⬇ EPUB

READING 1 SAMUEL 17

JT I suggested this scripture, as I thought it would be necessary to see at the outset that the establishment of the kingdom, and the ordering of the house of God, and all that appertains to the house, are dependent on death and resurrection. All these things are founded on the death and resurrection of Christ, and consequently the overthrow of Satan’s power.

RSS We have here the overthrow of Satan’s power, but where do death and resurrection come in?

JT It was in that way Satan’s power was overthrown. Through death Christ annulled him that had the power of death, Hebrews 2:14. This chapter is figuratively the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus viewed as annulling Satan.

RSS You see Christ in victory here.

JT Yes, with the giant’s head in His hand. It is in resurrection He has the token of victory.

WB You would almost think it was in the way of death here.

JT The chapter presents to us the power of Satan over man, and man being in terror on account of it, having no way of deliverance; so that David coming upon the scene is figurative of Christ appearing; and we know that Satan has been overthrown through death, Hebrews 2:14.

JLJ You get that when he takes the enemy’s sword and takes off his head. David had no sword in his hand. You do not get the death of Christ in the New Testament apart from His resurrection?

JT They go together; everything depended on ^[p. 382] the resurrection.

E There could have been no victory without the resurrection.

AI What would you say the head sets forth in connection with the sword?

JT The head of the giant, as severed from his body, is manifestly a token that he is annulled. If his head is severed he is without power to do anything, because the head is the seat of all direction; the body is the vehicle through which it is carried out.

FL I suppose the thought of David taking it up to Jerusalem indicates Christ gone on high and leading captivity captive.

JT I think so. The fact of his having done so is mentioned here in Samuel, and the thought is enlarged on in Chronicles because when David is anointed king over all Israel he goes up to Jerusalem at once and takes it. It is not enlarged on here; evidently it is mentioned to show that the token of victory was taken into the place of authority.

RSS I thought Jerusalem was in the hands of the Jebusites at this period.

JT It is not said that he took Goliath’s head up there at that particular moment.

FL As to time he went in to Saul with the head of Goliath in his hand; the other is brought in here as typifying that Christ has gone up on high, and has taken the proof of victory up there, but it is not a point of time.

RSS The question is asked: “Whose son art thou?” 1 Samuel 17:58. Do you think it suggests the Father there in connection with Christ?

JT A man’s distinction is very often derived from his parentage but here, no doubt, it is rather that David’s identity should be known. I suppose Christ’s generation is a truth that we learn after we know salvation. When a man is concerned about his salvation, he is not concerned about the kind of person who is going to effect it for him, but after his ^[p. 383] deliverance is effected he wants to know about that persons identity. Of course Saul should have known, for David had been in his house.

RSS Saul, being one of the great types, in the Old Testament, of the man after the flesh, did not recognise God’s man when he appeared on the scene.

AAT The kingdom and the church are not in this chapter, are they?

JT No. What is before us here in type is the Lord Jesus appearing on the scene after Satan had had his way for centuries, terrifying man. The Lord appears and through death He overthrows him; so that this is the platform on which all that follows is based until the temple is built.

WJN It suppose you come practically into the victory that Christ has won through the kingdom and the house?

JT I think so. So that we have to wait for the enthronement of David over all Israel to get the full result of this victory. By-and-by the authority of Christ is to be recognised universally, but we come into the practical good of the victory now on the principle of faith.

GFW It appears that David and Solomon both represent Christ, but the kingdom and house are more represented by Solomon. David gives us the victory, but the house is built in peace.

JT Yes, the house is built when there are no enemies or adversaries occurrent. The great point here is to see Christ as the victorious One; because unless believers have Him personally clearly before their souls as victorious there is no groundwork for any further work in their souls. What you get in the next chapter, the conduct of David in the house of Saul, endears him to the people, so that his name is much set by. Therefore the groundwork for God’s work in our souls is the knowledge of Christ in this light as ^[p. 384] foreshadowed here.

RSS Do you think a person could have peace without it?

JT I think not.

RSS The thing that gives you peace in your soul is to see Christ victorious in resurrection. Mr. Darby asked this question of those who were exercised: ‘Are you glad to see Him raised?’ It is a very good question. If you are, I think it is a pretty good evidence that Christ is something to you.

GFW I was wondering if there was a moral correspondence today with the fact that David could not build the house. It says specifically that he was not to build the house. Solomon was to build it.

JT While having to say to enemies, the house is not in view, and I think it is so in our souls. Unless the soul is clear as to the overthrow of Satan’s power, it is not in a condition for the Spirit’s operation as to building, and therefore this chapter is very important in that way.

FL The first thing that comes out here is the re-establishment of the name of Jehovah, verses 46, 47. The people through their faithlessness and their evil conduct had caused the name of Jehovah to be blasphemed. Samson had fallen, and, further, the ark had gone into the possession of the Philistines; therefore there was apparently good reason that Goliath should hold the name of Jehovah in contempt as far as he could judge by the state of the people; and the first point is that the name of Jehovah is re-established, being brought into honour by David, not only before the enemy, but in the sight of the people.

JT In verse 47 you get: “And all this assembly shall know that the Lord saveth not with sword and spear”. 1 Samuel 17:47.

FL And in verse 45: “I come to thee in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom thou hast defied”. 1 Samuel 17:45. That was the issue.

WB God’s glory must be maintained before there is any blessing for man.

JT The condition in which the people were when Christ appeared among them really compromised God, for He was professedly known there in Israel, and yet they were under the foreign yoke, so that evidently one great point in the Lord’s death was to re-establish the truth of God’s power. The resurrection of Christ is the great testimony to God’s power, and “that there is a God in Israel”. 1 Samuel 17:46.

FL Christ was “declared Son of God with power by resurrection from among the dead”, Romans 1:4.

GAT Is your thought that our souls are set at liberty through the kingdom?

JT Yes. If your soul is not relieved of the fear of the enemy as having the power of death, clearly you are not in the enjoyment of the kingdom, nor in your place in the house. “When Saul and all Israel heard those words of the Philistine, they were dismayed, and greatly afraid”, 1 Samuel 17:11. David’s victory altered that state of things. Contrast that with the end of this chapter and the beginning of the next and what you see in Jonathan. I think there you see the state of the believer’s soul when he sees Christ as typified here.

RSS You refer to his stripping himself and adorning David.

JT Yes. David had become an object to him.

FL I suppose the way in which the type works here is, Christ is first seen going down into death, then coming up in victory in resurrection, bearing the trophies on high, then there is the testimony to who He is, and then the heart going out to Him.

JT Then David becomes precious in Israel. His name is much set by — showing that Christ is now known in the believer’s soul, not only as having accomplished the one great victory, but as superior to all others in ^[p. 386] every respect.

GFW I suppose the point is that it is not only David, but David in victory.

JT Exactly and you are personally drawn to him now. Before that the burning question was the overthrow of this giant by whomsoever; it mattered little for the moment who did it; it must be done by somebody.

FL Then David becomes the preferred man. John the baptist said: “He that cometh after me is preferred before me”. John 1:15. David is the preferred man. “Saul hath slain his thousands, but David his ten thousands”. 1 Samuel 18:7. There is none like him.

JT So that his name was much set by. It says “David behaved himself more wisely than all the servants of Saul; so that his name was much set by”. 1 Samuel 18:30.

GAT Does David displace Saul here?

JT I think he does for any who have faith. I doubt not that he displaced him in Jonathan’s soul. I do not think he displaced Jonathan in Jonathan’s soul, but Jonathan, at any rate, thought of David as first, though of himself as second.

WJN I suppose the displacing today is moral.

JT Undoubtedly so, Christ displaces every other man in your soul, however great he may be; but the most difficult matter is, that He should displace you.

FL That comes out in Mephibosheth. Jonathan is displaced in Jonathan figuratively in Mephibosheth. Jonathan dies on Mount Gilboa, and Mephibosheth, who is Jonathan in newness of life, sees only one man.

WJN But Saul is not actually displaced yet, and the displacement begins in the affections.

JT What is most difficult with us is that we allow ourselves to remain alongside of Christ. It is Christ and 1. That is what came out in Jonathan. It was David and Jonathan, but the work of the Spirit in our souls is that it should be only Christ and ^[p. 387] there is no ground for building till that takes place; till you are wholly displaced in your own soul.

GAT “Not I, but Christ”. Galatians 2:20.

AAT I suppose it is very easy to judge our acts, but we are slow to come to a judgment of ourselves.

JT We are slow to give up having a place; the trouble is that we do not accept that we are nothing. Jonathan went a great length in disrobing himself, but still he retained his own importance Did you not think what was suggested was very helpful, that in Jonathan’s descendant, Mephibosheth you see in figure the full work of God coming out? He secured nothing for himself when David was in reproach; he thought only of the king.

JT “Forasmuch as my Lord the king is come again in peace unto his own house”, 2 Samuel 19:30.

JLJ Is that why Jonathan went back, because David had not supreme place in his heart?

JT He never really forsook the house of Saul. He made a covenant with David and loved him as his own soul. It does not say he loved him more.

WHF Jonathan failed in not wholly identifying himself with David.

LTF He saved his life and lost it.

JT Exactly. He maintained a status in the kingdom with Saul. He never gave up that, although he had light as to David. He represents a large number of believers who maintain a connection with what is visible and in honour in the world; with what is the accepted order of things there, and yet they have at bottom real affection for Christ.

FL I think a great cause of breakdown as far as one can see in true believers, is the family tie. While Jonathan undoubtedly had honours, yet he implied that he put them off in putting off his robe and his weapons, but be broke ^[p. 388] down where most break down, and that is, in connection with the family.

JT Jonathan was never really formed by David. He never took character from David.

R.S.S. Why do you say so?

JT Because he never came under David’s authority and influence. It is impossible for a believer who recognises the order of things that is accepted in the world to be formed after Christ. They are formed after the system that they recognise.

WB What is the reason? It was because David was in rejection that Jonathan would not follow him. The Lord occupies the place of reproach now, and the believer has to be identified with Him in His rejection.

JT And in going out to Christ and accepting His reproach, you come under His influence; there is a formative work in your soul and you partake of His character. The class of people who came to David were not such as would help any system of things in the world. They were in distress and debt and discontented, but David gave his character to them, 1 Samuel 22.

JC They learned him in the cave as they could not have learned him in any other way; and when he gets his place as king they are qualified to reign with him.

FL So David’s associates in the kingdom were those who were in the cave with him and in the wilderness; how they come out in service is seen in Chronicles. They received their character and formation in the place of reproach in the cave and in the wilderness.

WB How would the line of things in Peter’s epistle come in here? In the first chapter the soul is brought on in the truth, and in the second the house is brought in; the Lord is made mention of as disallowed of man, but to those who believe He ^[p. 389] is the preciousness?

JT The point in chapter 1 is that you are begotten again to a living hope, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead; that is the first point, and they are begotten by the Word; then, as newborn babes, they desire the sincere milk of the word that they may grow up to salvation: “If so be ye have tasted that the Lord is good”. 1 Peter 2:3. Then you get the thought of the building.

RSS First, the kingdom, and following on that, the thought of the building.

JT But what I think we all need to see is that the kingdom is based on the truth of death and resurrection. That is the foundation of everything.

RSS Peter makes that very clear; “begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from among the dead”, 1 Peter 1:3.

JT So that if Christ is risen you have stability; stability is in a risen Man.

RSS I think you can see the necessity of the kingdom preceding any truth in connection with the house, because the house needs protection, and the kingdom has to be established to that end.

JT And you can see the necessity of the Person of Christ, as the victorious One, becoming of interest to the soul, for it is to One whom you thus regard that you submit yourself.

RSS So it says in Peter, “Whom having not seen, ye love”. 1 Peter 1:8.

JT Just so. I do not think you would be prepared to submit yourself voluntarily to one whom you did not regard as morally greater than yourself; and Christ has proved Himself to be morally the greatest of all by death and resurrection.

JLJ You would say Jonathan should have seen and owned it.

JT He should, because David had proved himself morally to be the king, not only as anointed, but ^[p. 390] in power.

GFW And if Jonathan had done that he would have come out as a mighty man under David. He would have slain giants like the others.

JT They learned how to do things from David.

Rem Jonathan never saw David’s kingdom.

JT No; but the power of the kingdom was actually realised in connection with David in rejection. The servant of Nabal testified to it. He says, “They were a wall unto us both by night and day”, 1 Samuel 25:16. There was a testimony rendered to Nabal and Abigail as to the power of the kingdom actually wielded by David in rejection; so that all those who joined David in that position realised what was there, and Jonathan could have had it. David says to Abiathar, “with me thou shalt be in safeguard”, 1 Samuel 22:23.

LEM Would you say Jonathan did not hold David as head?

JT No, he did not. He never gave David his place.

FL He had light as to David as king; he saw the end of his house was coming and the rise of David’s house was inevitable and he makes a covenant in view of it; but taking the figure of Jonathan and Mephibosheth, it seems that till Jonathan had reached the point of death he could not enter into what the kingdom meant nor what David meant. You must have Mephibosheth for that. Jonathan had to come to death and its consequences; then he will find he can enter into what the kingdom is and association, so Mephibosheth answers to Jonathan in newness of life.

JLJ You would say we must all have experience before we can do that.

FL And so by the Spirit we are brought up to the same point.

JT As having the Spirit you can accept death.

WB The two sons of Zebedee wished that they should sit one on the Lord’s right hand and the other on His left. He turned to them and asked if they were able to drink of the cup that He drank; I thought of that in contrast to Jonathan. He wanted a place with David, but did not take the path to it.

JT He would like to have the place second to David, but he would not accept what is involved in it.

Ques Is not that point brought in in 1 Samuel 23:16? Jonathan strengthened David’s hand in God and made a covenant with him, but David abode in the wood and Jonathan went to his house. That is where they severed company.

JT Yes. Previously, when David had to flee from Saul, we are told that Jonathan went to the city. He went to the city first. That is to say, he went back to the political centre evidently, showing that he never really abandoned the order of things established under Saul; but there had been development, and it would appear that the city had no longer the hold upon him, but it was rather his house now. He went to his house. One often sees believers recognising the political order of things here, and yet they love Christ. That may be given up and still the house may hold them. But all the while David was in the hold.

RSS So it becomes a question of whether you love your own kin more than you love the people of God. Is not that the great test?

JT I think so.

JC Which is it, need or affection, that helps people toward Christ? They that went to David were in need whereas Jonathan had affection for him, and yet he did not closely identify himself with David.

JT After David is distinctly separated from the house of Saul the teaching takes a turn. Now he becomes a centre personally, and all those that were in need and distress and debt and the like go out to ^[p. 392] him, and he becomes captain over them; so that clearly a new order of things is inaugurated under David now.

FL I think it answers a little to the ministry of Christ in the way He presented the claims of God and maintained the name of God before the people, but they refused it. Then it was a question of the publicans, harlots and sinners and He took them up. So though the works of David were before all the people, they did not give him his place, but the discontented and the debtors and the distressed came to him, and he took them up.

JT I am sure that is true.

RSS Is not the difficulty, to come to God’s mind about the man after the flesh? You see it coming out even in a man like Samuel, as to Saul. God says to Samuel: “How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him”, 1 Samuel 16:1; and then He tells him to fill his horn and go and anoint David. It was hard for Samuel to give up Saul, for there was something very attractive about him.

JT Yes. In principle Saul and the order of things that he dominated prefigure the state of things that Christ found here in Israel; so the difficulty for believers was in overcoming that system of things and withdrawing from it. It was really set up of God as Saul had been. It was the recognised religion on the earth set up by God, and it took believers a good while to overcome. The Lord had part in it, as David had part under Saul’s regime, but in time David has to withdraw, and then there is the introduction of a new order of things, and he dominated that; and I think David in the cave of Adullam, and those who came to him, represent Christ and His own at the present time.

WJN Is there anything that corresponds to what existed for a time ^[p. 393] after Pentecost?

JT That is just what it alludes to.

JC The first seven chapters of the Acts.

JT What we want to see is how it affects believers today; multitudes of them are connected with the order of things established in the world.

FL I am very glad we have got a bit on to this line, because I think one is conscious that very largely amongst ourselves the hindrance comes in the nature of things that have been dwelt upon as surrounding Jonathan and David. I connect it with a verse in the gospels: “A man’s foes shall be they of his own household”. Matthew 10:36. “He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me”. Matthew 10:37. I think if anyone is at all in touch with the people of God it is seen that it is not exactly the city and the place of honour that is holding us, but the hindrance is very commonly found in our own households. I have been much impressed with that the last few years. You find when there is breakdown as a test comes from God, it is frequently found in connection with one’s own household.

LEM Will you explain what you mean?

FL I refer to the links that exist in connection with the household circle. It may be the influence of the wife, or the husband, or the brother, or sister, or parent. The Lord puts it: “He that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me”. Matthew 10:37.

AAT That is, you are assuming that they are not Christians?

FL No! I am assuming that as Christians they are not set in connection with the testimony of the Christ. If they are not Christians, they are not so much harm to you, but it is as occupying the place of believers that they become a snare here to you.

JT Certainly. They are Moabites. That is what the relative is that influences a believer towards the world.

AL In Luke 14 you have them brought in;

^[p. 394] father, mother, brethren and wife, and others, are to be hated. It costs something to take a path with the rejected Man.

JT I am sure the great thing for us to get hold of is what Christ is as victorious, to lay hold of that Person in resurrection.

JC Just as He becomes everything to me, I am ready to go down.

RSS In the end of Matthew 12 His mother and His brethren were seeking to see Him, but He only recognised those who did the will of God as His mother and His brethren. The Lord indicates there what was coming, that really doing the will of God is the important thing.

JT I suppose that is so with us. You cannot, of course, disown natural relationships in their place, but a believer, in admitting the influence of a relative, is recognising the influence of Moab, and if that is not judged it will result in guilty connection with the world.

LEM You were saying the great thing is to recognise Christ as the victorious One, and connecting it with family relationships. Will you explain that?

JT The question is, Is it worth your while to sacrifice these things? The Person becomes of such interest to you that you feel it is well worth your while.

WB Psalm 45 comes in very beautifully there. The king is spoken of, and it says, “forget also thine own people, and thy father’s house; so shall the king greatly desire thy beauty”. Psalm 45:10,11.

JT Believers, who are in the light of Christ in resurrection, feel it is worth while to leave all for that Man. Then there is preparation of soul for the kingdom and for the house. 1 Chronicles does not give us any account of the overthrow of the giant, but all that you get in it in regard to David is really based on that; and all that we have here now, the kingdom of God and the house of God, depends on ^[p. 395] the death and resurrection of Christ. If believers are not on that platform there is no victory. I do not say they are not Christians, but the point in Christianity is to get your feet on the platform of resurrection in other words, to know Christ risen.

ST I notice in following the figure in connection with Mephibosheth, that in being carried away by his nurse he was dropped and made lame, so I was thinking we have to be dropped.

JT And then Christ touches you. In resurrection you are made strong.

FL I think that is a very good point, that what carries you naturally drops you, and then you become an object of notice to Christ and He brings you into His sphere of things, and you cannot leave it.

GAT Will you say a little more about getting our feet on resurrection ground? I can understand our getting the knowledge of our sins forgiven, but as to the resurrection side, how do we actually arrive there?

JT There is such a thing as resurrection ground, but the difficulty is that people have not reached it. Exodus 15 indicates clearly the resurrection of Christ. It points to the resurrection of Christ, but there is the ground that is characterised by resurrection, and Canaan is that ground; but the question is, have we reached the resurrection platform? I think that is subjective.

LTF Would the man at the beautiful gate of the temple, Acts 4, represent that?

JT That is it. When he gets his feet and ankle bones made strong, he leaps and praises God. So the believer first of all sees Christ risen, and that gives him peace in his soul, but the experience of the wilderness gives him feet as it were. I think it is in the wilderness that you learn how to walk, and in result you want to walk on resurrection ground. The prophet Habakkuk says, “he will make my feet like hinds’ feet”. Habakkuk 3:19. Naphtali was a hind let loose. The prophet begins on a low key. He begins by prayer in distress, but at the end he speaks of God’s salvation. Although there should be poverty, he would trust God, and God would be his salvation; and he says, “he will make my feet like hinds’ feet, and he will make me to walk upon mine high places”, Habakkuk 3:19. I take it that the prophet is now on resurrection ground, and he has feet that are suitable for that; then he says, “To the chief singer on my stringed instruments”. Habakkuk 3:19. He has now touched a chord that indicates resurrection.

LEM I suppose you would say that a man’s strong point naturally is apt to be his weak point spiritually.

JT A man has to be crippled. Nobody can walk here according to God, except Christ, unless he is first crippled. Jacob was crippled, in getting his name changed. It is as we are crippled that we realise divine power subjectively.

GAT That means getting your will broken.

JT Yes, and in losing any conscious strength you have. A man may be a good speaker and think he can preach the gospel, because he is an eloquent man, but the Spirit of God does not help him thus. The Spirit of God would make him feel he has no power to speak on divine things; so that he is humbled, and then God gives him power to speak.

GFW “When I am weak, then am I strong”, 2 Corinthians 12:10.

JT As sure as possible, if you feel you have ability to speak you will make a failure of it.

WB They were great speakers at Corinth, but Paul says, “I was with you in weakness”. 1 Corinthians 2:3.

JT The effect of the Spirit’s work is that you look for Canaan.

AI You see that in connection with the new power ^[p. 397] Jacob got at the brook.

JT I take it that Jacob at the brook got the Spirit’s power, which in a Christian would be the reception of the Spirit. We cannot sustain a new name without the Spirit.

FL And for Jacob it was like the brazen serpent for the people in the wilderness. And so it is a new departure from that point. It was a new departure for the people.

WB How is it that that name is again mentioned when he goes to Bethel, which means house of God? The Lord gives him that name again.

JT But He gives him more. He reveals to him His own name. In Genesis 35 God takes him up after he had gone back. You get a new section after the death of Deborah; that is an epoch, and then God takes the initiative and speaks to him. God had asked Jacob for his name at the brook, but God would not tell him His name, but at Bethel He told it to him. He says: “I am God Almighty”. Genesis 35:11. He had learned that in the house of God. That is where you get revelations.

Rem There is a considerable period of time between the brook and Bethel.

JT Yes. You might have a new name and yet be self-centred. Jacob built an altar, El-elohe-Israel; meaning, I am the whole object of God. What it implied was that God is the God of Israel — Jacob’s God. Now he got into trouble there and God said, “go up to Bethel and dwell there, and make there an altar unto God”, Genesis 35:1. He did not direct him to build an altar at Shechem, but at Bethel. At Bethel he built an altar, and called it El-beth-el, that is to say, that God has a house, and He is in control there. Jacob is not the object, but God and the house of God is the object.

RSS What is the significance of that?

JT Whatever it may represent typically, at any rate death seems to be very significant there. It is ^[p. 398] the end of an era in Jacob’s history, for he had been self-occupied; now he reaches an epoch, and in the next verse God takes up a new line. He takes up Jacob more on the line of counsel.

RSS Deborah was his mother’s nurse. It may be something in connection with what we have been speaking of this morning; the severing of links here.

JT I think it is that. No doubt the death of Deborah intimated certain natural connections that Jacob would have recognised; now he is severed from all these and a new chapter is opened up: God says, “Israel shall be thy name ... I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply”, Genesis 35:10,11.

Rem It seems remarkable that one might have the Spirit and be a considerable distance from the house of God as to the state of one’s soul.

JT But it is so, and when you turn your face to the house of God the terror of the Lord will be upon your enemies.

FL When the call comes to go to Bethel, then Jacob says to his household: “Put away the strange gods that are among you ... and they gave unto Jacob all the strange gods which were in their hand”. Genesis 35:2,4. Then Deborah died. Deborah was really a link with the sphere from which they had come out, and death had to come in to sever connection with that link, as with Abraham in connection with his father. But then there was the full response.

← Previous Article 46 of 54 Next →