THE INHERITANCE DIVIDED AMONG THE TRIBES (3)
[p. 328] THE INHERITANCE DIVIDED AMONG THE TRIBES (3)
Joshua 14:6 - 15; Joshua 15:13 - 19; Joshua 17:3 - 6; Joshua 18:1 - 10
JT Before proceeding to these chapters it seems as if we should again revert to chapter 10 in order that the place man has in the economy should be clearly seen. The withdrawal of divine support in Jerusalem was indicated, I think, by the Lord speaking out of heaven to Saul. He said, “I am Jesus”, Acts 9:5. Things were in His hands. And whilst Jerusalem was waited on in patience, the time had now come to transfer the centre of operations from earth to heaven. A Man in heaven dominated everything. Stephen, looking up, saw Him standing there; Colossians contemplates Him sitting there. Heaven, too, is dominated by a Man, and I think that is the truth which appears in the tenth chapter of this book. Joshua commanded the sun and moon, and they obeyed his command, indicating that God had hearkened unto the voice of a man. After Acts 9 the dispositions of God are from heaven. Man is there, He had spoken out of heaven, and in connection with that communication there was light from heaven. Following on that there is a vessel let down out of heaven (Acts 10), and then the disposition of God, having all that in view, is through the house, as in Acts 13; the mind of God is henceforth to be disclosed in the assembly.
Now that is why I wanted Joshua 18 read, because the dispositions in regard to the seven tribes that had not yet received their inheritance were to be made in connection with the tabernacle. The whole assembly of the children of Israel gathered together at Shiloh, and set up the tent of meeting there. You will notice that it is set up in connection with [p. 329] the whole assembly, and then the mind of God is made known there as to what had remained unordered. This, I think, may be easily fitted in to our present position in the history of the assembly; the mind of God comes out in the assembly. In Antioch there was a company of saints separated to the Lord, and 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 mind of God comes out in connection with the assembly through the Holy Spirit acting there. We were dwelling yesterday on chapter 10 as bringing out the place man has. The Lord had said, as rejected by Israel, “How much better then is a man than a sheep”, Matthew 12:12; and I think the book of Ezekiel fits in there; it is the place a man has; Man is in the brightest spot in the heavens, dominating it; the whole area of divine power is subservient to Him.
HH And from that Man in the heavens comes out now what is for the blessing of those on the earth.
JT Yes, indeed. The conditions in the assembly were that Saul was making havoc of it. That was the effort of the enemy. Then the Lord steps in. Satan had intruded too far on His territory, and He speaks from heaven, and everything goes down before Him; He exercises His power to bring everything down, and so the assemblies had rest.
Ques And is the assembly brought into accord with that Man so that He may communicate to them the truth?
JT I think the truth of the assembly comes out in the use of the word ‘assemblies’. Earlier it was ‘assembly’, that is, one idea in Jerusalem, but henceforth it is ‘assemblies’; and these are available to Christ for the disclosure of His mind here, and for His comfort and joy too. And I think the setting up of the tabernacle for the whole congregation of the children of Israel at Shiloh would indicate that [p. 330] the assembly is there; all were committed to it; and the dispositions of God were made there.
SJBC Shiloh seems to have been a provisional place, a place where He set His name first. Would that work out in the Acts?
JT The full thought of God in the assembly comes out, I think, after Acts 9; it was earlier connected with Jerusalem, while God was waiting on that city.
Ques What was your thought in connection with Caleb and Joseph and Judah getting their inheritance?
JT I think Caleb represents the faith side, i.e., faith lays hold of the purpose of God; he had already trodden the ground, and it was given to him on that principle — his foot had trodden it. But whatever you lay hold of by faith can only be maintained by the Spirit. Now Achsah, Caleb’s daughter, represents the subjective side. She would have springs of water; that is, she would have the Spirit. Caleb sets up the primary thought, but in Achsah we have the continuous thought, and so she appears again in Judges. The daughters of Zelophehad represent the birthright. We have to distinguish between the purpose of God, which is sovereignty, and the birthright. Birthright involves parentage. Joseph had the birthright, we are told, but Judah represents the sovereign purpose of God. So that we have in both these tribes a subjective correspondence with the position they occupied, i.e., in the woman; and without that you cannot have the continuance of things. It is in the feminine side that things are continued. Now these two thoughts run together, i.e., the purpose of God in giving us things, and faith laying hold of that, which would be represented by Hebron; then what comes in through parentage, that is, our relation to God; for as the sons or children of God we come into the birthright, and that is what Joseph represents; but the purpose of God is represented by Judah.
[p. 331] Rem Things are only of value to us by our continuance in them. “If indeed we hold fast the boldness and the boast of hope firm to the end”, Hebrews 3:6.
HH Does not the breakdown come in, in Judah? We were referring yesterday to the sin of Achan. It would emphasise the thought of God’s sovereignty in Judah being connected with the tribe in which He would work out His purpose.
JT Caleb rose above all that, and, of course, the sin had been judged. Directly Judah comes in you get Caleb.
EM I would like to ask why the thought of the man in Christ was brought in before the unfolding of the inheritance?
JT Well, one can see the force of it, I think, in the New Testament. Man has his place in the counsels of God. So long as Jerusalem is recognised that man is not in evidence. Jerusalem is necessarily circumscribed, being connected with God on earth; whereas the Son of man in heaven is the Lord’s universal place. He is free and untrammelled now, in that Israel has rejected all the overtures of grace, and He speaks to Saul from heaven. Stephen had been stoned, and Saul made havoc of the assembly; he represented Jerusalem, breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the saints. The breach was permanent, hence the voice from heaven. There is now one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, consequently the prayers are universal. This is in no way weakened by the fact that grace pursued the Jews in Paul’s ministry even to Rome.
HH Do you connect chapter 10 with the thought of reduction?
JT Yes; you will notice in that chapter how Joshua prevails, how overwhelming are the victories; and the prominence of Gilgal, as we have been considering it, points to the principles of reduction [p. 332] having been definitely accepted; Gilgal is particularly prominent in chapter 10.
ENH What is the teaching in the second great combination with Jabin, king of Hazor, which is recorded in chapter 11?
JT The great combination in chapter 11 continues the conflict, and Joshua is victorious. All this opposition corresponds, I think, with Saul continuing to breathe out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord. Neither Saul nor the elders at Jerusalem had reckoned on Christ being in heaven, nor that He was entrusted with the authority of God. The overwhelming power of God was now in the hands of a Man, and who could cope with that! So with Joshua here; in the tenth chapter the five kings were brought down, and not only is Joshua victorious, but Satan, so to speak, is bruised under his feet. The epistle to the Romans contemplates that Satan shall be bruised under our feet shortly, but Ephesians, I think, contemplates that this is already done.
ENH You refer to the people putting their feet on the necks of these kings.
JT Yes; these five kings represent the power of the enemy against the truth. The enemies of the Lord in sending out Saul of Tarsus did not realise what a power they had to cope against. When heaven enters into the conflict it is the beginning of the end. Joshua said, “Come forward, put your feet on the necks of these kings”, Joshua 10:24.
HH It would suggest that to take up the conflict we have really to be men in Christ.
JT I think so.
HH But you are now referring to Christ personally, in Acts 9, and power from on high?
JT Yes, but then the saints are brought into that under Paul’s ministry; that is to say, the knowledge of the power that is in heaven. Paul went to Ephesus through the “upper districts”, Acts 19:1. There you have the heavenly position. Apollos was at Corinth; he, as it were, is looking after the assembly on earth.
Ques Would Caleb’s reference to his own strength show that he appreciated the strength he had got?
JT No doubt. He represents faith, the faith that lays hold of the purpose of God; but you can only lay hold of the heavenly position by realising the fact that the man who has gone in death is now in heaven. If you do not understand the position in heaven you will never be here in the conflict with any assurance.
Rem “All power is given unto me”, Matthew 28:18 The power that made Saul of Tarsus subject was really used by him as a weapon afterwards. He refers to the weapons afterwards which, he says, are not carnal but spiritual and mighty to the pulling down of strongholds. He is, like Joshua, using those weapons on behalf of the testimony. He would, no doubt, in his ministry pass that on as power in the assembly.
JT His prayers in Ephesians 1 and Ephesians 3 are to that end: “that ye should know ... the surpassing greatness of his power towards us who believe, according to the working of the might of his strength, in which he wrought in the Christ in raising him from among the dead, and he set him down at his right hand in the heavenlies”, Ephesians 1:18 - 20. Now that power is in the assembly.
Ques John says, “Greater is he that is in you that he that is in the world”, 1 John 4:4. Is that a similar idea?
JT Yes.
WHM What does Shiloh answer to? Is Shiloh an advance on Jerusalem?
JT Well, it is. Shiloh is connected in Genesis with the purpose of God. “The sceptre will not depart from Judah, nor the lawgiver from between his feet,
[p. 334] until Shiloh come, and to him will be the obedience of peoples”, Genesis 49:10. I think that is what came out here; the whole assembly is subject to Him, and they set up the tent of meeting. In Acts 20, when they assembled to break bread on the first day of the week, Paul discoursed to them. Everything now is put in the light of Paul’s ministry. Would you say so, Mr. G.?
TMG Quite so; he had declared to them the whole counsel of God.
JT That is what marks Paul’s ministry; there is nothing kept back. In John’s ministry there is a reserve, however, which is characteristic; John 21:21 - 23.
HD'AC Then chapter 11 is the taking of the whole land from that position.
JM So Paul’s discourse relates to what is special, and to what should be ever present with us?
JT It is the light that governs the position now. That is the only way you can understand that incident where Paul discoursed so long. The more you perceive how extensive a subject it is, the more glad you are of the length of the discourse. After Paul’s discourse there was a conversation; he gives an opportunity to them to ask questions, as it were. So, as has been remarked, the whole land has been taken; but there are dispositions to be made; and these henceforth are to be made in connection with the house. Joshua says to them (chapter 18:3), “how long will ye show yourselves slack to take possession of the land which Jehovah, the God of your fathers, hath given you? Provide you three men for a tribe”, and so on. In verse 10 we read, “Joshua cast lots for them in Shiloh before Jehovah. And there Joshua divided the land to the children of Israel, according to their divisions”.
SJBC So the church is not solely occupied with fighting; there are seasons of rest in which we can explore the land. When Saul’s persecution ceased the churches had rest.
Ques Would Antioch answer to Shiloh?
JT I think so. There is very little in the way of disposition until we come to Acts 13. After the fourth chapter there was rest, then in the sixth chapter there was discontent and breakdown, the Hellenists murmured against the Hebrews because their widows were overlooked in the daily ministration, and seven men full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom were appointed to look after the matter, among whom were Stephen and Philip. You get their service, but they were just deacons; they were not sent to preach or minister. The light is carried to Samaria, and Antioch, in an unofficial way, i.e., through the scattering. That is the government of God acting; those that were scattered carried the light. But in chapter 13 you have distinct divine disposition. “The Holy Spirit said, Separate me now Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them”, Acts 13:2. Now the Holy Spirit is free to act in the assembly, and I think that is how matters stand ever since.
JM The dispositions of God are made known through the assembly.
JT Yes. So that Judah remains in his portion. That is not affected by subsequent dispositions: “For the gifts and the calling of God are not subject to repentance”, Romans 11:29. Joseph and Judah stand; I suppose that may date back to Caleb and Joshua. Those tribes were represented by these two men, who had faith; there is also a corresponding subjective state in these two tribes, as we have noted; so they stand, the one in the north and the other in the south. And the inheritance given by Moses to the two and a half tribes beyond the Jordan remained also. But there are other dispositions now, and for these we have to wait on God. God must [p. 336] have His place in His house. He is in His house, and you look for Him to act there. That is how matters now stand. You have to wait and see what God will do. “The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole decision is of Jehovah”, Proverbs 16:33. God must decide things. So what you find in our scriptures is, that Benjamin gets his portion between these two tribes. Judah is on the south, and Joseph on the north, with Benjamin between these two (so to speak) influential brethren.
SJBC How did this disposition work out? Some may have a different appreciation of their inheritance from others.
JT Benjamin is placed, and then the next tribe to be considered is Simeon, and he is set down right in the midst of Judah. That is to say, the dispositions of God in this house, necessarily work out for the exercises of all. One idea is that the saints are necessarily influential. If we proceed from Christ in heaven we must be; He influences the whole realm in heaven and earth, but then He influences things through the saints. Judah had his influence, and he gets a large territory; on the other hand he stands first, he represents the purpose of God and is given the first place. But now here is a brother, Simeon, and he is set down in the midst of Judah. How is Judah going to take that? You see the dispositions of God test us; they test our love and magnanimity. Can you admit of a brother coming into your territory to whom God has given power? Can you make room for him?
HD'AC There was room really, the territory was too much for Judah.
JT Yes, but Judah might have said, I can use it, but he did not, he accepted the thing; there is not a question on Judah’s part. In fact, in later years a brotherly spirit prevailed between them, and Judah says to Simeon, “Come up with me into my [p. 337] lot, and let us fight against the Canaanites, and I likewise will go with thee into thy lot”, Judges 1:3. The brotherly spirit was in exercise.
SJBC That is a great lesson, to make room for one’s brother.
Rem It would bring out how far we have accepted the doctrine of all that has gone before.
JT That is it. God loves to test us; He knows what we are capable of, and the love that He has put into your heart He would like to bring out. So making room for one’s brethren is a great thing.
Rem If the divine character of the dispositions of God in the house is not accepted, the joy of the privilege is interfered with. You look at the inheritance in that way; not so much from the height of the enjoyment of it, but rather from the standpoint of its divine character in connection with the maintenance of things in testimony.
JT So that the Lord’s word in John 13 has a peculiar force: “By this shall all know that ye are disciples of mine, if ye have love amongst yourselves”, John 13:35. There is to be, so to speak, a stock of it available all the time.
TMG It would indicate the importance of the reduction you were speaking of.
JT I suppose the greater the reduction, the more readily you will give place to others.
HH If one brings a letter to a meeting, much lies behind that; not only are we thankful that you have got the letter, but we receive you.
JT Yes; there is room to be made for the one who brings it. Benjamin (little Benjamin as he is called elsewhere) was set down between the two great tribes, and circumstances show that he was equal to this position. He had really one of the most important places assigned to him, according to Moses’ placing. “The beloved of Jehovah — he shall dwell in safety by him; he will cover him all the day long, and dwell between his shoulders”, Deuteronomy 33:12. In the light of that he might say to himself, I am going to have the most conspicuous place because the Lord is going to dwell between my shoulders; that is, he had mount Zion in his territory; and the passage here shows that Jerusalem was one of the cities given to Benjamin. Well now, how is this going to work out, because when Israel came out of Egypt “Judah was his sanctuary”, Psalm 114:2. Benjamin has to be prepared for adjustment. Adjustment was needed because the purpose of God was, that Judah was to be His sanctuary; He chose the tribe of Judah; He “chose the tribe of Judah, the mount Zion which he loved; and he built his sanctuary like the heights, like the earth which he hath founded for ever”, Psalm 78:68,69. And we see from Joshua 18 that Jerusalem is one of the cities of Benjamin.
EM Would a disposition have the whole assembly in view?
JT Oh, yes; we shall see later, please God, that the position of the Levites was universal; but for the moment we are dealing with divine dispositions as they affect us locally.
Ques Is it not important for us to understand the constitution of the assembly down here?
JT Yes, it is; and I think that is what comes out in the Acts, from chapter 13 onwards. In the development of the truth that came out at Ephesus; Ephesus is the crown, as we have often heard, and what marked that assembly was not only light, it had the counsel of God — but it also had love. Paul embraced them before he left them. God’s love was expressed to them in Paul’s embrace; and then when he sent for the elders afterwards they embraced him — showing that the house was set up in reciprocal affection; the love of God and the love of the saints were expressed. That was how matters stood in Paul’s assembly; the house is set up by God through him.
HD'AC Benjamin does not come in until Shiloh comes in. That would probably correspond with the introduction of Saul of Tarsus. Then why were all chosen by lot except those on the other side of the river? Eleazar comes to the front in the very beginning of this allotment; chapter 14:1. Eleazar and Joshua cast lots simply on their own account, apart from the question of any tabernacle.
JT I think it would correspond with the state of things in the earlier chapters of Acts. The Lord indicated how matters should be, in the choice of the apostles. There was no disposition made in the house to give Peter his place, nor the eleven either. They were appointed directly by the Lord Himself. We know that He prayed before appointing them; Luke 6:12 - 16.
Rem I suppose Joshua would represent the authority of the Lord, and Eleazar the priestly side.
JT Well, the twelve were appointed directly by the Lord; but the dispositions from Paul onward were made through the assembly; and everyone, I think, finds his position in this way now.
Rem The man in Christ is not known apart from the assembly. Lots are cast here at Shiloh.
JT Yes; the casting of the lots would be placing the matter in God’s hands. I think this is a great principle to lay hold of; it brings out two things, the sovereignty of God, and the love in the saints. The sovereignty of God always tests us. All the saints are under His eye, but the truth of a man in Christ is in connection with the assembly.
Ques Do you mean that in regard to the movements of a man in Christ, the centre would really be Christ; but would not the circle of His movements really be the assembly?
JT Yes, I think the apostle’s great concern [p. 340] about the assembly would be that it should be where Christ could express Himself — where the mind of God could be expressed.
JBC-l Referring again for a moment to the tribes, I see that their disposition in the wilderness was different from that in the land; what would be the reason for that?
JT One can understand that the position in the wilderness calls for peculiar priestly energy. One might have supposed that Levi was God’s sanctuary, whereas the Psalmist said it was Judah. The Psalmist speaks from the standpoint of subsequent history, the standpoint of David and Solomon, whereas the wilderness is more that of Levi. Everything was made to depend on the priestly state in the wilderness; but Judah is the purpose of God.
Ques Would Judah bring in the Melchisedec thought?
JT Our Lord sprang from Judah. We can understand the epistle to Hebrews opening up the thought that Judah is His sanctuary.
JM You referred to the sovereignty of God, and the necessity for love amongst the saints, as being important in regard to the dispositions of God, and how we are tested by them. Is there not a danger in a day like this of our getting somewhat localised, and not seeing the universal character of the assembly?
JT Yes; I think what we may consider this afternoon will help on that line; the Levites bring in the universal thought, the tribe being dispersed throughout the whole of the territory. Here we are looking at the tribes in detail. I think it is the local thought — how you can get on with people locally. Now, if we consider Simeon, he is set down in the midst of Judah, and a right spirit is maintained, for evidently there was no friction. Nothing in a way tests you more than one coming into your midst who has himself influence according to God.
[p. 341] It is remarkable, as we draw near the climax of assembly development, how persons appear on the scene from different quarters; there was Paul, a man raised up of God to build the assembly as a wise architect; but then we also find at Corinth two persons from Italy, Aquila and Priscilla his wife. They were driven out of Rome by the edict of the emperor Claudius expelling all the Jews, they were simply tentmakers by trade, and they shared the same lodging as Paul. And then we are told that another man arrived at Ephesus, Apollos by name; he comes on the scene in the same connection, he is an Alexandrian, and a product of John’s ministry, he is not a convert of Paul. See how extensive and far reaching God’s arrangements are! You must not despise any ministry, because God might be working through it. So here is Apollos, a remarkable man, mighty in the Scriptures and available for the service of God. Now God arranges that Apollos is not helped by Paul, but by Aquila and Priscilla. And Paul has no complaint to make about that, he accepts it. And all this is leading up to the great truth of the house — God’s universal operations. And you must always be prepared for that. If you have got an official spirit, and you want to dominate your local meeting, God will upset your purpose by bringing in others able to serve.
Ques When you speak of the assembly, you include all the meetings in a city; you would not refer to one of the local meetings to the exclusion of the others?
JT Well, there is only one assembly in a city, for example, the assembly of God at Corinth; 1 Corinthians 1: 2.
Ques Would not all the brethren in the city have an interest in each of the meetings?
JT Certainly; an elder in a city would have jurisdiction in the whole city, no matter how many [p. 342] meetings there might be in it. If you are in a city your responsibility is in the city. But you may dominate it, or think you do, or seek to do so, which is worse still. God will upset that; He will bring in someone perhaps who has more spiritual power, or as much; and how are you going to receive him? That is what comes in here.
Ques Do you think Paul tested Barnabas in that way?
JT No doubt he did. And then he must also have been a great test to the twelve in Jerusalem. But you see what comes out; they gave to him the right hand of fellowship; there was grace there. It is beautiful to see how these principles worked out. It must have been gratifying to God. We must be prepared to admit the workings of God, even if eclipsed by them.
HD'AC “I went up again to Jerusalem”, Paul says, “... and I laid before them the glad tidings which I preach among the nations ... for to me those which were conspicuous communicated nothing”, Galatians 2:1,2; Galatians 2:6. Christ was commended, and they were very great gainers.
JT Paul acted wisely, he went up to Jerusalem to make acquaintance with Peter, and he remained with him fifteen days. So there was no breach. Then another thing comes out in Deuteronomy 33. Simeon is left out altogether; his name is not mentioned. That must have been a great test to him. When we come to the book of Joshua, however, he is not forgotten; he gets his position in the midst of Judah; and, what is more remarkable, he gets Beersheba. That is, he comes into the light of the faithfulness of God. God, in the exercise of His sovereignty, does not forget His faithfulness. And if a brother has been true at any time, and for some reason is eclipsed, God does not forget the bright days. Now that is something that must [p. 343] be remembered.
JBC-l In connection with what you were saying as to the dispositions of God, does not Joshua’s commencement appear to have significance in that he attached himself to the assembly? He commenced with no official standing, but he was ultimately placed as leader.
JT He departed not from the tent. And then another thing, in nominating him, God says, “a man in whom is the Spirit”, Numbers 27:18. As you say, he had no official place, except that he was Moses’ attendant, which is a menial thought; but he had the Spirit.
Ques Why do you think Simeon was left out in Deuteronomy?
JT It is just a question of God’s sovereignty. Whenever anything is done by God there is always a reason for it. We may not see the reason, but we may be sure God has a reason though it may be hidden, for God conceals things. But whatever happened, God’s faithfulness remained, and Simeon must have his place.
There is another thought that ought to be mentioned: some have the idea that the book of Joshua is simply to put the people in possession of their inheritance in heaven. It puts the saints in place while we are down here in relation to what we have in heaven. So that the position of the tribes differs very materially in this book from the book of Ezekiel. In the latter they are from east to west, whereas here it is quite different tribes within tribes and so on. Love is to shine from our relations to one another as thus placed. I think that is what John 13 means — how they were to behave while the Lord was away.