very practical direction. In leprosy, of course, it is a pronounced thing that you can take account of easily, but there are those who can take account of gross things, but cannot detect sins that are directly against God, and His commandments; or it may be a trespass against another. These are apt to be minimised or made nothing of; that is [p. 188] to say, there are those of us who can take account of things that happen which even natural conscience can take account of, but the passage speaks of “any of all the sins of man”: “When a man or woman shall commit any of all the sins of man to work unfaithfulness against Jehovah” (Numbers 5:6). It may be primarily against a brother, but it is really against Jehovah, and it cannot be left because such are guilty. They shall confess.
AP Would you think that Matthew 18:15, “If thy brother sin against thee”, would come in under this heading?
JT Yes. Of course it would be a big list to go over “all the sins of man”, as seen here. Man has learned to sin since Adam’s time. Some people say, ‘The thing was not so bad’; but Adam’s was not so bad from that point of view, he only took some fruit, but it was “against Jehovah” directly. Shimei in Solomon’s time was told to build a house in Jerusalem and stay there, under penalty of death were he to go outside Jerusalem. But two of his servants ran away to Gath, and Shimei went and brought his servants from Gath. People might say, ‘Why should Shimei not go after his servants, they were his property?’ But he forfeited his life through doing so. The idea is of man disregarding the command of God, whether it be a small sin or a great sin. It is an act of will; so here it is, “any of all the sins of man ... against Jehovah” (Numbers 5:6). Man has acquired a great ability to sin, from Adam down to the present time. I believe they are learning to commit new sins all the time, but all sins will be taken account of, and we must not say of any that it is not much. The sinner has to judge it, whatever it is. He is to confess and add the fifth part thereof, too.
JTJr Confession mainly settles the matter, does it not?
JT The fifth part is required too. He “shall add unto it the fifth part thereof, and give it unto him against whom he hath trespassed. And if the man have [p. 189] no kinsman to recompense the trespass unto, the trespass which is recompensed to Jehovah shall be the priest’s” (Numbers 5:8). So that the priesthood and the saints are enriched by this fifth part. We are richer brothers and sisters afterwards than we were before the thing happened.
JTJr Does the fifth part indicate that the confession was not merely an acknowledgment, but that a spiritual process has been gone through in the soul and the exercise which enables the person to bring in something that is profitable for the saints?
JT Yes, it is given to the priest. In result, it makes us all richer.
ABP Why is it a fifth part?
JT Well, I suppose it is not so much as you might add if you were a spiritual man. It seems to be a light tax. Zacchaeus said he restored fourfold, and the Lord immediately said, “He also is a son of Abraham” (Luke 19:9). He was very liberal in what he did and the Lord honours that.
ABP I wondered whether the fifth part might also indicate the recognition of our weakness.
JT It is a reasonable demand, and the addition shows that you really judge the trespass. It does not say. If you are able to do it. The idea, I think, is that you are able. Wealth is assumed.
AFM And then verse 7 shows that you give the fifth part to the brother against whom you have trespassed. There is a personal transaction between them. Sometimes we are slow in that; we confess, but do not measure up to the requirement of the fifth part.
JT I think when a tax like this is imposed, it is understood that you can pay it. God is crediting you with that, and I am sure if you face the thing, you find that you have ability to pay. The very facing of it makes you rich enough. If you are an honest man you want to make reparation, so there is no shade of doubt now about the trespass being fully recompensed.
[p. 190] APT Is Psalm 51 like the fifth part? David goes over the ground fully, so that he really judges the sin, and says, “Behold, thou wilt have truth in the inward parts” (Psalm 51:6), showing what God would get from the burnt-offering.
JEH Is not sinning against a brother also trespassing against the Lord? If one were helped to look at the matter from that standpoint it would not be so hard to make confession to the brother. In Psalm 51:4, just referred to, David says, “Against thee, thee only, have I sinned”. As a matter of fact, it was against a brother, but the sense came into his soul that it was against the Lord.
JT The psalm is certainly an evidence of genuineness in the man, of how thoroughly he dealt with the sin. He was quick to note it from Nathan’s parable, and to say what should be done to the “rich man”; and Nathan says to David, “Thou art the man!” (2 Samuel 12:7). He does not at all excuse himself, but says, “I have sinned against Jehovah” (2 Samuel 12:13).
CAM As to Numbers 5, do you not think it results in comfort to the man who trespassed, when the fifth part is added to the principal? Also there is really gain to the priestly element amongst the saints?
JT That is the thing to be noted; we are not impoverished by trespasses of this kind. There is sorrow connected with them, but through reparation being made the saints are enriched. I believe the assembly was enriched by the outcome of Peter’s guilt. He went out and wept bitterly, we are told; then the Lord, as risen, appeared to him. The saints were enriched, when as gathered they were speaking about this very thing; saying, “The Lord is indeed risen and has appeared to Simon” (Luke 24:34). They were enriched in the sense of grace.
AP The spoil which emanated from David’s exercises at Ziklag, he sent round to the elders of Judah. Is that not [p. 191] right?
JT Quite so. There had been failure there too with David. Then we have the secret of unfaithfulness typified in the woman whose husband became jealous of her. That is the next thing in Numbers 5: she is made to feel the thing inwardly in drinking the water, corresponding to what happened at Horeb. She has to drink what is called “holy water”; perhaps, the only place in Scripture where you get that term. It is a very remarkable thing that the system that speaks much of holy water is the very system that is in mind in this type as being unfaithful. This water is mixed with the dust that is on the floor of the tabernacle, and it brings to light whether she is guilty or not. There is in the tabernacle, in the presence of God, the means of disclosing secret unfaithfulness to Christ. And that being dealt with, we have the Nazarite, a man devoted to God; he is in renunciation of all natural rights, which is a most essential thing in service to God. He thus ensures the continuance of the testimony, which goes on to the end. Then we have the riches seen in the offering of the princes in chapter 7.
AFM Does not the end of chapter 6 morally follow chapter 5, where, referring to the law of jealousy, the woman, if proven to be immune from guilt, bears fruit, which takes form in nazariteship? The chapters evidently connect.
JT I am sure they do; the blessing is secured through the Nazarite in chapter 6: “Speak unto Aaron and unto his sons, saying. On this wise ye shall bless the children of Israel: saying unto them, Jehovah bless thee, and keep thee; Jehovah make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee; Jehovah lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace. And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel; and I will bless them” (Numbers 6:23 - 27). The nazariteship of Christ thus secures a wonderful result.
ABP Does Paul confirm this in 1 Corinthians 6:12 “[p. 192] All things are lawful to me, but all things do not profit;
all things are lawful to me, but I will not be brought under the power of any”?
JT That is the idea. You renounce your natural rights, and as chapter 5 is gone through, spiritual riches will ensue. Under these circumstances, recovery to faithfulness being restored, we have conditions of great wealth; this is seen in these spiritual men, who are heads of the tribes, and shows that they are united. It is very practical, underlying the unity of the Levites. The service of these princes is spread out. Twelve days are given to the service, and each of these men stood up for a whole day offering these rich things to Jehovah. The scene typifies a great product of the work of God among the saints resulting in wealthy men. Their wealth is not making them independent or rivals of each other, but uniting them, and all culminating in Jehovah speaking to Moses from off the mercy-seat. And then the Levites, coming through in that way, are presented to God, being offered as a wave-offering (chapter 8:11); that is, they are constantly before His eye as pleasing to Him even as Christ was on the banks of the Jordan.
JTJr Does David exemplify what is seen in chapter 7, in that he failed, yet at the end of his life he offers great wealth?
JT Yes; although 1 Chronicles does not give his great failure as to Uriah, it does give his failure in numbering the people; there was no doubt pride of heart in doing this; he thereby dropped to the level of worldly kings around him and would be inflated as well by the large number of people under him. That was a grave failure on his part, and God so regarded it; but David judged it thoroughly, and was accepted of God, as we learn in chapter 21 of that book. Then in chapter 22 you have a disclosure of the most remarkable wealth, seen in David’s ability to provide one hundred thousand talents [p. 193] of gold.
CAM The priesthood in Chronicles is a testimony to this spiritual wealth.
JT Yes; your soul is moved as you go through chapters 21 to 29: the wealth of David and the wealth of the princes. That is what we may see here also; that is, as we judge sin really, bringing God into it, and offer our fifth part, the saints are enriched. And then the bearing of seed, as the woman is cleared, as has been remarked, and then the Nazarite, and the blessing, and then these twelve princes with their wealth. I do not think we should hesitate in facing all the sorrowful matters that come up constantly among us, if the thought of God is that there should be the accruement of wealth, and that it should promote unity and richness in the house of God.
AFM Then the thought of Moses going in to God at the end of chapter 7, when God, so to speak, anticipated him by speaking first, and then Moses speaking; would that be the order of events, that being so wealthy we are enabled to approach God according to His own greatness and dignity?
JT Yes; we get communications. It says, “And when Moses went into the tent of meeting to speak with Him, then he heard the voice speaking to him from off the mercy-seat which was upon the ark of testimony, from between the two cherubim; and he spoke to Him” (Numbers 7:89).
ABP There is such a thing as wealth that divides. I was thinking of Lot and Abram.
JT That is a humbling suggestion. They were sundered by their great property; the same thing appears with the two-and-a-half tribes; their wealth held them back on the east side of Jordan; but here their wealth is utilised in unity toward God, for the enrichment of His house.
AP Is it because they were prepared to hold their wealth in relation to [p. 194] the altar?
JT Quite so; it was “the dedication-gift of the altar” (Numbers 7:88).
RWS Barnabas was a Levite who sold his land and brought the money and laid it at the feet of the apostles.
JT Barnabas is a good illustration of a prince. The Spirit of God gives him that place, I think.
AR These princes come forward after the tabernacle is set up. Why is that?
JT You can understand that it has in view the recognition of the tabernacle. It says, “And it came to pass on the day that Moses had completed the setting up of the tabernacle, and had anointed it, and hallowed it, and all the furniture thereof, and the altar and its utensils, and had anointed them, and hallowed them ...” (Numbers 7:1). Now, if you connect that verse with the end of Exodus, you see that it synchronises with the glory coming in. It was when Moses had done everything and each part was in its place, and functioning, that God would say, ‘I will take all that over’, and He comes in in the cloud and fills it with the glory. You can see what a scene it was as the tabernacle is filled with the glory, and covered with the cloud — how God was pleased with all this spontaneous giving. One would connect it with the assembly, where each of us in his place is functioning. There is no need for Moses to serve; for all are subject. God is saying, ‘This is pleasing to Me’; and He appropriates it. What follows is this spontaneous giving by the princes, during the twelve days; then God says, ‘I will speak to you now’. I think all this is very great and blessed.
You will notice in the beginning of chapter 8, Jehovah says, “Speak unto Aaron, and say unto him, When thou lightest the lamps, the seven lamps shall give light over against the candlestick. And Aaron did so; he lighted the lamps thereof over against the candlestick, as Jehovah had commanded Moses. And this was the work of the candlestick: it was of beaten gold; from its base [p. 195] to its flowers was it beaten work; according to the form which Jehovah had shewn Moses, so had he made the candlestick” (Numbers 8:2 - 4). In these opening verses you have the light of the seven lamps being caused to ascend, so that the quality and beauty of what bears it is displayed; hence the whole scene is typically wonderful.
GMacP Is the unity of the Spirit worked out amongst us in the light of chapter 7?
JT Where there is spiritual wealth amongst us, it promotes unity.
FNW What is the difference between what the twelve princes contributed here and what the people generally contributed in view of constructing the tabernacle itself?
JT This is additional. There was no demand upon the princes. The material for the tabernacle was asked for, as you will remember, in Exodus 25; then in Exodus 34 and 35, where the law is given a second time, and Moses came down with his face shining, in principle with the new covenant, Moses again puts it on the responsibility of the people that they bring the material for the tabernacle, and it says they departed from before Moses and brought it; meaning, I think, what Paul had in mind in telling the Corinthians to put by for the poor saints on the first day of the week at home, that there might be no collections when he came. That is, he wished their giving to be the outcome of love operating in their own hearts, and it is again referred to after the new covenant ministry was introduced in the second epistle.
The people departed from Moses, each man to his tent, as you might say, in Exodus 35, and brought the things required in great abundance. I think the idea is to show that under these conditions demanding was not necessary. The people would go to their tents and say, ‘I will give this much’, and they gave remarkably well; in fact, Moses had to restrain them from bringing;
[p. 196] it was too much! There was nothing of that character here. The twelve princes are not asked to bring anything. The giving was out of spontaneity — they gave of their spiritual wealth; and how pleasing it was to God!
WGT Would the “beaten gold” suggest exercise?
JT Quite so, it refers to discipline.
AR Does the tabernacle represent a system of love, and the princes in correspondence with that? Their movements were permeated with love.
JT That is right. There were the evidences of it there; anyone that looked at the tabernacle would see that it was a product of love.
NP Will you tell us why they all gave the same things, and in the same quantity and quality?
JT I think it is to emphasise the perfection and the unity. Philippians 2:1,2 says, “If then there be any comfort in Christ, if any consolation of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and compassions, fulfil my joy, that ye may think the same thing, having the same love, joined in soul, thinking one thing”. I think we have a remarkable expression of unity illustrated in the offerings of Numbers 7.
ANW I was thinking of the Spirit’s care in giving through Moses seventy-nine verses; writing the details of what the princes offered twelve times.
JT I have often thought of it; each prince having his day for twelve days. Each of these men is thinking the same thing: it is Christ filling their hearts. They are not in rivalry with one another; they are not devouring one another; they are living on Christ!
AR I was wondering whether the spirit at Antioch was characterised by the features that we have been speaking of. It says, in Acts 11, they were first called Christians in Antioch; then later, “As they were ministering to the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, Separate me now Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them” (Acts 13:2). The true levites came to light under these [p. 197] circumstances.
JT That is right. We may regard that as the antitype of this, we are given there the names of five persons who were ministering to the Lord and fasting. That is, they were denying themselves. What good times they must have had at Antioch! Upon that the Spirit says, “Separate me now Barnabas and Saul” (Acts 13:2), showing He had entire confidence in them.
ABP The very word “separate” seems to emphasise the unity.
JT Just so; He contemplates, I think, that there is no rivalry, or disposition to get rid of any of the brethren. They were not an obstacle there. The brethren were reluctant to let them go on their anticipated work.
AFM Chapter 8 goes on to speak of the Levites being offered as a wave-offering before Jehovah; is that a result of what the Levites have passed through experimentally? They are now a wave-offering to Jehovah, in view of His service.
JT That is the next thing as showing how we are viewed as in service. It is a subordinating thing, something that subordinates me to others, but God is pleased with me there. I believe that Christ Himself sets out the great levitical thought in that sense. He came up out of the Jordan as about to enter upon His service, and heaven’s voice says, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight” (Matthew 3:17). His service was in view.
GMacP Is that how we understand the wave-offering as linked up with the oblation and the meat-offering as seen in Him?
JT Yes; the wave-offering and the heave-offering suggest spontaneity. The wave-offering gives evidence of what God specially likes. What is waved before one attracts the eye. The wave-sheaf (Leviticus 23:11), is Christ in resurrection occupying God’s heart. Here the Levites are offered by Aaron as a wave-offering.
JHE Would the day of Pentecost answer to [p. 198] that?
JT The two wave-loaves are typical of the saints — what came out of their houses. The point is what comes out of our houses, and whether what happens in secret in our houses is pleasing to God; does He delight in it?
WGT Would what Paul presented at Corinth be the wave-offering — Jesus Christ, and Him crucified?
JT Quite so. That is what he presented; the wave-offering is of course presented to God, and as presenting Christ to the Corinthians, he would present Him to God also as speaking to Him.
JTJr Is the thought that we must be acceptable to God before we can minister?
JT That is the idea; you cannot be effective among the brethren unless you first are pleasing to God. I believe that is what was seen at the Lord’s baptism, as coming up from the water when the Father’s voice is heard, for Christ was infinitely pleasing to Him. The Father speaks of the Lord in Matthew, and to Him in Mark and Luke. In Matthew it is, “This is my beloved Son” (Matthew 3:17). In Mark and Luke it is, “Thou art my beloved Son” (Mark 1:11 and Luke 3:22). The first, what others should know. The second and third, what is between the two Persons.
AFM Does the idea of God’s committal to Christ enter into His baptism? The Spirit came down upon Him in bodily form as a dove. Then in regard to ourselves, I suppose, God commits Himself to us in view of our service; in both cases the end in view is fruitfulness to God.
APT The Lord says of Paul, “Behold, he is praying” (Acts 9:11).
JT In that Paul corresponded to Christ, who was praying when the heavens were opened upon Him.
JTJr The word, “in thee I have found my delight” (Mark 1:11 and Luke 3:22), being directed to the Lord Himself in Mark and Luke, would correspond with the Nazarite, as seen in Numbers 6. It is what God found in Christ as measuring up to His own thought of [p. 199] service.
NMacC Does it always follow that because your service is acceptable to God it will be acceptable to your brethren?
JT That is the order normally. If in ministering to the Lord we are fasting, we show we are self-denying; that is what went on at Antioch, and the Spirit said, “Separate me now Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them. Then, having fasted and prayed, and having laid their hands on them, they let them go” (Acts 13:2,3). It was the Spirit’s mind and they let them go. It is a striking example of the working out of levitical principles.
WB-w It says in Numbers 8, “And thus shalt thou do unto them, to cleanse them: sprinkle upon them water of purification from sin; and they shall pass the razor over all their flesh, and shall wash their garments, and make themselves clean” (verse 7). How does that process work out now?
JT It seems to be the service of Christ. Moses was to perform this first part — it is like, “sprinkled as to our hearts from a wicked conscience” (Hebrews 10:22). But then they were to shave themselves and wash themselves. The sprinkling is from the divine side. The Lord says, “He that is washed all over needs not to wash save his feet, but is wholly clean” (John 13:10). I think it honours the Levites. It was not a bath that they needed, it was just sprinkling, as a matter of testimony; that must be understood at this juncture. I am now brought near to serve; and hence I am sprinkled, but I must also shave all my flesh and wash my garments. I must see now to all matters in which my life is manifest. It is manifested in my house, in my business, and among my brethren; it is a great general thought. The flesh, the natural growth, is there, and I have to watch it. It is that in which my life is manifested as a Christian. I cannot say it is a question only of myself and my house; I must include my business. It is a matter of where my life is manifest; I think that is what is meant, and all [p. 200] that is to come under the work of the razor. That is the idea, I think. Then there is the washing of the garments. Some of us recently were speaking about Peter’s boat, of how the Lord went into it, but Peter was washing his nets; that would allude to his business affairs.
WGT The apostle says he was conscious of nothing in himself, but he was not justified in this. Is it the thought, that he would continue washing?
JT Just so; you cannot be sure that everything with you is right, so that there is need of constant exercise.
AR After that they were to bring the Levites before the tent of meeting and before the people, who were to lay their hands upon them.
JT Yes; it goes on to say, “And they shall take a young bullock and its oblation of fine flour mingled with oil; and another young bullock shalt thou take for a sin-offering” (verse 8); the burnt-offering would be what was pleasing to God, that which goes up to God; but there was also the sin-offering. There is no peace-offering here. It was not a matter of coming together for mutual spiritual enjoyment, but of service. A meeting like this would be in line with the peace-offering as offered and eaten, where the Lord has part, but verse 8 is not that. It is a question of service; so that these two offerings are in view. They are peculiar offerings, and then the oblation with the burnt-offering. “And thou shalt bring the Levites before the tent of meeting; and thou shalt gather together the whole assembly of the children of Israel. And thou shalt bring the Levites before Jehovah; and the children of Israel shall put their hands upon the Levites. And Aaron shall offer the Levites as a wave-offering before Jehovah from the children of Israel, and they shall perform the service of Jehovah” (verses 9 - 11). So that it is “the whole assembly”; the saints are all identified [p. 201] in this.
APT I am not quite clear as to this service of Jehovah. It is entirely manward?
JT Not necessarily. They were finally set around the tabernacle, and were amenable to the priest at all times. They were also to carry the tabernacle. Their attitude was “ourselves your bondmen for Jesus’ sake” (2 Corinthians 4:5). It is not enough merely to say, I am a servant of the Lord. I may be, of course, but I am a servant of the saints, and hence I must be always ready to serve them.
RWS There were over twenty thousand of them. Is not that a relatively small number? I was wondering how it would work out; whether it would imply that there is not much for us to do, if each one did his own work, or whether the converse would apply today — more work to do than there are levites to serve.
JT Well, I think the latter is quite obvious. There is more work to do than is done. The number of Levites actually in service was eight thousand five hundred and eighty (chapter 4:48). This number would be increased as the entry age was reduced to twenty-five (chapter 8:24). They were evidently sufficient for the service. There were enough; there were three families of them, and each had its own work to do, and there is no evidence that the work was not done. They were appointed to carry the holy things, and then the curtains and the boards. There was no suggestion that there were not enough of them, but is it so today? Are the holy things, the things in relation to the Deity, and the most sacred and precious things looked after? And the utensils of the holy place, the curtains, the boards, bars, pillars, pegs, and cords — are these things all looked after? The precious things of the Deity, are we concerned enough about them? Zacchaeus would be a man like that. He wanted to see who Jesus was. He would be a Kohathite, I am sure. And then the brethren who are looking after the principles, the Gershonites, carried the curtains and so on. We must see to the principles [p. 202] in everything that we do, the principles that govern what we do; and then finally the persons — the boards — particularly the boards, bars, and pillars. Who is looking after those? This was the work of the Merarites. So we have to make a comparison in this way. In the primary thought of God there were enough. It was strenuous labour, but there is no suggestion that there were not enough to do it, but our concern should be, is it being done now?
JEH Would you bring principles in in relation to the pegs?
JT The principles would be the curtains, things that stretch out and cover the whole position, that which properly makes up the tabernacle.
AR Do you think we are apt to reverse the order? The Kohathites rightly come first. They were always thinking of the holy things. I was wondering whether we are not thinking of people more. We have a great number of brothers who can preach the gospel, but very few possibly who could give an address upon the Person of Christ.
JT I am sure that is a very important suggestion. Can I give an address on the Person of Christ? And why not, if I know Him and love Him?
CAM Do you not think, in that connection, it is marvellous how the Lord has the personnel of all the local companies of His people under His own hand?
JT Yes. Every meeting of the saints requires these three services. The first thing is to keep God before the saints, God in the three Persons, and I believe Zacchaeus, as I was saying, is typical of that. “He sought to see Jesus who he was” (Luke 19:3), and he saw Him. The Lord had challenged the disciples as to who He was. He had asked them what men were saying about Him, and what they were saying. That enters into the service of the Kohathites. But then there are the principles that govern our position. The Gershonites see to the principles. The Merarites look after the [p. 203] people, for you must have the people to sustain the principles; that is, the boards were to sustain the curtains.
ABP In that connection, the service of the Samaritan in Luke 10 seems to be distinctly the care of the person, but in doing so, there was a principle asserted — that of the neighbour.
JT Quite so. Those that were neighbours to him literally did no good to him; they passed by on the other side; so the Samaritan became the true Merarite and also the Gershonite.
AFM You are speaking about the disparity between the number of Levites and the people generally. I was wondering whether you could tell us how that applies to the temple? There evidently were plenty to do the work there.
JT The same comes out here, as we have been saying. In the closing verses of the chapter, after they are presented to Jehovah, the age is reduced to twenty- five years. It is as if Jehovah would say, ‘All these persons are delightful to Me. Now I can increase their number by reducing their age’. We do not get a word about this until they are waved before Him. Then under David, the age is again reduced to twenty years. There were thirty-eight thousand Levites according to 1 Chronicles 23, but then David added to them by reducing the age five years, and I think it is in keeping with the then new order of things. Solomon was “young and tender”, and he sat on the throne with David. I think the idea is that God was pleased with him from the outset. Jehovah had loved him even as a babe. I think the divine thought under David was to bring typically all the young Christians into correspondence with Christ, that they are normally young and tender spiritually. There is a freshness about them, and I think we all can say that when we hear a young brother taking part in the meeting for the first time, there is [p. 204] something particularly fresh and attractive about it, and we thank God for it.
JS The freshness in this sense is delightful to God, and hence the age is reduced.
JT That is what I thought; it is in keeping with the new order of things; you have Solomon as king, who was about the age prescribed by David for levitical service.
AR If young brothers knew what they are in the eye of God and in the eye of the saints, they would more readily take on the service.
APT What you say would help as to the matter of age when receiving into fellowship; it is a question of what we see in them for the Lord, not so much their age in years.
JT We may say they are too young, without thinking of their spiritual formation. Sometimes our young people are older than their years, and it is for the brethren to discern this.
EEH What would you say about Paul’s first preaching, in Acts 9? He preached Jesus, that He is the Son of God. It was “Jesus” whom he saw on the road to Damascus. He seemed to have gained additional light as to the Lord’s Person, would you say?
JT Quite so. He was the first to preach Him as Son of God, as far as Scripture records. I suppose all that enters into what we are saying, that Paul advanced rapidly. He is called a young man in Acts 7. Peter had the knowledge of the Son of God, and so had all the apostles, but what is so remarkable is that they do not say anything about it in their early ministry. Paul, however, begins with it. This is evidently in view of the full thought of the house. Sonship comes in also in David in relation to the house of God. It came into David’s mind to build the house, which brought out the necessity for Solomon; that is, a son, and I believe the introduction of the full divine thought of the house synchronises with the appearance of Paul.
[p. 205] So that he preaches that Jesus is the Son of God. At Corinth, he and Silvanus and Timotheus preached the Son of God, Jesus Christ, so that it was evidently the great burden of his preaching. I believe Solomon on the throne suggests the idea, hence for David things were not as burdensome as they had been. So today, it is really a question of the part our young brothers are taking, or should take, in the assembly, not now carrying things as in the wilderness, since the ark is at rest, all of which gives character to the present assembly position, and as showing it is their time of service.
CAM All that seems to indicate the end of the assembly’s history — that we are at the end of the dispensation; it is such a privileged moment, the truth of the Son of God and all these wonderful things connected with Him, being brought to our attention.
JT Would to God that we all took that thought in!
CAM We should take it in, it is really very wonderful. It should be exceedingly stimulating to any saint that has his Christian career ahead of him, as illustrated in the young Levites of David’s day.
JTJr What is the thought of the fifty years? Does it mean that we should never reach that age?
JT That would be the thought. God expects from us our best. In the greatest servants mentioned in Scripture, their best went on to the end of their days. There are really no pensioners or superannuated persons connected with the testimony. That the Levites were to minister with their brethren after fifty indicates that whatever ability there is will be accepted, but restricted according to what it may be.
AR In Paul’s first preaching, he was morally a Kohathite you might say, handling the holy things.
JT That is right. And in the epistles to the Corinthians we have also Gershonite and Merarite services, i.e. principles governing the assembly are [p. 206] laid down, the curtains of the tabernacle largely representing these; and then he is concerned about the wicked person being put away, that his spirit should be saved, and that, as repentant, he should be restored.
APT What kind of man do you think Timothy was? Was he an all-round man?
JT The three levitical features would apply to one levite. It is not, in the antitype, that one set are Kohathites, another Gershonites, and another Merarites. You want to have the three ideas united, to present Christ as the Son of God, to keep the principles right, and then keep the persons right.
APT Paul says to the Philippian brethren that he would send Timothy to them as he had no one like-minded who would care with genuine feeling how they got on. I was wondering whether that refers to the service of God and where it would fit in.
JT Quite so; that, as having the saints in view, would be, in character, Gershonite service — how the saints get on. Epaphroditus was concerned about the saints, too.
ANW Yet Timothy was to do the work of an evangelist.
JT Quite so; all the levitical features appeared in him.
WB-w When the Lord Jesus was with the disciples on the mount (Matthew 5, Matthew 6, and Matthew 7), He taught them. Is the teaching there, the principles?
JT I think so; very largely the principles of the kingdom.
AP He spoke as One having authority. I was going to ask whether the limited number of levites would be an obstacle in any way to divine Persons speaking in a full way.
JT Divine activities are greatly limited and retarded today, because of the shortage of those who serve,
[p. 207] and because of our low state generally and consequent spiritual poverty.
WB-w Have you a suggestion to give on Deuteronomy 33?
JT We might finish this subject of the Levites with the understanding that their history is given retrospectively in that chapter. We have often noticed regarding Levi in Deuteronomy 33 that the Thummim is put before the Urim, meaning that the Levites had the needed quality and so were perfect. According to the best authorities, Thummim means perfection, which would show that all we have been speaking about had become effective in them, so that we have perfection. Then the meaning of Urim is light, which comes out in that setting. They endured the test at Massah and at Meribah; they denied natural claims: he “said to his father and to his mother, I see him not, and he acknowledged not his brethren, and knew not his own children; for they have observed thy word, and kept thy covenant. They shall teach Jacob thine ordinances, and Israel thy law” (verses 9,10).
AFM You were saying earlier that their priestly and levitical service combined in Deuteronomy, so in this blessing the two thoughts are united. There was the teaching of Jacob Jehovah’s ordinances, and the offering of incense before His nostrils. Is that the thought?
JT That is right; the priesthood is included in Levi here even as to teaching. “They shall teach Jacob thine ordinances, and Israel thy law”. So we have teachers now; not man-made teachers, but those who are spiritual, who teach divine ordinances and laws.
AR Will you define the difference between Jacob and Israel here?
JT Well, it is a common distinction in the Scriptures; the first alluding to us in responsibility, and the second [p. 208] as spiritual.
JHE The Lord appeared to Simon. Would that be the Jacob side? and then He appeared to Cephas — would that answer more to Israel?
JT That is right. He appeared to Simon after He arose. But Paul says He appeared to Cephas; that is the spiritual side, for this name denotes material for building.