LEVITICAL PRIVILEGE
LEVITICAL PRIVILEGE
JT The book of Joshua, it seems to me, is designed to foreshadow the assembly’s position, as well as her heavenly testimony, and I think the way in which the Levites are viewed represents the assembly in that light. There are three things said of the Levites in this book in regard to their inheritance; that the sacrifices of the Lord were their inheritance; that the Lord was their inheritance; and that the priesthood was their inheritance; that they had no inheritance in the land. Then, they are given forty-eight cities and their suburbs in which to dwell.
WB Is there any significance in the number forty-eight?
JT Yes, I think it is an allusion to administration. I think the cities were to be centres of influence, which is a very important idea. The levitical influence was to be universal in the nation.
Ques What is the levitical influence?
JT The influence of a people that have no inheritance upon earth, but have to do with God. They have approach to God; they have the place of the firstborn with God (for the Levites were taken instead of the firstborn), as representing God’s portion in the whole nation. A people thus privileged would necessarily have a most beneficial influence, and in the antitype a heavenly influence, because the antitype is the saints viewed as the “firstborn ones registered in heaven”, Hebrews 12, and having no inheritance upon earth.
AFM Do you make any difference between the Levites as a tribe and the priestly family?
JT The priestly family was confined to Aaron. Here they are included in [p. 127] the levitical family.
WB The priesthood was from the tribe of Levi.
JT Yes. In verse 4 it says, “The children of Aaron the priest, which were Levites”; they were included in the Levites. But the idea conveyed in the family of Levi is different from the idea conveyed in the priesthood, because the tribe of Levi was God’s portion out of Israel. They were taken instead of the firstborn. It seems to me that that follows properly on the truth of resurrection, because resurrection in itself is not limited to the church, and therefore is not properly church-privilege, and should not be so regarded. It is an immense privilege to have part in resurrection, but resurrection is not limited to us. It is a universal thing. It began with Abraham, and the blessing of Abraham is universal.
AFM Do you refer to the nations, where it says, “that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles”?
JT Yes. “In thee shall all the nations of the earth be blessed” will have strict fulfilment in the millennial state of things.
JNH What does the resurrection of the just include?
JT It includes all the just, all that have part in the first resurrection. But if you take account of those that have part in the first resurrection, you will find that there are some who are especially privileged. Revelation 20 speaks about the first resurrection, and there are those who reign with Christ. It says: “I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them”.
PHF What is the privilege that is peculiar to the church?
JT I think that the church is alluded to there. But he goes on to speak about certain ones who had been already under review in the earlier part of the Revelation, certain ones who had suffered; and he mentions them specifically, else it might be considered [p. 128] that they were omitted in the first resurrection. The first resurrection includes all the just, but the assembly clearly has the first place, because, as a matter of fact, we are raised before those that suffer during the period indicated in Revelation. But still the thought of resurrection is universal. It applies to all.
GWH Why do the sons of Aaron appear here?
JT I think it is a special mention of the priestly family, but still they are included in the Levites. But the thought in the Levites in this book indicates privilege, which is not universal.
ARS That privilege is connected with the Lord’s things, the sacrifices.
JT Yes, and the Lord Himself, and the priesthood, and then, besides that, they had cities. They lived exclusively in cities. They did not live in the country, and there is a great difference between life in a city and rural life.
ARS Is the city the idea of exclusion?
JT There is a certain education, a certain culture involved in the life in a city which is not in rural life. In the antitype it is our position that is in view; that is, our life is in the city.
GAT Which city do you mean, the city of refuge, or the city of blessing? There are: six of refuge and forty-two of blessing.
JT I think all the forty-eight were alike, in this sense, that they were residential cities for the Levites.
JNH I have been greatly interested in the thought about the city representing the capital. Do you make a distinction among the cities as to the culture and training required for the capital of the nation and administration of affairs?
JT Yes; life in a city is regarded both in the Scriptures and in the world as different from life in the country.
JNH Abraham looked for a city, A city would [p. 129] in some way minister to the necessities of a man living in the country, would it not?
JT That is not what I see here. Abraham looked for a city. That is somewhat different — a different line of thought. The cities that the Levites actually possessed were not built by them, neither were they built by Israelites.
WJN We are told that Abraham “looked for a city”. Is not that rather future, in the sense that it is to come out in manifestation by-and-by, but what is here refers to the present?
JT The book of Joshua deals with the present state of things. It deals with Christianity as it has been inaugurated in connection with Christ’s resurrection and ascension, so that the cities are not as Jerusalem. The idea is not the way they were built, or the material used in their building. That is not before the Spirit. What is before the Spirit is that there is a class whose life is in the city.
Ques What advantage attaches to that?
JT There is a certain culture and education involved in life in the city, in a building, and those that are viewed as in the cities have no inheritance upon earth. When you seek the antitype you can see at once that it refers to Christians. For the moment those who are specially privileged have no place on earth at all. They are associated with God and His things, and they live in a city. The Levites have the sacrifices and the priesthood, and their dwelling is in the city. But the whole country was to be influenced by them.
Ques Do all Christians live in the city in the sense you speak of?
JT All Christians are typically in the levitical tribe; this tribe refers to Christians. The great advantage of the types, read in the light of the New Testament, is that they emphasise the truths of Christianity.
[p. 130] Ques Would you say that all Christians are not in the good of this?
JT That is another matter; but there is great importance in our getting hold of the divine thought for us, and that is, that we are to have no inheritance upon earth. The effect of that is that you do not seek one on earth. Barnabas is a representative Levite of the New Testament. It says of him: “having land, sold it”.
Ques Do you mean that you would not advise us to have land?
JT No. It is a question of what you look upon as your inheritance — your treasure? There is no more harm intrinsically in buying a piece of land to farm with the object of making a living by it than in buying a suit of clothes. The point is the principle upon which you hold things. If a man owns a farm, that is not to be his inheritance or to give him position here. I used to think that Barnabas sold his property because he did not care for it any more, but that is not the way Scripture presents it. If that had been his thought he would not have sold it; he would have given it away. But he sold his property because he was going to use the price of it for the testimony.
WHC And that he might be more free for the testimony.
JT Barnabas is first seen as coming to the apostles with the money. He saw that he could make good use of it, and so he brought it and placed it where it could best be used; not in the bank, but at the feet of the apostles.
BSS I suppose it was hardly according to divine order that Barnabas, as a Levite, should have had any land?
JT Clearly not.
RSS And now he was affected by what was presented to him.
JT His act shows that the antitype had more [p. 131] weight with him than the type. The Levite was the type, but the antitype had come in; the true levitical idea had been inaugurated, and that affected him greatly, and he acts in the spirit of it.
WHC Would you say that every Christian by having the Spirit is a Levite?
JT I think so. I think every Christian in the divine thought is called to it.
WHC He may not be in the good of it; that is the Spirit’s work in him.
JT Yes; but do you not think that it is important that we should have the light of it brought to us, because that sets us in exercise. If I see that God has called me to the levitical position it sets me in motion, and I do not want to have an inheritance on the earth, I do not want to have my mind on earthly things. God has called me to heavenly things.
RSS I am not quite clear as to what you said in connection with resurrection and the Levite. The levitical tribe was clearly taken in place of the firstborn. They had that position, but the life of the firstborn was forfeited. I suppose it was that you referred to?
JT No. That is Exodus. I was rather thinking of the way in which the Spirit introduces the Levites in Joshua. In being introduced in the book of Joshua they are introduced in connection with the teaching of Joshua, and Joshua does not present atonement, nor redemption. He deals with life. The Spirit of God shows us in Joshua, how Christ has overthrown death through His death and resurrection, and that in resurrection a new order has been introduced. That is the point in resurrection, that a new kind of man has appeared. Now the levitical idea in Joshua is in advance of that. The thought of a new order of man is not confined to the church, because every family will be on that principle. But the tribe of Levi having a special place refer typically to the [p. 132] church which has a special place -with God. That was the reason why I thought that the subject would indicate something of church-privilege, as being beyond resurrection. Joshua does not show us the Levites carrying the ark. The necessity for that had ceased. He does not speak of the service of the Levites. He speaks only of their inheritance and this is typical of the saints, not in the way in which the Lord uses us in His service, but according to the inheritance which He has given us.
ARS And that is a heavenly inheritance.
JT Yes.
ARS And you would connect resurrection with this in that way?
JT Quite so.
ARS And our sphere is a heavenly one?
JT Yes. And that must be preceded by resurrection, because the people who have a heavenly portion are a risen people. They come into resurrection, but they have more than resurrection.
ARS You have been speaking about the levitical position.
JT Yes, we are speaking of their position, not of their service.
WB So the Levites in the type represent the church. Who do the twelve tribes represent?
JT I think the twelve tribes, viewed as distinct from the Levites, have reference to Israel, as God’s earthly people having an earthly portion, whereas the church has a heavenly portion.
WB They are all the people of God.
JT Yes, but the Levites had a higher portion. They had to do with the things of God only; and the point was that they were to influence all the tribes.
WB And does this answer to the thought of every family being named of the Father?
JT No doubt. It is indicated here that God,
[p. 133] in the sovereignty of His ways, gives the Levites a special place. They represented the firstborn and were God’s portion. Ephraim had the firstborn’s place on earth, and Levi represented God’s portion out of the people; Levi represents the firstborn in heaven.
JNH What are the suburbs? The Levites did have the use of land reaching out a certain number of feet from their cities.
JT Two thousand feet was to be measured from the wall of the city outward. Over that territory they had a special influence. It was theirs, but it was to be used for their cattle.
PHF What is the significance of that strip of land round their cities?
JT Well, as to the antitype, there is a difference between what is strictly the assembly and what you may call its immediate precincts. What is strictly the assembly is pervaded by the Spirit. That is, no one is in the assembly who has not the Spirit. But the suburbs are near to the city. They are not the city, and they are not the country. So that there is a zone, you might say, between what is strictly the assembly and what is not. Your children, and all that pertains to you, come under your direct influence, but your children and your property are not in the assembly. They may subserve the assembly, but they are not part of it. I have no doubt that is the idea in the suburbs. Do you not so take account of your family and your property? It is not the world, and yet it is not the assembly, but it may be made to subserve the assembly. The cattle even are taken into account.
WB In the case of a believing wife who has an unbelieving husband, it says that the children are holy.
JT Yes, and even an unbelieving husband is sanctified by a believing wife.
[p. 134] WB What you say would mean that nothing with a Christian would drop down to the level of the world.
JT The Christian properly never regards anything on that level. His business is not carried on on that level. His servants and all that pertain to him are in close proximity to what is spiritual.
GAT Then, are the suburbs in the sphere of privilege?
JT It is a privilege in a sense, but it is not the city.
GAT Would you make a distinction between privilege and blessing? Are we not brought into privilege by baptism, while blessing is by the Spirit?
JT That is helpful. Perhaps such a distinction may be made.
WHC It is a great privilege to be introduced by baptism into a sphere on earth where all the light is, and where the Spirit of God is, and the ministry of the Spirit, and the ordinances, everything by which we can reach the blessing where we can receive the Spirit, by whom we enter into the blessing.
JNH The children, as brought in at the beginning, were brought within the circle of the operations of the Holy Spirit within the range of the influences you have spoken of.
WHC The ordinance of circumcision illustrates that. It was a great privilege for a child of a Jew to be by circumcision introduced into the sphere of blessing.
JNH In Hebrews 6 they are said to be “partakers of the Holy Ghost”. They were inside the circle of the Holy Ghost, where He operated, and it speaks of the possibility of some going out of it. Is that the thought you have as to the suburbs?
JT In Hebrews 6 they had more. They were made “partakers” of the Spirit; they had “tasted [p. 135] of the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come”. It referred to Jewish believers who had been brought into the Christian circle of things and were in danger of apostatising, of giving up Christianity. As our brother was saying, baptism, or being born of Christian parents, places us within the reach of privileges. It gives us an immense advantage. It is a privilege, and the question is whether we take advantage of the opportunities afforded us.
JNH As I understand it, through baptism I bring my child into the sphere of privilege, but he may fall short of the sphere of blessing.
JT Yes; he may fall short of the Spirit and what lies in the Spirit.
AFM What is the sphere of the church’s administration, and what is it that the church ministers? It must be very good.
JT Well, that would raise the whole question involved in the course of the testimony in the Acts; that is, the apostles were accustomed to the tabernacle and the temple, both of which were erected in a rectangular form. They were oblong. Now in the sheet let down from heaven in Acts 10, was an allusion to the place and influence of the assembly, as seen when the truth of it was fully developed. The sheet was four-cornered. It was a square, but in the form of a vessel. I take it that it alluded to the four points of the compass; the whole earth; that the whole earth was now in the mind of God, so the vessel of administration was presented as four-cornered. That was a new education for Peter, but it was an education that was involved in his levitical position when he understood it.
WHC That would answer to the Lord’s commission: “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature”.
JT Quite so. But it would be from heaven. The sheet was let down from heaven, following upon You mean as to Saul?
JT Yes. The Lord shone upon Saul and spoke to Saul from heaven. Administration from a heavenly centre had begun, and now God would educate Peter to make room for this. So the four-cornered sheet was let down from heaven, and in it were all manner of beasts. And God said to Peter, “Rise, kill and eat”. Peter said, “Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean”. And God’s answer was: “What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common”. God was intimating that administration from heaven involved the benefit of the whole earth; that there was now no section of the earth especially favoured; and I have no doubt that the forty-eight cities of the Levites pointed to that; that the whole nation was to be influenced by the tribe of Levi through their cities.
AFM The twelve tribes, then, would symbolise the whole creation, the world at large?
JT I think so.
AFM The world is in the position of reconciliation at the present time. The casting away of the Jew was the reconciling of the world.
RSS It is carried out in the holy city in Revelation 21. It is four-square.
JT That is what I was going to say, and it shows what our brother has suggested in his question about the administration, that the administration through the assembly is universal; it is four-square. Then what it administers would be in keeping with its nature. It would administer according to its nature. The assembly is formed after Christ. The administration would be in accord with the gospel as preached by Peter to Cornelius and his company: God had “anointed Jesus of Nazareth ... who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed [p. 137] of the devil; for God was with him”. So that the administration would be the administration of good, “He went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him”.
Ques In what way did the Levites administer good in Old Testament times?
JT I do not know whether they were up to the truth. What we have to deal with is the antitype, because we know, as a matter of fact, the types prove nothing in themselves. But you can understand that people who were exclusively occupied with the offerings, with the priesthood, and with God Himself, and who lived in cities, would be of a different kind from the ordinary Israelite who lived in the country, and had no direct access to God.
RML The different services depended upon the Levites doing their part in Israel.
JT The allusion to them in Deuteronomy 33, I think, helps: “Let thy Thummim and thy Urim be with thy holy one, whom thou didst prove at Massah, and with whom thou didst strive at the waters of Meribah; who said unto his father and to his mother, I have not seen him; neither did he acknowledge his brethren, nor knew his own children: for they have observed thy word, and kept thy covenant. They shall teach Jacob thy judgments, and Israel thy law: they shall put incense before thee, and whole burnt sacrifice upon thine altar. Bless, Lord, his substance, and accept the work of his hands: smite through the loins of them that rise against him, and of them that hate him, that they rise not again”. (verse 8 - 11). I think a people such as that indicates would have a very great and a very good influence over others.
WJN The priesthood is included in that.
JT Clearly, the Urim and Thummim were there. And so in Joshua.
WJN Malachi 2 says of Levi: “My covenant [p. 138] was with him of life and peace; and I gave them to him for the fear wherewith he feared me, and was afraid before my name. The law of truth was in his mouth, and iniquity was not found in his lips: he walked with me in peace and equity, and did turn many away from iniquity”.
ARS Is the practical effect now of the influence of the Levites, that if we, as Christians, are true to our levitical position, the heavenly influence will spread? I was thinking of the vision of the waters in Ezekiel 47, the measurement showed first, water to the ankles, next to the knees, and finally a mighty river, waters to swim in, and finally running out into the desert. Is that the idea?
JT Yes, I have no doubt that the position of the heavenly city in the kingdom will be the full answer to the position of the Levites, because its influences are universal, it is four-square.
ARS It seems to me that the great thing would be to see that the Lord’s people are in the good of this position, because, if they are, the influence is sure to be felt.
JT And you want to make a point of your influence being a heavenly one.
ARS What I have in mind is, for instance, a great many saints have the idea that as soon as a person is converted they should set him to work to get others in. They are pulled in, no matter whether they are up to their heavenly position or not.
JT But God will not have anything lower now in the way of testimony than that which came out in Christ, and that was a heavenly testimony.
GAT Does that testimony come out through the church today?
JT It should; and hence the importance of recognising the levitical position, because it is designed in the book of Joshua to set forth our [p. 139] position now. We are to influence all below; the heavenly city will do this in the future.
Ques Has it reference to both the present and the future?
JT Certainly. The thousand years has reference to all testimony that was placed in the hands of man previously; everything that was committed to man’s responsibility is taken up and maintained in the heavenly city.
EHT The position of the Levites is a specific one. Before God all Christians are Levites, but all Christians are not exercising their privilege. They have a position in the world to come in administration. Do Christians who take advantage of the privilege now have any greater position in the holy city then than those who do not?
JT That is a very good question. I think that the influence that we shall exert in the future will be co-relative with the influence that we exert now, because the formation is going on now.
GAT We get that in connection with the pounds and the talents, do we not?
JT Yes, we do.
Rem It is a great thing at the present moment if there is a heavenly people down here in the good of their citizenship.
JT It is a very great thing for God, because the testimony that God intended in Christianity was not fully rendered -until after Acts 9. What corresponded strictly with the heavenly city did not come out until after Paul’s conversion; although the city is founded on the testimony of the twelve, yet its completion is the result of the ministry of Paul.
Rem There will never be a day of privilege like the present one.
JT Never another day like this.
Rem And what the blessed Lord would have us [p. 140] exercised about is to be in the good of the privilege at the present moment.
JT It is very remarkable that in Malachi the last of the prophets, the tribe of Levi should have such an honourable mention. It is very encouraging for our day, because we might think that the position or testimony of the church is no longer recognised.
GAT It is a very common expression that things have gone to pieces.
JT Well, I believe God would revive and is reviving the light of the church. Every testimony, every bit of service, depend upon it, should have in view the church’s place in God’s counsels. That is what should give tone to all activity in service.
WB You said that the Levites had three things: the sacrifices, the priesthood, and the Lord Himself. How had they the Lord?
JT Jehovah was their inheritance. The Lord said to Abraham, “I am thy shield and thy exceeding great reward”. That was a wonderful thing to say to a man, that God Himself is to be his reward. In the presence of that, that God was his reward, Abraham thought of an heir. He said, I have no heir. It seems to me to be an immense thing to have God as our portion. “Jehovah is your inheritance”, was said to Levi.
WJN Genesis 15: 1 was after Abraham had acted on the principle of surrender in the previous chapter.
JT Yes. The connection of a city, or cities, in Scripture is of intense interest, because, as far as I see, it is connected in the mind of God with the church exclusively.
AFM This was a matter of grace, was it not? They did not build the cities; they were given to them. What is your thought about that?
JT I think the actual cities, what they are, is [p. 141] not so much in view, but rather the fact that they have cities, in contrast with an inheritance in the country. When we come to consider the cities, the truth comes out that it is not cities, but one city. But forty-eight cities would indicate that their influence was to be universal in the nation. The cities were scattered all over the country.
Ques Is your thought as to the importance of the city in Scripture that God has only one city for a place of administration, and that is the church?
JT Yes. Hebrews says, “Ye have come to ... the city of the living God, heavenly Jerusalem”. When the thought of God is developed there is one city. Then we have the “assembly of the firstborn [who are] registered in heaven”. That is the antitype of the tribe of Levi.
GAT What is the connection between the city of Revelation 21, the city that is four-square, and the forty-eight cities of the Levites, as to the present time and the way it will come out in the future?
JT There is clearly a numerical connection between the forty-eight cities and the city that is four-square. The city being four-square refers to its universal character. There are three gates on either side of the city, making twelve. In the city there are twelve gates, and on the gates are the names of the twelve tribes of Israel, and at each gate is an angel. Moreover, each gate is one pearl. Now all these things put together show that the gates are of immense importance. A pearl represents what is most valuable of all the things that are mentioned. The precious stones were in the foundation, but a pearl is that which in itself is used as a figure of the church. It was the “pearl of great price”. The idea of a pearl is not that it reflects light. The idea in a precious stone is that it reflects light; but the idea in a pearl is intrinsic preciousness. It is “a whole” — one pearl. It is not cut, so that it refers to what is [p. 142] intrinsically valuable in the eye of Christ, not simply what reflects Him. Peter was a precious stone. He was a cut stone. The Lord had formed Peter through discipline, so that he reflected Christ in the foundation, and so as to all the apostles. But I have no doubt Paul would convey something of the pearl. That is, he brings the church in according to what it is for Christ’s affections, and the fact that the gates are of pearl shows of what importance they are. All that issues from the city necessarily goes through the gates, and all that enter the city go in through the gates; the names of the twelve tribes are there, and angels are there. In God’s ways previously administration was either in angelic hands or in the hands of the twelve tribes of Israel, whereas now it is all taken up and placed in the city. In other words, administration now — all government, issues from the city.
RSS The gospel of Matthew shows that. It presents the church in that character.
JT I think so. I think the gospel of Matthew was to support the testimony of the twelve. If I understand it, the gospel of Mark was to support the ministry of the twelve; their ministry was accredited by the ministry of the Lord; and the gospel of Luke supports the testimony of Paul; and I think that Paul brings in the tribe of Levi. That is, the gospel of Luke shows that the saints, those who believe, have their names registered in heaven; that the saints of the present dispensation have a heavenly position. “Here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come”, and the heavenly city is the one that is to come. What kind of administration will it be when you think of those gates being pearls! What an influence will issue, what a governmental influence will issue from those gates! That influence will be universal.
WJN You speak of Paul’s ministry giving [p. 143] what answers to the pearl. Does that refer to the formation of the church in divine affection?
JT That is what I thought. I think the gates are the result of his ministry.
AFM If the gates set forth the unity and beauty and worth of the church as according to Paul’s ministry, what about the interior of the city? That has not been mentioned.
JT It has been pointed out that a city is completed in its gates. It is said of Jericho that the builder completed the city in his youngest son. He laid the foundation in his eldest son and set up the gates in his youngest son. That to my mind is evidence that the idea in setting up gates is completion. Paul set up the gates, because the city was completed by his ministry. He did not found the city, but he completed it. I have no doubt that Ephesus was the completion of it.
AFM The crowning ministry.
JT Yes. The gates were the public place of judgment in Old Testament times. So the husband of the wise woman was known in the gates.
Ques Was not that where Lot was found?
JT Yes, he sat in the gate of the city. And it was in the gate of the city that Boaz purchased Ruth.
Ques Would you say that power and authority were represented in the gates?
JT I think so.
WB Will you say a little more about the foundation?
JT You have the name of each stone in the foundation given to us, showing that each apostle was to reflect something distinctive. They were not all alike. There were not two of them alike; they were all different. But, taken together, they would be administratively a complete reflection of Christ, I [p. 144] think.
WB What is the thought in the cutting of the stone?
JT I suppose that the light should be reflected. I do not know much about precious stones, but I understand that they reflect light.
WB It shows the special pains which God has taken with them?
JT Yes, the way He has discipled them. Peter is the model as to how the apostles were formed by Christ.
GAT What about the interior-of the city?
JT The book of Revelation does not show us what is within.
GAT It says, “The Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it”.
JT Yes, but the interior is not opened up to us.
WB Except that it is pure gold.
JT Yes. That is what it is. But you can understand that Paul placed the church in heaven. He brought to pass the interior. He placed the church in heaven by his ministry; but what the Spirit shows us is not the interior, but what is manifest to all. What the Spirit sets forth is the vessel of administration.
AFM As it appears to the universe.
JT Yes, as it appears externally. The inside corresponds with the exterior. So you may understand something of the interior from the exterior; it is an expression of what is within.
GAT There is a street in the city, at any rate, all of gold. Is the interior for the pleasure of God?
JT Quite so. It is what the city is God-ward. In a general way, John 20 shows us the interior, whereas the Acts shows us the exterior, what is manward. John 20 shows us the saints within with Christ. In Revelation it is a question of seeing what comes out of heaven administratively.
RSS You mention that there were two [p. 145] other references to the Levites in the book of Joshua.
JT Look at chapter 13: 14: “Only unto the tribe of Levi he gave none inheritance; the sacrifices of the Lord God of Israel made by fire are their inheritance, as he said unto them”. And the last verse: “But unto the tribe of Levi Moses gave not any inheritance: the Lord God of Israel was their inheritance, as he said unto them”. Then chapter 18: 7: “But the Levites have no part among you; for the priesthood of the Lord is their inheritance”. That was what I alluded to.
WB If these three things were known and enjoyed by us, there would not occur difficulties in matters of judgment that have so often arisen in the church.
JT Their food would be the sacrifices of the Lord God of Israel made by fire, which refers to the sacrifice of Christ as bearing God’s judgment. That is a food that in itself would build up a very remarkable constitution, a very good constitution. It would render them qualified to judge and to discern. Then they had the Lord God of Israel as an object for their affections. And as to their office, they had the priesthood. That was their employ. Aaron is included in the tribe of Levi. The Spirit of God includes Aaron here.
Rem I thought it was only the family of Aaron that had the priesthood.
WHC The Levites had the service of God manward, and Aaron had it Godward.
JT I think they are simply viewed here as the priestly tribe, and so in Deuteronomy they had the Urim and Thummim. First of all, they have for their food the sacrifices of the Lord God of Israel made by fire. That is their portion for food. Then they had Jehovah as the object of their hearts. And their employment was the priesthood; they had access to [p. 146] Jehovah.
WB There are many of us here who are connected with gatherings. If we get hold of this it might be very helpful in details in the assembly, because it has to do with the inner life. As you said, the exterior would come out of that. If we were enjoying together these things what would come in the way of discipline and that sort of thing would be put right without much trouble.
JT And you can see that the priesthood would play a very great part later on. The death of the high priest determined the period when the man-slayer was released.
AFM The death of the high priest refers to the coming of the Lord?
JT Yes; it is the termination of a period. The period of a high priest marked time, and his death marked time.
JNH I think that on previous occasions you made quite a distinction between priestly and levitical service.
JT I hope we may come to that, but what we have in view now is the type of the church as having a heavenly portion.
JNH And Levi is included there?
JT It is the priestly tribe.
JNH In Deuteronomy 33 the tribes are really in question, are they not? There are the blessings of Israel, and then it describes the various tribes. That would confirm what you say. Moses is the man of God who blesses the tribes.
JT Yes, and Levi is marked off as the priestly tribe.