THE CITIES OF REFUGE
[p. 357] THE CITIES OF REFUGE
Ques Would you say how you apprehend the cities of refuge?
JT The prominence given to them in the typical books shews how important the subject is, at least in regard to what they represent — that is, the provision made in grace for the Jew. The Lord on the cross, according to Luke, says: “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do”. And Stephen, in agreement with this, says: “Lord, lay not this sin to their charge”. It is the element of grace introduced by the Lord Jesus on the cross, in keeping, indeed, with His whole ministry in Luke: that the greatest means might be available for the greatest sinner’s to be sheltered; for the ground of the cities of refuge is that they were regarded as doing the thing ignorantly, in unbelief.
Ques It was God’s provision for them in view of the murder of Christ?
JT Yes. That element of grace, introduced by the Lord on the cross and reflected in Stephen-and, indeed, in the earlier saints generally — was to reside in the assembly. Here you will observe: “When Jehovah thy God hath cut off the nations whose land Jehovah thy God giveth thee and thou hast dispossessed them, and dwellest in their cities and in their houses, thou shalt separate three cities ...” That would mean that God had given salvation to His people, deliverance from their enemies, so that they were in peace, settled in the land; the element of grace would be prominent, not an attitude of vengeance, there was no such attitude in Christ; in the Psalms there is reference to vengeance, but not in the Acts, nor in Luke. It is grace. The saints, the members of the assembly, reflected that, notwithstanding the murderous attitude of the Jews. They reflected that spirit of grace, so that their very enemies, as in the case [p. 358] of Saul of Tarsus, found a residence of safety in the assembly. The great lesson for us, therefore, would be the maintenance of grace towards those who might oppose or persecute. In the sphere of the saints there is safety from the avenger of blood, there is protection from vengeance, even though the person might be deserving of it. “Thou shalt separate” — the saints, as delivered from the satanic power, were thus to provide for the sinner.
Ques I was thinking of Paul’s ascription to Timothy of “grace, mercy and peace”. Are those the qualities that are found in one who is set that way?
JT Yes; you see in Titus the thing is very prominent: “For the grace of God which carries with it salvation for all men has appeared”. All men. Its bearing is towards those who are guilty of murder, the murder of Christ was deliberate, but it was not reckoned to the Jews in that way, not as if they knew “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do”.
Ques Why is it that in this chapter you get three cities set apart provisionally? In Numbers it is six, but here it seems the last three of the six only come in additionally.
JT That is in view of extension.
Ques I was wondering whether these six include the three beyond Jordan, or as the result of increase in the spiritual apprehension of things?
JT It would mean increase in spiritual territory. I suppose it would refer to Paul’s ministry. There was the ministry of the twelve which went to a point, and the primary thought is attached to their sphere, Judaea and Jerusalem; the ministry of the twelve extended to a point but not to the full extent of the purpose that God had in His mind. So that the second three would mean what went on amongst the nations by Paul’s ministry, beginning with the Jews in every case, only there was an extension — it was an extended ministry among the [p. 359] nations. Paul was really sent to the nations, but “the sons of Israel” were also included, so that he always made a point of going to the Jew first. The death of Stephen had brought out what they were doing, but he only asks the Lord not to lay “this sin” to their charge — he does not make a general request. But the extension in Paul’s ministry was provided for in the second three cities, showing the excess of grace; that what had happened at Jerusalem had really brought out that they knew what they were doing. Grace was presented to the Jews among the nations on the same principle as it had been presented at Jerusalem. What do you say?
FI I think that is right. I had in mind a little that this would stand especially in regard to the assembly in a Deuteronomy setting. I wondered whether, as there is increase in spiritual impressions of things, there is often amongst us a liability to fall short. There is the necessity for the enlargement of which you are speaking. We find ourselves up against these spiritual movements and often hinder one another; but if we are increasing on the spiritual side there should be that which should be for the preservation of others.
JT So you are adjusted according to that increase in regard to any opposition that there might be. Grace is always in evidence.
Ques Would the epistle to the Hebrews fit in with the first three, “mount Zion” and “the city of the living God”; we get salvation referred to, and the Spirit is “the Spirit of grace”, and reference is made to any who should lack grace?
JT I think so. That epistle addresses those to whom the first three directly refer. They refer to the Jews in the land, they were guilty of the death of Christ. “The dispersion” could hardly be so regarded, for they had no actual voice in the matter; but still the grace was brought to them, as it is invariably in Paul’s ministry. He had to separate the disciples from the synagogue; but [p. 360] the attitude primarily towards them was forgiveness. God was not charging them with the guilt of Christ’s death. Paul said at Antioch of Pisidia: “Those who dwell in Jerusalem, and their rulers, not having known him, have fulfilled also the voices of the prophets … by judging him”, (Acts 13:27).
Ques So that coming to mount Zion would be that, would it not?
JT I think so. In saying they had “fled for refuge”, he directly alludes to the cities of refuge. The Jews had fled for refuge, and remaining on the ground of Judaism would expose them to judgment. The destruction of Jerusalem by Titus was the man-slayer; the governmental action of God overcame them. Had they come to the city of refuge they would have escaped that.
Ques I was wondering how far the attitude of Stephen’s soul and his prayer to God covered what those men were doing. It does not go any further than the three cities, do you think?
JT No; it was not a general prayer like the Lord’s own. The Lord said: “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do”. He meant what they were doing in crucifying Him. But Stephen says: “Lay not this sin to their charge”. The answer to this would mean that the murder of Stephen did not hinder the continuance of grace to the Jews.
Ques Does he bring into practical effect the divine idea of these three cities?
JT I think he does.
Rem As far as he was concerned he did not desire anything in the way of vengeance.
JT No; and it does not appear that it was laid to their charge, although I suppose the general conduct of the Jews is shown as Paul puts it in writing to the Thessalonians, (1 Thessalonians 2:14 - 16). I think that is an allusion to their exposure to the avenger of blood. Instead of submitting to the gospel and taking advantage [p. 361] of the city of refuge opened up in it, they kept on resisting, and wrath came upon them.
Ques Would the act of Stephen in his intercession bring in in a priestly way salvation on that occasion? Were they covered in that way by his prayer?
JT No doubt; it must have been very delightful to God that in such dreadful circumstances he was able to maintain the character of the dispensation, which is an immense thing with Him. Like Abigail, who diverted David from shedding blood; it is the spirit of the church. “Vengeance is mine”, God says, and “Avenge not yourselves”. That is the great lesson for us, the spirit of grace, of forgiveness; we leave all else with God.
Ques Did not Stephen’s prayer in that way open the door for the extension of the activities of grace?
JT Well, Scripture says those that were scattered at his persecution went abroad preaching; it is a very fine result; and God honours that attitude in every one of us. Instead of vengeance here you have a widespread proclamation in Philip and in others.
Ques Was not the spirit of that carried on in Paul himself? He says: “... all men forsook me: I pray God that it may not be laid to their charge”. That should mark us as together, as well as in our thoughts towards the world.
JT “... If thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink”. The assembly has become the residence of grace. The Holy Spirit has come in. God dwells here. The saints are formed in grace — taught by it and thus fitted to exemplify the dispensation.
Ques Grace should be the dominant feature amongst the saints?
JT That is conveyed in the city of refuge; the man-slayer comes in and finds that element, it is a home for him, he feels things are in his favour there.
Ques What about Joshua, where the dries of refuge are in the hands of the [p. 362] levites?
JT That is an added thought which is very important. You might expect that in Joshua, because that book presents the heavenly side of things. Some of us were speaking about the five hundred to whom the Lord appeared, a number large enough to be influential generally. The impress of Christ risen and appearing to them would affect them, and this would enter into their influence. The levites were a goodly number, according to Numbers there were twenty-two thousand levites and eight thousand of them in actual service; so that they represent the amount of heavenly influence exerted in the book of Joshua. The priestly family in Numbers is small, but they had to do directly with God, and so their power was great; power with God in one man has universal influence. That is the idea of priesthood Godward. It is not a question so much of the number of priests, as the power of the thing, of that element. Moses and Aaron are among God’s priests. They called upon the Lord and He answered them. Psalm 99; it is not so much the number of persons as the effectiveness of the thing, whether it be in Christ personally or in one like Elijah or Moses. But one idea of the levitical family is numbers: “The assembly of the firstborn ones”. The idea is that their influence is to become general, and that is what Joshua has in mind; and included in their cities (they had forty-eight, a universal number, four times twelve) were the six cities of refuge. In the hands of the levites, the heavenly saints, these were generally situated in elevated parts of the country — “hill country”. The idea is moral elevation, and the influence flowing from that. That is important in regard to these cities. The Jew would not find any spirit of vengeance in the assembly viewed in that light. The saints would be like Christ. Saul, in his opposition to them, met Jesus; the same kind of Man that was seen in the gospels — “led as a lamb to the slaughter”. That was what Saul met. He met that same spirit in the persecuted ones. As James said: “Ye [p. 363] have condemned and killed the just; and he doth not resist you”. And so the eunuch was reading the prophet Isaiah, chapter 53, and he says: ‘What does this mean?’ And Philip opens his mouth and preaches unto him Jesus. That kind of man, that kind of spirit that Saul met with in his persecuting career. In the epistle to the Romans we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter, not yet slaughtered, but held there for the slaughterer to come; that is the spirit which is to mark the saints.
Ques So that Stephen would be an example of that? He met his death in that spirit?
JT Yes, just as the Lord did; and then Philip preaches that Man, so that His Spirit goes abroad to the gentiles. Paul comes to Europe, and that means that you have the spirit of Jesus in the west-There is another thing here: “Thou shalt prepare thee the way, and divide the territory of thy land ...” They were to consider the distance to be covered by the man-slayer. It is very beautiful the consideration there is for the man-slayer; the distance is to be reckoned that he might have to take; there was to be a way, so that it would be possible for him to get to the city of refuge; there would be no barriers.
Ques You would like to so present Christ that it might not be difficult for the soul to bow?
JT If you take Peter’s first address, the way is made easy for the Jews, Acts 2. In chapter 3 he tells them that they slew Christ in ignorance — thus the city of refuge was open to them.
Rem There is no toleration of unjudged evil; the act was one of ignorance, and so extraordinary grace was shown.
JT Hence the three thousand were added at Pentecost. There is forgiveness with God, and a way is prepared for the man-slayer to return. The addition of so many at once shows what grace was there.
Rem And that principle should be just as active [p. 364] amongst us as brethren together now. Here it is two working together, and how one who inadvertently slays the other finds grace; with us the way should be made easy for his restoration when one is convicted of sin and judges himself.
JT Quite.
Rem I was thinking we need that as much amongst selves as we do in regard to the presentation of things to the world.
JT So that taking due account of the dispensational side of the teaching, you can use this type in the principle of it, as to anything happening amongst us.
Rem If one has moved and inadvertently damaged another, how often you are held back because you are not sure of the conditions you are going to meet on the way back. There should be an increase in the administration of grace, so that such can find their way back easily.
JT I think that is very important; the person is thus encouraged to seek forgiveness and reconciliation.
Ques Is not that the force of the word in the end of Ephesians 4: “And be ye kind one to another, tender-hearted, forgiving one another”?
JT And it is put there on its highest plane — “even as God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven you”.
Ques You mean the spirit of forgiveness is always there?
JT Yes, there is forgiveness with God; there ought to be that with us; it is very beautiful in Stephen. So that if one has to deal with you about something, he is not hindered by any thought that you are a hard man, he knows you to be forgiving.
Ques You alluded to 1 Thessalonians. The apostle carries it on to the end of the second epistle: “Yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother”. Is that the thought?
Ques How about the instrument of service getting out [p. 365] of hand?
JT Well, in that there is something of remissness there is no evil or murderous intent, but want of care in the instrument leads to its being in a bad condition.
Ques Do you think it might touch the thought of how you serve? There must be no carelessness lest you slay your brother.
JT The instrument of service is yourself, it is what you are. So that personality underlies service. The levite is a great person, a first-born, and should not descend to petty things; he must not allow fleshly motives, otherwise his instrument is sure to do damage.
Rem In connection with what has been remarked: often the instrument does get out of hand.
JT “That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour”, (1 Thessalonians 4:4). The vessel is that which God would use. I believe Romans lays the basis for everything, so that in regard of the vessel or the instrument, even our members are to be “instruments of righteousness”. There must be no axe with the head flying off; it would be an instrument of murder even though the intent might not be there. It I would be most culpable thing for a carpenter to work with an axe with its head loosely on.
Ques That brings in the thought of subjection in all one’s movements and service?
JT I think so. You see that your members are; instruments of righteousness, and such instruments would not damage anybody.
Rem So that, as subject to the Lord, you would be very considerate to the brethren and others; you would not give offence in any way.
JT Romans is the great grounding epistle; young believers should begin there as in school. For the early impressions are the impressions that last, they are fundamental impressions; college education after does not I make up for them. One has got older and the impressions do not take on so well. And then to present the [p. 366] whole body a living sacrifice; it is on the principle of sacrifice, for you are now definitely on the line of Christ; so that the instrument or vessel is in God’s hands.
Rem Self-consideration would not come in, but you would act like God.
JT The element of sacrifice in it would imply that you are on the same line as Christ. Sacrifice implies unselfishness. A man gives up his body. No amount of means can compare with a man’s body. You present your body a living sacrifice. Such an instrument is not likely ever to damage anybody.
Ques Would you say that the Spirit of Christ would shine out in one who is grounded in the epistle to the Romans?
JT I believe Romans is the basis of everything, as I said.
Ques It develops the features that are to mark you towards your enemy, and in consideration for your brethren, which is your intelligent service.
JT Consideration for your brethren, and, after that, in chapter 13, the recognition of the powers that be. We may do damage in that field, if one does not understand the government of God. The powers that be are ordained of God, and if one acts in a legal manner, one may do much damage without meaning to do it. The fact that we do not mean to kill a man does not take away the great loss that may be incurred in his death.
Rem When Abner killed Asahel with the hinder end of his spear he had to meet the consequences.
JT In Romans 14 we have the ‘weak brother’; you may destroy him by your knowledge. It would be the same sort of thing — not understanding the principle of grace.
Ques You might do a right thing in a spirit that would do damage?
JT Quite. Damage is done by disregarding the conscience of a weak brother.
[p. 367] Ques So that in Ephesians we are to walk ‘carefully’, chapter 5:15?
JT Then in Romans 15 we are to receive one another as Christ also received us, to the glory of God. Romans provides for having on the armour of light; we have not yet taken possession of the land, but as in the midst of darkness the armour of light means that you have light as to everything; whether it be trade unions or the Government, public things, relations in business, all these things are met by “the armour of light”. The armour of God is Ephesians; it is for the land of promise. We do not want to alter things here. The land is a spiritual realm, but Romans contemplates our being in the wilderness, and going through it according to God.
Rem So that Paul says: “As much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men”.
JT Abimelech made a covenant with Abraham not to interfere with him or his son or grandson. Genesis 21. As expressed in the “seven ewe lambs”, Abraham would not do anybody any harm.
Ques “Let your yieldingness be known” — this would help us to live in our responsible spheres unperturbed and free from distress. Could we have a word about one who does the thing deliberately?
JT Well, it might apply to us in the spirit of it. God will deal with that. Alexander the coppersmith is an example. Primarily the reference is to the Jew; it became apparent that he did it intentionally, he really meant to put Christ to death. Paul said to them at Rome: “This salvation of God has been sent to the nations; they also will hear it”, (Acts 28:28). That would be an end of the six cities. The Jews went off wrangling among themselves. Their day is over for the tune. They had definitely committed themselves to their act, and the gospel is now no longer “to the Jew first”; therefore, in returning to the land, as they are today, they are exposing themselves to the avenger of blood — the [p. 368] judgment of God will overtake them there. Paul says: “Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil; the Lord reward him according to his works”. He did not say: “I will reward him”, but “the lord reward him”. You do not ignore the thing. I suppose the present apostasy is like it. There is no city of refuge for Christian apostates at all, but a ‘strong delusion’, so that they may become worse; there is no hope for them at all.
Ques I was going to ask: Why limit it to six cities?
JT I suppose the number would be abundant testimony to grace. Two is enough, three is full, and six is superabundant — here the superabundance of grace.
Rem There are three steps here: he lies in wait, rises against him, and smites him mortally, verse 11.
JT Lying in wait is the first step; a very solemn thing as showing how deliberate the murderer’s attitude was. God is infinitely fair with man; in the broken state of things among the few they were not all committed to the death of Christ; some hesitated. I suppose in Joseph’s case, who is a type (the Old Testament furnishes us with details), it would be known that both Reuben and Judah were not really personally murderers. Reuben sought to deliver him out of their hands; he counselled them to put him in the pit, but there was no water there. Judah counselled them to sell him; all that is taken account of by God; but Judah and Reuben were both guilty in that they concealed the matter and were thus partners to it. Had they recoiled from the thing and taken an open stand against the murderous attitude of the others, they might have saved Joseph, but they did not. A remnant were saved, but on the principle of grace; they accepted responsibility for the guilt, and “fled for refuge”. “Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain”; every repentant one would admit that. That was the only way out, and in repenting they would come into the [p. 369] city of refuge and save themselves from the man-slayer.
Ques Would you say that God had sealed it upon the Jews as a nation — “His blood be upon us, and upon our children”?
JT He finally bound that on them. I suppose the apostles really determined that: “Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven”. That came about. Their sin was bound on them. Authority to do this was given to Peter, Matthew 16:19, and also to the church, Matthew 18:18.
Ques You mean it was bound upon them in the governmental ways of God?
JT In Matthew 18 the Lord puts binding before loosing, whereas in John He reverses it. John has in mind recovery in the last days. That is the attitude we take now. If a brother has been in the Roman Catholic church, he is guilty there; but if he is exercised, you release him and set his face in the right direction. You hold him out the hand of encouragement. All this would help in our relations among ourselves, that there might be the spirit of grace, and we might enjoy the inheritance together. If you compare Matthew and John, Matthew is the church gospel, when the church was in its pristine state. Peter personally had authority to bind and to loose, which was remarkable. The Lord placed confidence in them. John puts remission first, giving us, so to speak, carte blanche — what we remit He remits.
Ques You have in mind where brethren are found under all sorts of circumstances?
JT You would want to clear the way for them, you would not hold anything against them. We have the spirit of remission amongst us. You can well afford to do that if one is coming out, but if he is staying where Christ’s authority is not owned or His name dishonoured, you put the thing on his conscience. When there is movement there is provision already there: “When the Lord thy God hath cut off the nations”,
[p. 370] and so on. You are well set up, you are able to be gracious.
Ques In verse 14 it says: “Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour’s landmark”. Would that have reference to a weak brother, or has it a general bearing?
JT I think both, especially the determining of local responsibility. The principle of local responsibility is: “Thou shalt love thy neighbour thyself”. There is a certain boundary between you and your neighbour and you do not transgress that; and that should be extended to a local company.
Ques What do you understand by “landmark”?
JT A boundary. You get an illustration in Jephthah’s time, when the Ammonites sought to take the land which the Israelites had had for three hundred years: he showed that God had given it to them. He outlined the territory and pointed out that God had given it to them, and so the Ammonites must not take it away. The latter part of the verse speaks of the inheritance, it is therefore a question of what God has set you in.
Ques You do not try to oust a brother from his position? A young one may have more light than an older one, and would wish the older one displaced. That would be removing his neighbour’s landmark?
JT God has “set certain in the assembly”. God has set a certain person in a certain position — we cannot alter that.
Ques Will you say a little about continuing until the death of the high priest?
JT The high priest denotes Christ, “having a great priest over the house of God”. It would be this dispensation; until the end of it this rule continues. The death of the high priest points to a change of dispensation.
Ques In verse 17 you get priests and judges. How would you connect that up? It says at the end: “Eye for eye, tooth for tooth”, verse 21. Has that any bearing on the present time?
JT “If an unrighteous witness rise up” — that is [p. 371] the first thing. Then the men shall stand before Jehovah, before the priests and the judges which shall be in those days, “and the judges shall make thorough inquiry”. I suppose Deuteronomy is the spirit of heaven governing us now; typically, it is heavenly things before we actually enter heaven. Moses, although he never entered the land as in the flesh, was wonderfully imbued with the spirit of it. In the light of it he writes this book. It begins: “These be the words which Moses spoke”. They have reference to the land; that is, it governs the whole dispensation. Jehovah is the same Jehovah, but the priests and the judges were not the same; but whoever they were they were to be recognised. So that we are not to say “the former days were better than these”; the same principles govern them.
Ques Does the principle of the judges exist today?
JT Surely. For us the spiritual application would be that the priests are the judges; they come first. Later, the judgment is to come from the priests; so that the question is whether we are among the priests? If we are, we will give a right judgment.
Rem In Matthew’s gospel this eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth is, so to speak, put into your own hands.
JT It would mean for us that there is to be rectitude, accuracy in judgment, fairness. If there be a matter between two brothers they are not to go before the unbelievers. To whom are they to go? To the most spiritual man in the meeting? No, but “the least esteemed in the assembly”; meaning that all in the assembly are priests. The least of them has more judgment than the Lord Chief Justice of England, because he has the Spirit of God, and the Chief Justice may not have — he may be a Jew or an infidel.
In matters relevant to temporal things it is the least in the church; but if it is a question of restoration it is not the least in the church, but “ye which are spiritual, restore such an one”. This is a harder matter.