LEADERSHIP (3)
[p. 137] LEADERSHIP (3)
Exodus 4:14-17; Exodus 4:27-31; Exodus 6: 26 - 30; Exodus 7: 1 - 7; Exodus 32: 1 - 6; Exodus 15: 20, 21
JT Our subject this morning is Aaron and Miriam. It reminds us at the outset of the brotherly spirit in service; it is not a question of gift, but brotherly feeling and affection, and ability to speak, and through this the obligation to take a secondary place in service — not an independent line as with the apostles. Each apostle had his own line of ministry. In this type it is the same ministry, the same current of things, and the introduction of the brother, or brothers, of a brotherly spirit, with readiness to take a second place in order to augment the position already inaugurated. Aaron appears as an afterthought. God intimated that He would go on with Moses alone, but Moses felt weak and unable to take the service up by himself, and so God in this first passage tells him about his brother, or rather by his question, reminds him of him. “Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know that he can speak well”. Aaron represents divine resources and reserves, but he is not brought in in any way to supplant Moses but to supplement his service. So that the deficiency that Moses asserted of himself is to be made up, the whole position is to be buttressed by the addition of Aaron. The verses read in chapters 6 and 7 show respectively the ages of the men. Aaron was older than Moses, which would not be an accident; God intended that there should be, through this fact, occasion of exercise in each of the brothers. Moses would have to overcome by moral power the discrepancy of age. Aaron came to that in time because he called him lord, showing that the moral feature is a great thing in service. Miriam is Aaron’s sister in Exodus 15, but in Numbers 26 she is ‘their’ sister, just the three in the family so far as the record goes. They will be tested [p. 138] family-wise. Natural relations are often very testing; nature by itself does not help at all in the family of God. It is always treacherous. That God should take up three from one family is remarkable. In view of their great age and being from one family, this confirms that these three persons are intended to furnish teaching for all servants coming after.
JD Allowing fully for the sovereignty of God in the selection of Moses, there is what has been in Moses of his own volition in coming forward. Do you think Aaron recognised that?
JT Well, he follows in happy accord: “And Jehovah said to Aaron, Go into the wilderness to meet Moses. And he went, and met him on the mountain of God, and kissed him. And Moses told Aaron all the words of Jehovah who had sent him, and all the signs that he had commanded him. And Moses and Aaron went and gathered all the elders of the children of Israel; and Aaron spoke all the words that Jehovah had spoken to Moses”. He did not add a word of his own apparently, but just spoke the words that God had spoken to Moses; so he falls into the position at once.
LES Would the family at Bethany somewhat correspond — Mary and Martha and Lazarus — the Lord qualifying them to serve?
JT There is a link, I am sure. It is only seen operative at the final supper at Bethany where they are all functioning together.
JH Is there some indication of service in the words, “the Levite thy brother”?
JT That is to be noted. He is not simply ‘a’ Levite but ‘the’ Levite, as though God would distinguish him in this way. The fact that his name is not mentioned earlier is to remind us that prospective servants are under the eye of God early. For God begins far up the stream with all of us if He is going [p. 139] to use us. He knew Aaron and called him “the Levite”. Why does He call him that? Evidently he had manifested the instincts of the Levite.
AEH Is this what betrays him later when he makes the calf — the idea of “the Levite” overcoming what might have been priestly in him? I was thinking that he was more on the level of serving the people there, and this betrayed him into falling below his proper level as placed of God. The Levite element has to be under control of what is priestly.
JT Well, clearly he fell under the influence of the people. His failures are marked by coming under other influence, whether it be the people here, or Miriam later, or the example of Moses as in Numbers 20. I think Aaron’s history reminds us of the dangers attaching to an amiable brother, a brotherly brother. He is apt to forget divine claims in meeting the claims of the brethren, falling under their influence; not being alone with God enough, too much with the brethren, and too much concerned about having their support.
HB Is that what is meant by “in brotherly love [have] love” (2 Peter 1: 7)?
JT That is just what is meant. Peter says that love is the saving element. Brotherly love, if in excess of love, will expose us to undue influence of brethren, which is always damaging.
AAT We have Paul and Barnabas working together and later Silas working with Paul. They work in couples. Is there any link in that?
JT Yes; the Lord sent out the apostles and the seventy others two and two. The point here is that Aaron shall augment fully what has already been inaugurated; therefore the connection in those cases would be that the brotherly spirit is allied with the apostolic spirit in Paul. The authority of God in Moses, or in Paul, might be too much for the brethren, so that the addition of a brother or brothers [p. 140] is intended to assure all of right sympathy and right feelings generally.
JHE Would you say Jacob rose to the situation when Joseph brought his sons to him? He really did the right thing in blessing them.
JT Yes. He was entirely above Joseph’s influence. With anybody in Egypt but Jacob and Pharaoh, the word of Joseph would be enough and there could be no withstanding it; but Jacob had blessed Pharaoh, and now he is dealing with Joseph. Joseph says, “Not so, my father”, and you may be sure that there was authority in his voice, but Jacob is not influenced by that. He says, “I know, my son, I know”.
AR Do Moses and Aaron represent one idea rather than two?
JT Yes. Aaron is brought in to augment what is there. Aaron was to supply the deficiency in the power of speech; other things came in later, but what comes into Exodus 4 is that God would go on with Moses alone.
WL Do we find today these two qualifications in one brother at the same time — ability in the way of gift coupled with moral qualifications?
JT Yes; we certainly find them in the true Moses and Aaron, who is the High Priest of our confession. We begin with Christ in all these matters and see the perfect blend in Him, and Paul came nearer to that than anyone else. Paul sent Timothy to Corinth that he might fill out the thought he had as to example — that they might learn his ways as they were in Christ.
WL So that the moral thing is by far the greater.
JT I do not think any brother should assume that he cannot do this or that. The apostle Paul never faltered, even if it were to carry money from the brethren or to build a fire; he was ready to do what was needed. The Lord Jesus says, “I am in the midst of you as one that serves” (Luke 22: 27). We must see that we do not [p. 141] appear to be clerical in any way, to be above our ordinary work. Paul says, Why should Barnabas and I not cease to work? but we are not doing it. Why should we not marry wives? but we are not doing it. They voiced what was right, and the saints should respect those rights, though they were not asserting them. There are rights, and the saints should recognise those rights, while the servants themselves are ready to do anything that is to be done. Aaron could speak well. It is said of Paul in Acts 14 that he was the chief speaker.
Ques I suppose no service that involves several persons could go on without the moral qualities we have spoken of, in addition to co-ordination?
JT That is important, and is more plainly stated in chapter 6. Here God says in Exodus 4: 16, “And he shall speak for thee unto the people; and it shall come to pass that he shall be to thee for a mouth, and thou shalt be to him for God”. God has made both mouths and He is going to give effect to both mouths, and in result I expect Moses’ mouth exceeded Aaron’s. In the meantime God is taking the matter in hand. It is a great undertaking. As we are entering on the service of God, we are entering on a great matter; it is already inaugurated, and it is a question whether we can fit in. Here God says, I am going to be with both your mouths; so that both increase in power, increase together. Therefore their speech would be a fit representation of God because there would be no disparity at all, no divided thought. Then in chapter 6 Moses raises the question of his poor speaking again. He says he is “of uncircumcised lips”. It is a critical stage: Moses is not yet established and Aaron has come on the scene and chapter 5 is the crisis. God is hardening Pharaoh. It is a testing time and Moses is still afraid of his speaking powers, which is rather poor because God had said He would be with his mouth.
Then Jehovah said in chapter 7, “See, I have made thee God to Pharaoh”, as if in the crisis God is capitalising what can be used. He is not capitalising Moses; his great words in Egypt are not capitalised at all. It is that God is to be with the mouths as they are, not simply with their words, but with their mouths. Who has made man’s mouth? God has not only made them, but He is going to be with our mouths, that is the point. The Lord at Nazareth opened His mouth, and those present wondered at the words of grace that were coming out of it.
Now God says, “See, I have made thee God to Pharaoh; and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet. Thou shalt speak all that I command thee; and Aaron thy brother shall speak unto Pharaoh, that he let the children of Israel go out of his land” (Exodus 7: 1, 2). Now it is a question of brethren working systematically but according to God’s appointment. It is not a question of Moses liking Aaron particularly, nor is it that Aaron is such a brotherly man, but that God is placing them together. It is a question now of the representation of God to Pharaoh.
JS Is it God Himself establishing the Mosaic system here?
JT Well, that is what it is. But really it is a question of what He is doing in this room, of suggesting to us that we have to work together. If I have to take a second place let me do it, or if I have to take a first place let me do it; but without the undercurrent of brotherly affection it will not be real or effective. Christianity involves systematic divine representation; and underneath all there must be moral authority developing and that is what happened in Moses’ case.
JD Do you think the opposition from the inside, from the difficult people he was serving, as well as from the hardness of Pharaoh’s heart on the outside, established Moses’ leadership? They did not listen [p. 143] to him, chapter 6: 9. But in the face of all that, leadership was being established in Moses’ heart on brotherly lines.
JT That is the idea. God is working to get the institution moving. It is a great matter, but the state of the people is inimical to it. It is very difficult to serve brethren that are disgruntled. If the brethren are oppressed or divided, there is great difficulty in serving them; chapter 5 brings that out. But the terrible thing is that God is hardening Pharaoh’s heart. God had furnished Aaron as speaker for Moses, and Moses is to be God to Pharaoh. Let no one be afraid of this. What is before us here is a type of what God has set up in Christ in heaven. God is thus represented down here. The Spirit in the assembly implies an anointed system in which God is represented. Here God is putting His stamp upon what He has effected. There is representation of God both to the saints and to Pharaoh.
JD This seems to open up that passage, “A brother is born for adversity” (Proverbs 17: 17).
JT There is one called “the brother Quartus” in Romans 16: 23. That he was a brother evidently characterised him. But we have to pay attention to the tendency in Aaron of coming under the influence of others; and it is sure that if brothers form special links with each other that is what will happen. Exodus 32 discloses a bad underlying state in the people. There is a crisis and these two men are before us. We have had Moses representing authority, and he does not come under evil influence, he is definitely with God in this great sorrow. Aaron’s first great failure is that he was influenced by the people, failing to be with God. As Moses was on the mountain with God, Aaron and Hur were left with the people. But in the absence of Moses he came under the influence of the people and blamed them for the great sin. He says, “the people ... are set on mischief”. He was [p. 144] right in a sense, but he was wrong too in listening to them. Indeed he was guilty as having become the instrument used in their idolatry.
JHE Would you say that was Peter’s failure? When he was with the Jews he was like the Jews. Paul had to reprove him.
JT Before certain came from James he ate with those of the nations, but when they came, he withdrew. That is what we have here in Exodus 32.
JH Was it seen too in Barnabas, a very brotherly man, who was carried away “by their dissimulation”?
JT Quite so. Barnabas was in it. It just confirms what we have been saying — the damage of special links, brother with brother.
JS Does Paul in the temple with the vow on him illustrate the same thing?
JT Well, he does. These are all cases included in what we are saying, how a servant may come under wrong influence.
APT In Matthew 16: 22, after the Lord had given Peter great truth regarding revelation, he says to the Lord, “God be favourable to thee, Lord; this shall in no wise be unto thee”. Was Peter there really coming under another influence?
JT Yes, but he would bring the Lord under his influence. He was trying to divert the Lord from the path of the will of God. The Lord says, “Get away behind me, Satan; ... for thy mind is not on the things that are of God, but on the things that are of men”.
JD The Corinthian error was in forming parties. 1 Corinthians 4: 6 says, “not letting your thoughts go above what is written, that ye may not be puffed up one for such a one against another”. Does that help?
JT Yes. That first joint service of Moses and Aaron was highly successful. Exodus 4: 31 says, “And when they heard that Jehovah had visited the [p. 145] children of Israel, and that he had seen their affliction, then they bowed their heads and worshipped”. That was a highly successful bit of service at the start. Then the crisis is seen in the fifth chapter, the state of the people and the state of Pharaoh; and in the sixth chapter, “Jehovah said to Moses, Now shalt thou see what I will do to Pharaoh”, verse 1. And in verse 9, “Moses spoke thus to the children of Israel; but they did not listen to Moses from anguish of spirit, and from hard service. And Jehovah spoke to Moses, saying, Go in, speak unto Pharaoh king of Egypt, that he let the children of Israel go out of his land. And Moses spoke before Jehovah, saying, Lo, the children of Israel do not hearken to me: how then should Pharaoh hearken to me, to me of uncircumcised lips? And Jehovah spoke to Moses and to Aaron, and gave them a commandment to the children of Israel, and to Pharaoh king of Egypt, to bring the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt”. That is a settled thing in God’s mind from verse 13, overruling all Moses’ felt weakness and anxiety. It is a settled matter.
The next thing is the genealogy working out into the priesthood. In verse 16 we have the sons of Levi. Their generations start with Levi and end with Phinehas; Moses and Aaron are in mind in all this, who these two men are. What a history behind them! That is what you get in verse 26, “This is that Aaron and Moses, to whom Jehovah said, Bring out the children of Israel from the land of Egypt according to their hosts. These are they who spoke to Pharaoh king of Egypt, to bring out the children of Israel from Egypt: this is that Moses and Aaron”. God is telling us here that these men are going through. He has made no mistake in the selection.
And then it is said, “And it came to pass on the day when Jehovah spoke to Moses in the land of Egypt, that Jehovah spoke to Moses, saying, I am [p. 146] Jehovah: speak thou unto Pharaoh king of Egypt all that I say unto thee. And Moses said before Jehovah, Behold, I am of uncircumcised lips, and how will Pharaoh hearken to me?” He reverts back to his weakness. But Jehovah inaugurates the system of which we have already spoken, chapter 7: 1. This would support Moses and Aaron in the great task assigned to them. God says in Exodus 7: 15, “Go unto Pharaoh in the morning — behold, he will go out unto the water — and take thy stand by the bank of the river in front of him; and take in thy hand the staff that was turned into a serpent”. Aaron is brought into all this, and Moses and Aaron are seen running right through to chapter 12 in this immense undertaking of God. There is no let-up at all and Moses is increasing in power in all these operations until he can say, “I will see thy face again no more!” Exodus 10: 29. All this indicates how the service of God must go on.
GAT Would you say that from verse 13 of chapter 6 Jehovah puts Moses under a command? It is not what Moses can do or cannot do, it is what he must do.
JT Quite so. It is God now. God is to be here representatively. That is why the system is set up in this way: “Jehovah said to Moses, See, I have made thee God to Pharaoh”. Now that is not an empty commission, God is to be with his mouth. Applied to ourselves today, this is a question of God, we are in God’s service, we have come into something that was inaugurated hundreds of years ago. It is a question of our coming into it, and representing God in His service. What they say to Pharaoh is in power; that is what is seen in chapter 7; and what these two men say to Pharaoh will have power until Pharaoh has to let the people go.
JH What is the thought in Aaron doing these signs before [p. 147] Pharaoh?
JT They represent God to bring down the world as the Lord Jesus did. It is Moses as God, Moses in the dignity of God in representation. You do not get Aaron as priest officially until chapter 29. Here we are dealing with the person of Aaron, what the man is himself.
AR That is what is in mind in Corinthians, in the prophetic meeting. The prophet brings God in, and as it says, God is among you.
JT Yes. The prophetic meeting, as we call it, is carried on in the light of the representation of God. Hence, as a brother is prophesying God is known there.
AMacD Is this a good balance in service: chapter 6: 26, says, “this is that Aaron and Moses”, and verse 27, “this is that Moses and Aaron”?
JT It is a good balance. When the Spirit says, “Aaron and Moses”, that is a recognition of Aaron’s age and brotherliness; but when He says, “Moses and Aaron”, that is the recognition of Moses’ place morally and his power.
Ques Is there any great evidence that Aaron is a man of faith?
JT There is nothing said of it, but I would say that he was. Aaron is drawn into the faith system. Moses is specially designated to the system of faith and Aaron is joining in what Moses is doing. We read about Aaron’s burial (Deuteronomy 10: 6), a remarkable burial, only two at the funeral! “And they went up” (Numbers 20: 27), a beautiful evidence of his recognition of God’s right to him, entire submission to the will of God. He died by the will of God, like the Lord Jesus. It is a most touching thing to think of those three up there, Moses disrobing Aaron and putting the high-priestly garments on Eleazar. God honours Moses in that way. “Moses and Aaron among his priests” (Psalm 99: 6).
GH Would you say that God seems to be stressing [p. 148] the feature of representation at the present day in brethren having to do with the authorities?
JT Yes. On the one hand the authorities represent God to you (Romans 13: 1 - 6), but on the other hand, on the moral side, you represent God to them, 1 Peter 2: 9. That is the test, as to whether there is any testimony for God. God is putting as a spear-head “a conscience without offence towards God and men” (Acts 24: 16). God is using that in the young men before the tribunals. It is a moral representation of Himself.
GAT Would you say that is the essential without which you cannot expect God’s support?
JT Yes. It is a remarkable time in that sense; and it is a question whether we are entirely given up to conscience, or if we are modifying the thing for the sake of gain, for the sake of what accrues to us financially.
AR We might do it for a way of escape. In Exodus 5 the pressure is crucial. Today we might modify it as a way out; we might volunteer for something easier.
JT That is what I was thinking of. It is a question of whether you are putting conscience in the front, a conscience void of offence before God and men.
JH So that the will of God enters into it.
JT Putting the moral side first; first things first, and righteousness, involving a good conscience, has this place.
AB In chapter 6, it says in the one case, “this is that Aaron and Moses”, and in the other, “this is that Moses and Aaron;” but at the beginning of verse 27 it says, “these are they”. Is there something in that?
JT God is calling attention to them. God is really dealing in this critical part of our subject with His own system, a representation of Himself, and He is capitalising the position not simply by telling Moses, You are to be God, but, “I have made thee God”.
[p. 149] God did it. You may be sure that God will be there, He will be there to make it effective. Pharaoh is made to feel that he has to do with God, he is dealing with God.
Ques Would you say that a real leader would feel that he has to act like God and for God?
JT If there is to be representation, there must be that. “Let us make man in our image:” that is representation.
WL Would you say that would be inseparably linked up with the brethren?
JT Quite so. Aaron is that element.
CR Paul could say, “But thanks be to God, who always leads us in triumph in the Christ, and makes manifest the odour of his knowledge through us in every place” (2 Corinthians 2: 14). Does that apply?
JT It does apply. God is doing that. Paul says, “an angel of the God ... whom I serve” (Acts 27: 23), and “having therefore met with the help which is from God, I have stood firm” (Acts 26: 22).
FNW As to Moses being conscious of his weakness, do you think that sometimes a sense of weakness may be God’s working? Paul had a constant thorn in the flesh and that would require Christ’s service.
JT Well, Moses would require help too, but here he is telling God he has uncircumcised lips.
FNW In some of our localities leadership from God is hindered through over-occupation with weakness.
JT Therefore God augments our position, linking us on with the brethren. But now He says, “I have made thee God” — not, ‘to the brethren’, but — “I have made thee God to Pharaoh”, because that is where you will need more support. It is not said that Moses was God to the brethren. It is “God to Pharaoh”. God is capitalising the position, so that Moses might succeed in the representation of God; and he did succeed.
JTJr When Moses and Aaron got into the subject [p. 150] they did well. They feared before they started their address, but when they got into it, God helped. Is that not very often true?
JT Very often a brother is very timid before he stands up, and he gets far more support than he reckons on. Because God wants to fit him, He is with his mouth; he will do better the next time.
LES Do you not get the idea in Jeremiah where he says, “Behold, I cannot speak; for I am a child. But Jehovah said unto me, Say not, I am a child; for thou shalt go to whomsoever I shall send thee, and whatsoever I command thee thou shalt speak. Be not afraid of them; for I am with thee to deliver thee, saith Jehovah” (Jeremiah 1: 6 - 8). And then it says, “And Jehovah put forth his hand and touched my mouth; and Jehovah said unto me, Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth. See, I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms, to pluck up, and to break down, and to destroy, and to overthrow, to build and to plant” (verses 9, 10).
JT There is a great similarity between Jeremiah and Moses.
GAT When the Father spoke about His Son: “This is my beloved Son; hear him”, there were no Moses and Aaron there.
JT No, because He is Moses and Aaron combined. He is the Apostle and High Priest of our confession. I hope all the brethren get some little impression of this matter of representation, because we are in a terrible time, and these features are necessary if God is to be represented in these terrible times, especially if the conscience void of offence is to be put forward. It is the making of the young men if they are before God in prayer about it. God would help in prayer.
GAT Would you say a word on how you go in for this?
JT It is not a question of going in for it, but of [p. 151] being put into it; first purchasing to yourself a good degree, and then God takes you on. You did not know you had such power, but as you go on God will give you such support that you will be conscious that He is with you.
CAM You were saying that God starts with this matter far up-stream. I mean that the preparation of the servants dates back long before they had any apprehension of it.
JT Quite so. The sixth chapter shows these two men brought into the service; we have their full genealogical position. In genealogical positions God is telling us that He has been thinking long before about us. So in Exodus 6: 2, “God spoke to Moses, and said to him, I am Jehovah. And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob”. So we go back to the foundation, the source of things, when God began to operate in Abraham; and then we have the sons of Jacob down to Levi, because that is what is in the mind of God — to bring out what these two men were. What men they are! He does not mention Miriam here, but He does later. They spring from a pure family, as we get in the first part of the book, “A man of the house of Levi went and took a daughter of Levi” (Exodus 2: 1). It was a wholly right seed. Is there a wholly right seed in the links we form? That is the point for us. These two men sprang from that, and God says these are the two; and they did the things required, for it says, “These are they who spoke to Pharaoh king of Egypt, to bring out the children of Israel from Egypt: this is that Moses and Aaron”. Their ages are given later. There they are, they stand out all through the ages representing this great principle for those who undertake service. God has put us into families so that we should understand that, even if there is disparity of age, it is a question of moral qualifications. This must prevail. That is what prevailed [p. 152] in Moses.
AEH I notice that each time Moses refers to his weakness, it is when he is speaking to God. Do you think it is a false sense of humility if I am referring all the time to my weakness in speaking to the brethren, instead of speaking in power as having to do with God?
JT Well, just so, it is power with God. Jacob set out that principle; unlike Moses, he wrestled with God, he did not give up; he wrestled with the angel and prevailed.
JD What is the point in God selecting the meeting place, verse 15, “he will go out unto the water”?
JT Pharaoh was going out to the water as was usual. He might say to Moses, This is no time to see me; why do you not come to my place of reception? The word is, “behold, he will go out unto the water — and take thy stand by the bank of the river in front of him”. That is, the river would be the resources of Egypt. God is going to operate against Egypt there; God chooses His own battle-ground.
JH It has been said that that is a mark of a good general.
JT He had taken up the same thought in sending Aaron to meet Moses; Aaron would be influenced by the mountain of God. He met him on the mountain of God and kissed him; meeting his brother, his affections became active. It is a good thing to know where to meet the brethren, as well as Pharaoh.
AR Is the meeting at the river intended to break down the world system, one system operating to bring down another?
JT That is the idea. The first sign had reference to the river — what Egypt prided itself in and relied upon. God is meeting Pharaoh at his strong point, not at his weak point. Moses is to stand in front of him. God is ready now, He has a system inaugurated, so that we are not to be afraid. While you are to be [p. 153] subject to the tribunals, your heart is not to be full of fear or you will never represent God. The scripture says, “Fear not”.
CHH Pharaoh had boasted that the river was his. Would this be to counteract that claim?
JT I think so. God is dealing with the position at its strongest point, and that is how God deals with the world, to expose it and overthrow it.
HB What would you say about the crucifixion being outside Jerusalem, the great centre of that time?
JT It must happen there. Moses and Elias spoke to the Lord of His exit, of what would happen at Jerusalem. It was the strength of the world religiously, and the political power was there; Pontius Pilate and the nations were there. That is the strongest point of all the world, and there God exposed it. “The earth was shaken”.
Ques What would you say is conveyed in the staff in the hand of Aaron?
JT The staff is the same whether in the hand of Moses or of Aaron; only the idea of a divine system is maintained and God’s authority, as we have been saying, is in it. The rod is seen in God’s hand (chapter 7: 17), in Moses’ hand and in Aaron’s hand. In Aaron’s hand it would, I suppose, be modified according to what he generally represents — priestly grace and sympathy.
MO Paul reminds Timothy that Christ witnessed a good confession before Pontius Pilate. Is that representation?
JT Just so; representation is not in a symbol; the staff represents experience with God. Both Moses and Aaron have staves here, but they represent one thought. Moses’ staff is called “the staff of God”, also designated “the staff that was turned into a serpent”.
JD Jacob gathered up his feet into his bed and leaned upon his staff. [p. 154] Is that experience?
JT I think so.
CDB What about Stephen as representative under those trying circumstances?
JT He represented God. He represented God by the masterful way in which he presented the truth. He outlined the truth from the beginning. And he represented God in maintaining the truth of the dispensation in suffering. “Kneeling down, he cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge” (Acts 7: 60).
EF Would you indicate the difference between the thought of representation and the thought of a young person confessing the Lord’s name?
JT Such a one is typically just at the age of 25, he is in his novitiate. He has to take the place of a learner. The Levites went in at 25, later at 20, but the full levitical age is 30 to 50; as though God would have full manhood to represent Him. The Lord Jesus as proclaimed at the Jordan “was beginning to be about 30 years old”. God recognised Him as representing Him.
APT Is that why you referred to the ages of Moses and Aaron? Is there any suggestion of the increase of the knowledge of God in the 80 years?
JT There is. Aaron, Moses, and Miriam were all old. The point is that God does not appoint novices to His service; they have to learn. He uses us as we serve according to what our hands find to do, and this leads to official recognition. God had been watching over Aaron and He knew he could speak well. Aaron had skill, at least in that sense. It was what was needed.
JTJr The man of God is to be complete, fully fitted for every good work, to know the Scriptures, which are profitable for instruction. 2 Timothy seems to be special instruction for the man of God.
JT That is a good scripture to bring in. Timothy was a young man, but he was to overcome his youth by [p. 155] putting on manliness.
WL Do you think that putting on manly features is one of the things today in regard of the young men having to appear before tribunals?
JT That is right, he is to appear in the Spirit of Christ. As a young man comes into the truth he gains by what he finds. But Moses is not presented like that. We want to get at what each one is with God. Aaron is not presented like that. He is older than Moses and God has known him. I think it is what a man is in himself with God. Aaron’s name is not mentioned until he is 83 years old, and yet God says, I know him. He was not with Moses and God, but evidently with God. What have I acquired with God in my own personal experience with Him? That is what each has to challenge himself about. Have I been with God?
RWS Would not God keep this matter of conscience before the authorities by our young brothers appearing before them, and then as definite inquiry is made, in correspondence as to it by older brothers writing to the heads of governments — as if God would have all to be reminded of conscience?
JT I am certain that is true. I am sure God has given the authorities and men in this world an opportunity. We read in Revelation of 7000 names of men; these are the men we have to do with. God is giving them an opportunity to see what the representation of Himself is. They profess to represent God, but the young man does too. He has a good conscience, void of offence toward God and man, which they have not, perhaps. He is telling them what first things are, that God is first, that God must be served rather than men. That is a fine testimony.
JD Referring to Timothy again, we often hear the first part of the verse quoted, “Let no one despise thy youth”, but not the latter part of the verse, “but be a model of the believers, in word, in conduct, in love, in faith, in purity” (1 Timothy 4: [p. 156] 12).
JT So that you overcome your disparity of age by moral qualifications.
CHH Acts 26: 2 says, “Then Paul stretching out his hand answered in his defence: I count myself happy”. He counted himself happy to give the testimony which is there stated.
JT He is so sensible of the power that worked in him. What would make us happier than that — the sense that God is with us? The sense that God is with you and that you are with God is what makes you happy.
CHH I was wondering whether the young men in appearing before tribunals should learn to welcome it, instead of dreading the ordeal; to give this testimony and be happy about it?
JT Paul is in great power. One always refers with pleasure to an occasion of a brother’s being in power, but better still to be conscious of yourself being in power. You do not have to speak of it, but the consciousness is there. Paul says, “I would to God, both in little and in much, that not only thou, but all who have heard me this day, should become such as I also am” (the consciousness that he had), “except these bonds” (Acts 26: 29).
APT Was he a little more representative of God in that chapter than he was as seen at the end of chapter 16?
JT When he directs that the magistrates should come and take him out? Yes. And as before the high priest he says, “God will smite thee, whited wall” (Acts 23: 3). That was a mistake, but he is there a fine example of a man who corrects himself quickly. He did not know it was the high priest. The word is, “Thou shalt not speak evilly of the ruler of thy people” (Acts 23: 5). He quoted from Exodus.
CHH I was wondering whether Acts 26 would be a good indication of suitable feelings that brethren should take on to properly represent God. These are [p. 157] spiritually ignorant men and here is an opportunity to represent God in the way of feelings for them.
JT It is certainly one of the finest chapters as to public testimony that you can get, a man calling attention to what he was — his own state; not to what he was saying, but to what he was. He was in a happy state. Nothing affects people more than your own state when you are speaking.
TS As a representative he stretched out his hand. It would look like a matter of his heart, would you say?
JT “All the day long I have stretched out my hands” Paul quotes of God in Romans 10: 21. But at the end of the chapter it is a question of what he was. Stretching out the hand would be appealing. Paul seemed to have a sign of his own; he made a sign with his hand at Antioch of Pisidia, Acts 13: 16.
WL Would you say that there are degrees of representation? One can only be what he is.
JT Whatever little representation there may be, if you give only a cup of cold water in the name of a disciple, it is of value, Matthew 10: 42. Now as to Miriam, we have not time to give much attention to her, but Exodus 15: 20, 21 says, “And Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took the tambour in her hand, and all the women went out after her with tambours and with dances. And Miriam answered them, Sing to Jehovah, for he is highly exalted: The horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea”. Here she is entitled, “the prophetess;” she is the sister of Aaron. Whether she and Aaron were together in their younger days, and how she acquired the state of a prophetess is not named. If a sister is to have a place in leadership, she appears according to what she is — Miriam is seen as a prophetess. She represents God in some measure in prophecy. That is an honourable title for a sister. If she is already known as speaking the words of God certainly she must [p. 158] be heard.
GAT When and where is she supposed to be heard?
JT There are restrictions or limits in the New Testament as to a woman prophesying. She is not told not to prophesy, but she is told to do it with her head covered. She is not to speak in the assembly or with her head uncovered. But if she is a prophetess she is to be heard; if she prophesies she is to be listened to. If sisters are to have a lead among the brethren, let them speak the words of God. There are plenty of words, but it is a question of speaking the words of God.
Rem Miriam was one of the four women who had to do with the introduction of this great vessel — Moses.
JT Her name is not mentioned but undoubtedly she is the “sister” who helped to preserve her infant brother. She was a young girl of tact and energy. Now she is introduced to us as a prophetess, the sister of a well-known servant.
JD Moral and spiritual capabilities enter into Acts 21, where we read that Philip had four daughters who prophesied. Would the idea of virginity enter into sisters prophesying?
JT Surely; but as just remarked, they are not supposed to speak in the assembly: “I suffer not a woman to teach” (1 Timothy 2: 12), and, “Let your women be silent in the assemblies” (1 Corinthians 14: 34). But 1 Corinthians 11: 5 clearly states that if a woman prophesies her head is to be covered. Then the reason is given, “but woman’s head is the man, and the Christ’s head God”. That is, she is before the public; it is a question of God’s order in creation and she is to have her head covered.
AAT Miriam’s service here is connected with singing. Is that a point?
JT That is the next thing, what she does. We have her identity, and she is a qualified person, worthy [p. 159] of mention. You get throughout Scripture women who are worthy of mention, holy women, as they are called in the New Testament. She is one of them, a sister of Aaron, and a leader in Israel. Now she is taking a leading part in the service of God not attempting to bring in her own composition. What is said is simply that she took a tambour in her hand, and all the women went after her, which would mean that she was influential in the right direction, a very important matter. She was influential in misleading her brother later, but she was influential among the women in doing what was right here, and they do what she does. It says, “Sing to Jehovah, for he is highly exalted: The horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea”. That is just the refrain from the first verse. She not only sings, but she appeals to others to sing also. She is simply augmenting what has already been done by Moses and the children of Israel. She is simply taking part in the refrain, and answers them in this way so that the service of God is augmented, but in just the measure of those words. She is not really adding anything to what Moses said, but she is singing, using these words; she is being used in the service, and she and the other women represent here the measure of the state of Israel in their service Godward at that time.
CAM In Psalm 68: 11 it says, “The Lord gives the word: great the host of the publishers”. Mr. Darby’s footnote says the publishers are women, and he refers to this chapter. There is a large sphere of service in that way.
JT It is a beautiful jewel set here as to what is called subjective conditions among us. You might compose a hymn and sing it and the brethren join in, but the question is the extent of the measure of the subjective state, and I believe these women represent that here.
JH There are two other women spoken of as [p. 160] prophetesses — Deborah and Huldah. They seem to have had great influence with the people and great support with the leaders of the day. Does that come into this?
JT It is opening up a door to the sisters. It is the order in which they serve. She appeals, “Sing to Jehovah”. She takes up what is there, but it is a beautiful finish to what is there. That is what is seen, a beautiful finish in the measure of the subjective conditions.
JS Does singing and dancing involve great spiritual agility?
JT Quite so, and the women follow her.
AEH Do you think that what she says here about the horse and rider suggests that she had come through all the exercise of the overthrow of that system? All that entered into her experience. In type she had been in all the exercises of the assembly.
JT It is the confirmation of the male side, the full intelligent representation of the matter in the song; in the subjective or feminine finish there is a real state behind the singing; only in a small measure. The sisters are all brought into it. It is a very beautiful suggestion as to how leadership in the service of God is to proceed. It is alternate singing. They are all brought into it in a subjective sense. There is feminine feeling in it. Dancing is a type of spiritual agility; it is a remarkable expression of musical feeling.
Ques Would you suggest that what is spoken by women would bear more on the feeling side than on teaching?
JT I think it does. That is what is meant here. Miriam uses the very words of Moses, but in the service there is a beautiful subjective touch and the women fall into it, and as answering, there is response.
CHH Would that be seen in Luke 8? There you get women with substance who ministered to [p. 161] the Lord.
JT Just so, all arising from chapter 7; the woman there loved much. She had what was needed to minister to Christ.
APT No doubt the sisters at Corinth needed help, as to leadership, chapter 11 so as to have part in the service.