"WHAT MEAN YE BY THESE STONES?"
“WHAT MEAN YE BY THESE STONES?”
Exodus 20:25,26; Exodus 28:9 - 22;Joshua 4:1 - 7
I have been thinking, dear brethren, of this enquiry in Joshua 4; one, doubtless, which most of us have noticed: “What mean ye by these stones?” In the light of this enquiry I have read in Exodus first, for we have to understand what the stones in Exodus mean, as well as those in Joshua. In fact it is well to be challenged as to whether we can answer such questions when they come to us, for this is not written down in a merely historic way. The book of Joshua is typical of Christians, and the enquiry may therefore be rightly made at any time in our dispensation, “What mean ye by these stones?” They represent something that Christians have as memorials, and anything of the kind that we have, or employ, in our public relations with God and one another, ought to be intelligible and explainable. According to the margin, verse 6, the enquiry might be made tomorrow, that is immediately, from that time onward, “What mean ye by these stones?”
Now I wish to apply all this to Exodus. Indeed it may be applied to Genesis too, and other books of Scripture, for the idea of stones is very prominent in the Scriptures. It is alluded to in Genesis 11 as you will remember, stones not being used by the world’s builders. They employed bricks instead of stone, shewing that they were not in the understanding of the import of stone. Their material was of their own making. The obvious inference is that their building would not be permanent, in the nature of things it would not last. The world comes to an end. It passes away and the lust thereof, but he that doeth the will of God abides for eternity. They were not doing the will of God. A man said to his fellow, “Come on, let us build ourselves a city and a tower, the top of which may reach to the heavens; and let us make ourselves a name”. They were not doing the [p. 461] will of God, they were world builders; and their successors have continued, using material of their own making, which will not last. But stones are of God’s making. In Scripture it clearly alludes to what is permanent, and that is what I wish to dwell upon. It is what we are going on with in our meetings. The things engaging us would be of little value if they were not permanent. What occupies us may be very foolish in the eyes of our religious neighbours, but it is permanent, and is the working out of the will of God. The Lord stresses the idea of doing the will of God. He brought the full idea of it into the world and exemplified it in every respect. It underlies all moral worth. He came, saying, “Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me), to do thy will, O God”. This — the will of God — underlies all moral worth, and he that does it “abides for ever”. The world passes away, and the Babel builders in using brick for stone, wrote themselves down as building that which would pass-away. Although bricks may last a good while, they are man’s manufacture, and cannot in the very nature of things abide unto eternity; whereas stone suggests something that abides. It is permanent; a substance that is in the earth, of which indeed geologists make much; but they omit from their findings the moral idea, which suggests permanency.
Now I speak of Exodus, first, in regard to an altar which is what each of us should have, and what we should have in a collective sense as well. Individual altars are found in Genesis, but no collective ones; but Exodus contemplates what is collective, a people with an altar. And so I wish to dwell on this feature, for it refers to our public relations with God. There are our secret relations, and I have no doubt that verse 25 may be linked up with our secret relations. Where God makes an altar inoperative, He wishes us to be known here as His worshippers; so He first specifies an altar earth. There is no ‘if’ to that altar, it is to be made; as you will observe in chapter 20:24, “An altar of earth shalt thou make unto me”. It alludes to our public relations with God, as those who worship Him; and we acknowledge in it what we are — earth. But then that would be of no value if our Lord Jesus Christ had not come as Man. Altars might be made without recognition of Him, they would be of no value whatever. The altar of earth therefore, contemplates our acknowledgment of what we are and that our Lord Jesus Christ becoming Man has met, that condition. It has been met, in that in Him, as made sin, sin in the flesh was condemned, and that He “bare our sins in his own body on the tree”, (1 Peter 2:24). He was “crucified in weakness, yet he lives by God’s power”, (2 Corinthians 13:4). He was “put to death in flesh but made alive in the Spirit”, (1 Peter 3:18); so there is in the altar of earth, in our approach to God, the acknowledgment before Him of what we are by nature, and how that is met. We can offer on it, as it says, “Thy burnt-offerings, and thy peace-offerings, thy sheep and thine oxen: in all places where I record my name I will come unto thee and I will bless thee”. There we see, dear brethren, how God comes to us. The Lord comes to us, in this humble but public acknowledgment of what we are by nature, and that we approach God, through our Lord Jesus Christ. Our burnt-offerings, our peace-offerings, our sheep and our oxen, represent the spiritual wealth that we possess; the spiritual apprehension of Christ is accepted and owned there, for He comes to us — a very precious thought.
But then in verse 25, there is an ‘if’, and that refers to spiritual ability, whether we can build an altar of stone. The alter of earth is enough to give us a status before God, but it does not carry us to the full length which divine love would seek, and therefore, as I said, it is a question of spiritual ability if we make an altar of stone. If we do that we have in our minds an additional thing, the idea of permanency; for our present mixed condition [p. 463] is not a permanent condition. The way of approach is mad? For us, in spite of it, by the death of Christ. Romans and Corinthians answer to this. It is a question of a public position, which God recognises. It is the efficacy of the death of Christ, and God recognises our altar on this basis. Without it we are not Christians at all. Without an altar, there is no use in pretending to be in relation to God. But with it, even an altar of earth, we are accepted; and not only accepted but God Himself records His name in connection with it, and comes and blesses us. But He looks for more, and hence, dear brethren, the ‘if’; it is a question of ability, and in raising up an altar of stone we come into the consciousness of permanency, and that it is in Christ risen from the dead. It is one thing to accept the statement of Scripture relative to Christ — or indeed any truth — but it is another thing to have an apprehension of the headship of Christ, to apprehend Him risen; to get into our souls the idea of a Man in resurrection. He is in a permanent state, a state He will never give up. Though He was “Made of the seed of David according to the flesh”, yet He was declared, “marked off” as it should read, “Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead”, (Romans 1:3 - 4). The soul thus apprehends Him as the Son of God.
I want to mention the subject of sonship. Paul says God revealed “His Son in me”. I wish you to note the word ‘in’ there, not ‘to’. It refers, I believe, to inward capacity for a divine operation; for a divine shewing, or revealing. The Lord challenges the blind man whose eyes had been opened, “Dost thou believe on the Son of God?” The point is what the man could apprehend. Was he ready for such a thing is that? Was he capable of it? The man immediately says, “Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him?” He acknowledges the Lordship of Christ, having said in testimony, “He is a prophet”. Room had been created in that man’s soul by one [p. 464] event after another, so that he is ready for this revelation. And the Lord says, “Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee”. That puts the man back on his history. It is well to be thrown back on our histories; not in self-occupation, but as to what we have already gone through, what we have already apprehended; then we are ready for something more. As they listened He spake a parable; it is a question of what we can take in. So the Lord says to this man, “Thou hast both seen him” — that refers to past history — and “it is he that talketh with thee”. It was not simply that He was speaking to him, but with him — on the man’s level, as we may say. Great as He is. He would link that man with Himself. They were both outcasts, but they were linked up eternally in the man’s acknowledgment, “Lord, I believe”. And he worshipped Him. Do we believe on the Son of God? He could have had his altar of earth, but the Lord wished him to have his altar of stone, and that no hammer should be lifted on it, no human touch; he should apprehend the Son of God. There can be no art of man’s device in that connection, it is repudiated.
We are now in the presence of the Son of God. You can go backward and forward when you come to the Son of God. You can go back as far as you can, and forward as far as you can, but He is the s unchanged and unchangeable; yet He came in man’s form, to remain in that form eternally. Blessed fact for us! Thus we are assured of a means of relationship with God in that blessed One. That is an “altar of stone”. It is a question of whether we are equal to it. It is open to us. That is the suggestion of Exodus. Exodus is typically mainly objective, and so opens up possibilities, and this possibility is to enter upon the apprehension of the Son of God, and to have our altar in that connection. Indeed we may by faith go as far as to say we are risen with Him, for the knowledge of the Son of God brings in association — brings in our relationship with Him as sons [p. 465] of God. It is an inlet to a very blessed subject of what we are, in the Son of God.
I wish now to pass on to chapter 28, and surely we may ask, “What mean these stones?” It is not now simply an ordinary stone, suggesting permanency, but a precious stone, and an array of them. For indeed when it comes to ourselves it is “every precious stone”. In Ezekiel we read of precious stones. The king of Tyre, chapter 28, is adorned with “every precious stone”, but there are only nine enumerated. There are more in connection with the heavenly city, and more here, for there are twelve. What a suggestion in these precious stones; not only of permanency, but of preciousness in permanency; preciousness in the divine estimate, for God has placed these things in His creation, for a language. The Scriptures abound with the use of created things as a language, as a means of conveying divine thoughts and in order to make things clear to us. The types are alluded to in Hebrews as the means through which the Spirit shews things to us. These things were to shew forth divine thoughts, not only for Him to speak through them, but to shew through them. It says in Hebrews that He speaks “As says the Holy Spirit”, (Hebrews 3:7); and shews, “The Holy Spirit shewing this”, (Hebrews 9:8); and witness, “The Holy Spirit also bears us witness”, (Hebrews 10:15), all by the use of the Old Testament.
So these precious stones were set in the creation by God to be a language to us; and how blessed that God, before ever we were, had these precious things in purpose, to convey to us how precious we are in His estimation! So you get the two onyx stones, put upon the priest’s shoulders. Two is adequate testimony. The tribes are thus carried upon the shoulders, separated, may I not say, by the heart of the High Priest? Is that a separation? Could there be a stronger link in testimony than the heart of Christ? We are held, and maintained — for it is a question of strength first of all, both shoulders [p. 466] are used to support us. It is not the idea of two as a dual thought, but as if the Lord would say, ‘I will have you in testimony, and I will support you in that, but you are not separated in it’. The two and a half tribes missed this thought of unity. They thought they could make up for the obvious difference between them and the nine and a half tribes, by the altar of Ed, “a great altar to see to”. But that was not in keeping with the shoulder pieces of the High Priest, it was rather a witness to a division that they made themselves; for they had said, “We will not inherit ... on yonder side Jordan”. There are many like that; selecting a position in self-will, even rearing up an altar; but however much they may say they do not mean it, if there is will in it, they do mean it. We may say much that is plausible to prove that we do not mean certain things, but if there is will in it we do mean them, and the Lord knows it, and we know it. They raised their altar and said it was not a separate thing, but it was. They did not want to inherit over Jordan, and they were the first to be taken captive.
Well, there is the support on the shoulders, but then there is the breastplate also. The saints are thus precious in the sight of God. Would that we could see each other as He sees us! Think of these precious stones formed in the creation, in order that God, in due course, might convey to us how valuable we are! Six names on either side held together in unity on the shoulders of the high priest. Then, as if to confirm and enhance the thought, the twelve stones in the breastplate are in four rows; each stone having its own distinctive feature. Who needs to assert his distinctiveness? Who needs to assert his worth above another? Who needs to boast in himself? As the apostle says, “He that boasts, let him boast in the Lord”, and again, “Let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me”. You see there is no need for the assertion of our distinctiveness. We have got it in the surest possible place, and that is on the heart [p. 467] of Christ. Everyone has got his distinction; and there, in the breastplate of the high priest, were the whole twelve names — row after row. Permanency is there. One would enlarge on the thought of what the saints were to Jesus, in John’s gospel; and in the institution of the Supper, in Luke’s gospel; He says, “With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer”. And then in John there is the feet washing, and one taking his place in the bosom of Jesus. The idea is, that it was available, and he took advantage of what was available, and leaned on the breast of Jesus. We are all loved by the Lord, but the position on His breast has to be taken. The distinction of each is secure, for each precious stone expresses it, as in the heart of Christ. Is that not enough, dear brethren? What is particularly noticeable in Exodus is what we are, in His mind, in our service here. The particular value He attaches to each one is spoken of in these precious stones. We can leave it all with Him, and it will save us from cleavage, and maintain us in unity. Not only collective unity, but in value. Twelve indicates that we are in His hands, and are perfectly pliable as wrought in love. He can dispose of us for His pleasure, to administrate according to Him. Well now, that is Exodus; and, as I said before, we may well ask our hearts, “What mean ye by these stones?” They speak volumes to us!
In Joshua we have the subjective side; and the idea of twelve is maintained. But there is in it the idea of the individual with strength. Each of the twelve men was to take up a stone out of Jordan, and put it on his shoulder and carry it out. That is not an objective idea, as we speak, it is a subjective idea, and means that I have some power. I could not take up a stone out of the bed of Jordan and put it on my shoulder and carry it out to Gil-gal, unless I had some power. In the epistle to the Corinthians it says “quit yourselves like men; be strong”.
“[p. 468] Let all things ye do be done in love”. It makes the way to a unity in life. I can regard unity as in the saints on the shoulders of Christ, and also as in the heart of Christ, and thus can have confidence in the saints “in the Lord”. In Galatians the apostle reckons on the Lord to keep the saints together in the truth. In Joshua, typically, believers are quickened with Christ, corresponding with Colossians, and thus they have power. When you come to the confines of Jordan the power of resurrection is in evidence, pre-eminently in the ark, Christ — but also in the saints as quickened with Him. Earlier in the narrative, in Numbers, leading up to this, the saints are moving, after they got the Spirit. They are contemplated as having the Holy Spirit in Numbers 21, and they move on continuously until they get to mount Pisgah. So far it is a question of the Holy Spirit. But when you come to the brink of the Jordan, it is the ark that is in evidence, and the power and order that mark the saints. In Colossians the only mention of the Holy Spirit is in chapter 1:8 “your love in the Spirit”. So in Colossians it is not the Spirit Himself that is prominent, but His work, in the believer, giving power in the soul to take the Stone on his shoulder and carry it out, but it is not a question of any Israelite but of the tribes. It is a question of the saints following the ark over Jordan, and on the way over taking up twelve stones (signifying unity) to carry them out into the land of Canaan. There is thus a testimony in Gilgal of the power of God, not only in Christ, but also in taking the saints out of death with Him. It is power in life out of death. Not simply “newness of life” as in (Romans 6:4), but life out of death, qualifying us for Canaan. There we come to the primary thought of God before sin came in. Adam is caused to fall into a deep sleep, so that God may bring in a life out of death. What kind of a life? Not a life after the ordinary creation, as with animal or vegetable life, but with Eve it is a question of life out of death. It is the thought of God in [p. 469] relation to the assembly, what He has in His mind. That death actually came in by sin is another matter; God foreknew all, but He shewed, before the fall, what He had in His mind. We cannot say that on account of this, death must have come in some other way than through sin had the fall not occurred, for God knew that it would happen; but the manner of Eve’s creation shews that life out of death was no afterthought with God.
So in Colossians we have been “buried with him in baptism, in which ye have been also raised with him”, that is status — position — “through faith of the working of God”. It is not actual or material yet, but I am raised through faith of the working of God. Then it goes on “You ... he has quickened together with him”, (Colossians 2:13). That is a present thing. Thus I can take a stone and carry it out of the bed of Jordan, and set it down as a memorial that I have come out of death, that from this point of view, all my previous history is finished with. Quickened together with Christ, brought into that land in association with Christ, in His life, that is the end. To take up this blessed position and enjoy it is a matter of spiritual power, but it is there to be taken up. The twelve stones here represent life in unity. Colossians promotes unity. The apostle says “being united together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the full knowledge of the mystery of God; in which are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge”, chapter 2:2,3. So you can understand the force of the question, “What mean ye by these stones?” We have to answer it; as in the land I say that they refer to the fact that I have been into death with Christ, and have come out by the power of God. If my life contradicts this, I cannot rightly convey what they mean, but if I am living in the power of Christ’s love, quickened together with Him, I can not only say what the stones mean but I express it. It is the unity of life. May the Lord bless these thoughts to us all!