⬇ EPUB

DIVINE APPOINTMENT

JT Judah (whose name signifies ‘praise’) has a unique place in Scripture as representing the idea of divine appointment based on a certain character in the person or persons appointed, whether that character be indicated prophetically, or whether it exist actually at any given time; so that it enters into localities as well as the general testimony of God. We are told that “the gifts and calling of God are without repentance” Romans 11:29, and that “God has set certain in the assembly”, 1 Corinthians 12:28. That is a question of His sovereign selection for certain services, and, as in the case of the apostle Paul, the ministry God had appointed to him was to go through, as he says, “That by me the preaching might be fully known”, 2 Timothy 4:17. Whatever others might have thought, that is how the preaching should be fully known. If others came according to God into the service, such as Apollos, the apostle made plenty of room for them in his own sphere of service. Although Paul had nothing to do with the instruction of Apollos at the outset, yet Apollos served in relation to him with the heartiest co-operation, and acceptance, too, by the apostle, whose position was not impaired by any further appointments of God or other help brought in. I thought we could see in the psalm the place that Judah had; he was Jehovah’s sanctuary. His name signifies praise; and although the facts in Exodus hardly bear out the idea of Judah being “His sanctuary” yet it was in the mind of God, doubtless, in view of characteristics that should fit in with the idea of the sanctuary, whether they were current at the time, or whether they were prophetic. God, knowing the end from the beginning, makes His appointments ^[p. 266] accordingly.

PL Would the lowliness which the sense of sovereignty would produce contribute to the spirit of mutuality?

JT Just so. You feel that if God puts one forward, either by prophetic indication or by direct support at the time, it is according to His perfect knowledge of the person or persons. And the name given to Judah undoubtedly was prophetic; it indicated that there should be praise, which surely has to do with the sanctuary.

Ques Is the recognition of divine sovereignty and mutuality, divine appointment and making room for one another, the way praise is helped practically?

JT I think so. I think mutual co-operation makes room for the sanctuary, and that is what comes out in Judah pre-eminently. He had a large territory allotted to him, but he was magnanimous. He represents the love, the greatness of love, which is not selfish or restrictive; it welcomes others to share with it what it has.

HEF Have you in mind, in saying that, that Judah asked Simeon to go with him?

JT Yes. Referring back to Joshua 19:1 - 9, we would all remember that Simeon’s portion or allotment was inside Judah’s. (Joshua 19:1 - 9). God could easily have given Simeon a portion otherwise; He could have given Judah a smaller portion and given Simeon his by itself. But this is the way God elected to have it, for the very reason just suggested, that is, to bring out in Judah what was there. God loves to bring out the good that is in us.

Rem Judah’s spirit in making room for Simeon, of whom it had been said, “I will divide them in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel” Genesis 49:7, was really of God.

JT I thought so. God loves to bring out the good that is in us, and we are tested sometimes in ^[p. 267] order that the good might be brought out. If the good is not in us it is not brought out; there is exposure; but in Judah’s case the good was there.

Rem The Lord Jesus Christ of necessity must come of the tribe of Judah.

JT All that enters into it; that is to say, what is potential as well as what is actual enters into the selection of Judah for this first place. As we were remarking, his name indicates much in a potential sense, and his part in somewhat modifying the hostility of his brethren towards Joseph indicates there was something good in the presence of bad. In the presence of evil in others he and Reuben had something good in them, which God always takes account of. Reuben would have delivered Joseph entirely, and Judah prevailed on his brethren not to kill him (Genesis 37:26,27). The idea of influence for good comes out in Judah, and then the part he takes in relation to Benjamin in procuring the food in Egypt and his speech before Joseph (Genesis 44:18 - 34), all bring out this element of good, this predominance of good. He shines where he is greatly needed.

Rem You have something in your mind as to why Judah was chosen at this particular moment in connection with this character of conflict.

JT I thought the good was showing itself in a very distinct way in Judah, especially in Caleb; for the tribe has to be accredited with all that attaches to it.

HEF While you make a good deal of God’s sovereign choice, would you say that the history of Judah shows that there was nothing arbitrary in that choice; there were certain features that justified that choice?

JT That is what I thought. Even if the features be not present when God makes the choice, they are there potentially, and He knows; in due course they come to light. We cannot always judge from the ^[p. 268] outset; we do not always see as God sees, but if God gives a place of prominence to any, He knows why, and He loves to bring out the features that He knows are there.

HEF Is it our business to recognise that sovereignty?

JT It is indeed, and then the one that is in an appointed position is great enough to make room for others.

Ques In Judges 1 Judah says to Simeon, “Come up with me into my lot, and let us fight against the Canaanites”. Judges 1:3 Is mutuality indicated in the “let us”?

JT That is the brother who is speaking. First we have: “And it came to pass after the death of Joshua that the children of Israel asked Jehovah, saying, Which of us shall go up against the Canaanites first, to fight against them? And Jehovah said, Judah shall go up; behold, I have delivered the land into his hand. And Judah said to Simeon his brother, Come up with me into my lot, and let us fight against the Canaanites, and I likewise will go with thee into thy lot; and Simeon went with him” Judges 1:1 - 3. It is a very beautiful beginning to the book of Judges.

JHB What is the bearing upon ourselves of these thoughts relating to Judah?

JT They refer to anyone whom God sees fit to put forward in His service. Then if He sees fit to put another forward in His service the question will be: Will the first make room for the second? Will they work together? That is, I think, the present bearing of a passage like this.

JHB I think that is helpful. Was there another tribe more prominent than Judah for a time before he came to the front?

JT Yes, the birthright was Joseph’s. Primarily the birthright was Reuben’s, but he lost it. Joseph got it on the principle of sovereign selection, and now ^[p. 269] Judah has the first place. So that someone has been displaced; indeed, twice there has been displacement on the principle of sovereignty. Now how is Judah going to behave? Through this book you will notice that Ephraim, who was the leading tribe according to the place Joseph had, is arbitrary; that is, he was not equal to the position, and suffered accordingly; whereas Judah is quite equal to the position here, and I think he represents what runs right through, for royalty belongs to Judah, all centring in Christ. It is the spirit of Christ that makes room for others.

JHB Does Psalm 78 bear on this?

JT “And he rejected the tent of Joseph, and chose not the tribe of Ephraim, but chose the tribe of Judah” Psalm 78:67,68.

JHB Historically that came to light later than what we are reading about.

JT Quite so. Psalm 114 makes the choice anterior to both these incidents. Then Zechariah says, “Jehovah shall save the tents of Judah first” Zechariah 12:7. And then we know that “our Lord has sprung out of Juda”, as we are told in Hebrews 7:14.

Rem Revelation 5 is very fine: “the Lion of the tribe of Juda” Revelation 5:5 prevails eventually.

JT The prevailing spirit for good comes to light; “the Lion of the tribe of Juda ... hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof” Revelation 5:5.

PL David was the subject of sovereignty as the psalmist says: “He chose David his servant, and took him from the sheepfolds”, Psalm 78:70. Then, in relation to the mighty men, does he make room for the spirit of mutuality in others?

JT He does indeed. He made too much room for Joab, but that is another thought. I think that is rather a weakness: Joab was “too hard” 2 Samuel 3:39 for him;

^[p. 270] that is another thing, but, generally speaking, the room he makes for the mighties is very fine.

EWL God would support that which is the outcome of His own sovereign activities?

JT He does; He comes in to make good what He knows is there. He knows the end from the beginning, and if He makes an appointment He has that in view. The history of Judah throughout supports the prominence which the tribe acquires.

Ques Is this the way things work out in localities, that there should be those who may be regarded as divinely appointed, that such would recognise others, and then there would be praise to God as an outcome?

JT That sets out what I have in mind very distinctly.

Rem The great issue would be in praise to God.

JT It is the great end in view in all the testimony of God, that all is to culminate in His praise. The book of Psalms is the testimony to that. The great end in view is the praise of all to Jehovah.

Rem Hence the importance of what you have suggested with regard to co-operation.

JT The seriousness of refusing that is seen in Diotrephes of whom John says, he “receives us not”, and further he “casts ... out of the assembly”, 3 John 9,10. Diotrephes would not admit of others serving with him. There was the spirit of intolerance; whereas we get the opposite here in Judah. He speaks to his brother, asking him to go with him, and they go together and fight together. Then note the recurrence of Judah’s name: in verse 4: “Judah went up”; in verse 8: “The children of Judah fought against Jerusalem”; then verse 9: “Afterwards the children of Judah went down to fight against the Canaanites”; and verse 10: “And Judah went against the Canaanites that dwelt in Hebron”. The Spirit of God seems to love to name Judah in this connection,

^[p. 271] as if God was pleased with the state of Judah at the moment in his movements, so that He repays him so far for his largeness of view. Judah is ready to take on Simeon, and Simeon is ready to go with him and fight in a subordinate way, but nevertheless to fight. So there is success and victory.

Rem The merging of Simeon in Judah in that way is very beautiful; Simeon does not seem to be receiving any prominent place, but is content to be merged in Judah.

JT That is the thought; Jehovah did not say anything as to Simeon fighting along with Judah, but He had given him a place in the territory of Judah, and Judah’s seeking the co-operation of Simeon here shows the excellent relations that existed between them.

PL Would Moses have all that in mind in the blessing of Judah: “Hear, Jehovah, the voice of Judah, and bring him unto his people; may his hands strive for them; and be thou a help to him against his oppressors”, Deuteronomy 33:7?

JT That fits in with what we are saying; also Jacob’s word: “The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be”, Genesis 49:10. That is very beautiful as showing what was there, as I said, either actually at the time, or potentially, God knowing all.

Ques Why do they take Adoni-Bezek, with his thumbs and great toes cut off, to Jerusalem, where he dies?

JT You will observe that it says of the children of Judah that they had taken Jerusalem and burnt it with fire: “And the children of Judah fought against Jerusalem, and took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and set the city on fire” (verse 8). Jerusalem belonged to Benjamin; why then should Judah take it? Benjamin makes no complaint; had he been a ^[p. 272] quarrelsome brother he would have made a complaint, but he had good reason to regard his elder brother Judah. Judah had spoken most touchingly of him to Joseph, and therefore Judah taking Jerusalem shows that there were excellent relations between him and Benjamin too. Obviously Benjamin valued the service rendered, for it was one of his cities. He could not possibly suffer loss by the capture of it by Judah, and he makes no complaint so far as we can see. So that Jerusalem has a place in a spiritual sense as taken by Judah; it was to be “the city of the great King”, Psalm 48:2. It is to have a place equal to Judah’s own, henceforth to be associated with Judah in a special way as the royal city. Now there must be something in that place, spiritually, to deal with such a man as Adoni-Bezek; there must be something there to deal with a condition like that in the best way. They deprive him of what signifies his natural power; he was a man of great natural power, thumbs and great toes indicating natural power, what we might rely on naturally in the service of God; and it is a great service to deprive us of that — to render that null and void in us. He died at Jerusalem. They brought him to Jerusalem, indicating the kind of influence that is at Jerusalem, Judah having already captured it.

Ques If the features of Jerusalem in a spiritual sense were found with us, would that kind of element among us die?

JT I think so; there are elements like this and you know what to do with them. Certain may have been prominent, and may have done certain things; they are on our hands, and Jerusalem is the best place for them. It is a question of spiritual influence instead of direct discipline; only that influence can bring down this sort of thing. Jerusalem stands for what is general against what is local. One great thought is “Jerusalem above” Galatians 4:26, not simply, Jerusalem in heaven, but “Jerusalem above”, Galatians 4:26 giving it a certain predominance and influence because of its elevation. I think many are helped that way who are unduly local, by being brought under the influence of what is general, which is what Jerusalem stands for.

JAP As we are all brought under the teaching of the Spirit of God are we led to value what is general?

JT I think it is a great day when we emerge from what is merely local to what is general, for the general idea is necessarily greater; I am afraid many of us are unduly local.

Rem “Judah was his sanctuary” is a matter of divine appointment, but it says further “Israel his dominion”, Psalm 114:2.

JT Just so; Israel brings in a wider thought.

ROS Would the children of Israel asking Jehovah “Who shall go up for us ... first?” show that they recognised that it was His dominion?

JT There was the recognition of Jehovah’s rights and of His sway. This thought of Jerusalem is one of the finest in the chapter really, if it is understood, if we read it from our understanding of Jerusalem; and this is the only way to read the Old Testament aright; we must read it with the eyes of the New Testament to get help and detail.

Rem In that way we should be great gainers by coming under the influence of “Jerusalem above ... which is our mother”. Galatians 4:26 It has delivering power, and such men as Adoni-Bezek die; they cease to be what they were. They had executed discipline upon him, but they did not kill him; that is, to put it in christian language, they did not exclude him from fellowship. They brought him where his natural proclivities ceased to act against the truth; he would be ^[p. 274] overwhelmed there.

HEF What have we to learn from the way Adoni-Bezek had treated the seventy kings?

JT It shows what sort of man he was — the cruelty that was there; and it is what we are all capable of, even in the things of God, if we are acting on the line of fleshly ability and power. In Jerusalem a man like this is rendered null and void, so to say; his power is taken from him. But if he moves where there is little spirituality he may yet do damage. Jerusalem represents what is spiritual. A man may be harmless in a spiritual meeting when he might do damage in an unspiritual one. He recognises the righteousness of God’s ways; that is what is so encouraging about him (verse 7); you could not retain him in fellowship otherwise. But he is not spiritual; so he is not a person to be at large; he is better under spiritual influence with persons to look after him in that way.

Ques How would “the upper springs and the nether springs” connect with this?

JT I think in these lie the power to deal with such conditions. The position of Judah deserves great attention, the recurrence of the expression ‘Judah’ as representing something that pleases God in this connection. That is to say, a brother, or brothers, put forward by God in His service and quite equal to receiving help from others without any jealousy, quite equal to receiving them and profiting by their co-operation; that is the point, I think. So God mentions Judah over and over again because He is pleased with him under those circumstances. I do not think we sufficiently take account of the part divine Persons have in the service here on earth. Every meeting affords something for God if it is spiritual; Divine Persons get more out of such meetings than any of us, and in the circumstances mentioned here Jehovah had great pleasure in Judah; He mentions him so frequently and helps him too.

^[p. 275] And then we see the kind of support that comes in in connection with Othniel and Achsah, because they are to continue this. The spirit of Judah, if it is to be continued, is to be on those lines, through “the upper springs and the nether springs”.

JHB Are two different kinds of spirituality seen in Othniel on the one hand and Achsah on the other?

JT Othniel is a warrior, because if this service of Judah is to be continued we have to be warriors, and warriors of a superior kind, because the service to be rendered involves the overthrow of what represents the world of literature. One who sets himself to overthrow that among the brethren has a heavy war on hand. He will have to suffer. So that Othniel is a man of courage. But then he is a man of affection too; he has something in his mind as a prize, and in that he represents the spirit of Christ. The end of all this war is to secure the assembly in principle, and that is worth while. The Lord Jesus gave all for that.

ROS David asked about the prize before he went to slay Goliath (1 Samuel 17:26).

JT There should always be that — an incentive — as indeed in the Lord’s case: “Who for the joy that was set before him”, Hebrews 12:2. That is a perfectly right thought, and appears here in a striking manner in Othniel. There is a prize in the end. And so with Jacob; he went to Padan expressly for a wife under the orders of his father and mother, but the question of a wife did not come up in Padan until Laban enquired about wages. A wife would be the wages (Genesis 29:18). That is what every servant should be labouring for. As soon as our brethren around us recognise any obligation to us, we say, We do not want yours but you. When Laban raised the question of wages, the answer was Rachel, that is, the assembly. Anyone not labouring with that in view is not in accord with the mind of Christ. It is a ^[p. 276] question of having the assembly in view in all our service, so that Christ may have the assembly, and that is what entered into Othniel’s exploit here. Achsah, in her position, is equally true; she recognised that the position required springs of water. She moved her husband first to ask of her father a field, but when she approaches her father herself she seems to be more aggressive; as if the nearer we get to God the more encouragement we have to pray. She asks for “springs of water”, and she gets them.

JHB These things would represent certain features which would be for the glory of God in His people — the woman representing the subjective state pleasing to God.

JT Judah’s spirit is to be continued. We must consider Othniel and Achsah as to what they represent. If we have rightly understood the position of Judah we can intelligently and profitably consider the position of Othniel and Achsah because they come in as of the family that, in this particular setting, gives such distinction to Judah. We must consider Caleb in this particular setting. The thought of belonging to the tribe of Judah is seen in Caleb’s time, and again in David’s time, and also in that of Christ.

PL You would never trust your thumbs and great toes once you have learned to prove what the upper and lower springs suggest. Would not the thumbs suggest upper power, and the great toes the lower?

JT I think the thumbs would allude to the power of intelligence. The thumb is the strongest finger. You do get the index finger also in Scripture — a very interesting subject, but the thumb suggests the power of intelligence, what it may do in keeping people down (as suggested by the expression ‘under his thumb’). That is a poor thing, if God is seeking to put certain ones up or use them alongside one.

^[p. 277] The idea of the great toe may be the power to kick or do harm to persons.

Rem So that great as a warrior might be he would not continue the conflict for its own sake; he would have something greater and nearer his heart, more important to him than victory.

JT Very good; you mean Achsah, typical of the assembly. Victory would be secured by the beautiful way indicated here of carrying on the service, that is, the upper and nether springs. Instead of using one’s own natural power one relies on the power of God, by self-judgment making room for the Spirit — the power of the Spirit of God. As the prophet says, “Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith Jehovah of hosts”, Zechariah 4:6.

Rem Achsah says, “Give me a blessing; for thou hast given me a southern land” — that would be the position; but for the gain and enjoyment of that you need the upper and nether springs.

JT That is what I think really takes the place of the thumbs and the great toes, which represent natural power.

JHB What do the upper and nether springs severally represent?

JT I suppose the upper springs might be taken as alluding to Ephesians — the elevated side of things. The nether represent what is here. As has been suggested, the toe is the power below — the lower affections. The nether springs would include, say, John 4, where the well springs up.

JHB Would the nether springs suggest the Spirit as meeting and displacing that which is of the flesh in us, and the upper the Spirit as leading us into the great thoughts of God?

JT Quite so. The nether springs involve, I think, the complete displacement of what is peculiarly mean about us, the vicious things that we are capable of in ^[p. 278] speaking against others. They originate in the lower affections, and so Peter says that we are to lay aside “all malice and all guile and hypocrisies and envyings and all evil speakings”, 1 Peter 2:1. That is all those mean things that so mark men and women in this world, the mean things that are current, that are employed against persons whom we do not like. I think “the lower springs” imply that all that is negatived.

JHB What is meant by the expression you have used: ‘the lower affections’?

JT As soon as they are purified (as in the case of the woman in John 4) you can appeal to what is within you; you can call upon all that is within you to praise God (see Psalm 103:1). All those affections are now suitable for divine praise, instead of being employed for the expression of the flesh. So that Romans 7 gives the process through which we are called upon to go if we are to reach “the nether springs”. It is an introspective sort of process, but you emerge as on the Lord’s side — like the sons of Levi, after Moses came down from the mount (Exodus 32:26). He could not bring the law into the camp; and that is just how it is with a person who has not gone through Romans 7; the law has to be broken outside, as it were, because the flesh is always against the law of God; it ever serves sin. So that it is a question of being on the Lord’s side, whether I am on the Lord’s side authoritatively or not; whether I can go right over on to the Lord’s side or whether the flesh holds me. So that the process results in: “So then I myself with the mind serve God’s law” Romans 7:25; that is, I have found my feet spiritually; I am now dominant in my own establishment, and say, like Joshua: “As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord”. Joshua 24:15. I am on the Lord’s side.

WHH Did not both these features appear in Caleb? Can we not trace it back? We can see how ^[p. 279] he appreciated divine wealth in the land, and how he met difficulties with his brethren.

JT Joshua 14 would bear out what you are saying; Caleb comes to Joshua and says in effect, ‘You remember the word of Jehovah concerning me and thee at Kadesh-barnea, after I had been sent to search out the land’. He is a man who can go back on his history without a tremor; he can call attention to what he was. He was on the Lord’s side. He can go back forty years and he was spiritual then. He had, so to speak, gone through Romans 7. He kept with the people of God; he never gave them up; he went all the way round with them; he refers to “when Israel wandered in the wilderness” Joshua 14:10. He admits that that was the condition of things; there was no definiteness about Israel, but he was definite. That is the kind of thing here in the beginning of Judges; it is Judah, but the Judah of Caleb’s time. That is the idea, and now Caleb is providing for a continuance of that in his son-in-law and daughter.

JAP Should that experience of Romans 7 be gone through early in the history of the believer?

JT That is the thing; can I refer back, as Caleb did, to earlier days? What were my experiences then? This process taken on early makes room for the nether springs. Young people are very prone to these vicious things against others; but now instead of evil speakings and the like I have the wholesome thoughts of God, what is of God.

Ques Does that come out in Colossians 3:12,13: “Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of compassion, kindness, lowliness, meekness, long-suffering; forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any should have a complaint against any; even as the Christ has forgiven you, so also do ye”?

JT I think that is the idea. The nether springs provide for ^[p. 280] all that.

ROS We read in Psalm 84:5 - 7: “Blessed is the man whose strength is in thee, — they, in whose heart are the highways. Passing through the valley of Baca, they make it a well-spring; yea, the early rain covereth it with blessings. They go from strength to strength: each one will appear before God in Zion”.

JT It is persons of that kind that continue the principle seen in Judah here.

Rem It is encouraging to see what you say, that God would preserve these things down through the generations, bringing in another generation a step in advance of the previous one.

JT To bring it down to a spiritual application: what time in Judah’s history have I lived in? The name means ‘praise’, and his history is always culminating in that. Have I been in accord with the period of Caleb, with “the upper springs and the nether springs”?

PL Do you think we might have, at the close, a panoramic view of Judah’s history at every point to bring out the varied excellencies of Christ?

JT It is a very fine study to find out what these features of Judah are, and whether one is in accord with them. This is one of the finest periods in Judah’s history, because both here and in Joshua 15 we have the history of this incident. God is given first place in regard of it.

JHB What do we learn from the fact that Othniel was the first of the deliverers?

JT He was a man of resources. In Judges 3 we are told: “The anger of Jehovah was hot against Israel, and he sold them into the hand of Chushan-rishathaim king of Mesopotamia” Judges 3:8 (meaning Syria of the two rivers). That means he was a king of great worldly resources; and the children of Israel served him eight years. Then “the children of Israel cried to Jehovah; and Jehovah raised up a saviour to the children of Israel, who saved them, Othniel the son of Kenaz, Caleb’s younger brother. And the Spirit of Jehovah was upon him, and he judged Israel; and he went out to war, and Jehovah gave Chushan-rishathaim king of Syria into his hand; and his hand prevailed against Chushan-rishathaim. And the land had rest forty years” Judges 3:9 - 11.

^[p. 281] That is the first judge, and he is a sort of type of the kind of thing that is sure to succeed — a man of spiritual resources, and these spiritual resources involve not only himself, but his wife; that is to say, Christ and the assembly are in view.

JHB That is important in a day of recovery.

JT I do not think God will let us have any rest till we recognise the assembly. “The land had rest forty years”. Judges 3:11. That is the principle running throughout the book. If we do not recognise the assembly we shall have trouble. Othniel secured Achsah and had his resources in the two kinds of springs; that is the whole position, I think.

← Previous Article 29 of 32 Next →