"WE HAVE AN ALTAR" (4)
“WE HAVE AN ALTAR” (4)
Exodus 17: 15, 16; Exodus 24: 3 - 8
JT Our subject requires that we first consider Exodus as to the altars that Moses made of himself, without direction, and then those that come under divine direction.
It will be understood that we are now on ministerial ground, Moses representing those who minister among the saints. These two altars are in that connection. The christian is viewed as the subject of the work of God as in Genesis, and what he does as left to himself indicates the measure of that work in him, the place God has with him. It widens out in the family, so that the altars in Genesis stand in relation to men of families — heads of houses.
WM Does the altar stand more in relation to God’s house in Exodus?
JT Yes, before we come to the house we have Moses building an altar. He was a servant in God’s house, but before he is actually seen in that light he builds altars.
WM That is, he is showing his capability to be a ministering servant.
JT Yes. He has the people in mind. These two altars are in relation to the people, the minister taking account of the people. That is, an altar is built by one who serves, not in his own house; whereas in Genesis the altars stand in relation to men who have houses of their own and whose houses have a great place, that is, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It is the household setting, although culminating in the house of God as we had it with Jacob, not the house of God as built or organised, but just in the abstract. It is a matter of light, whereas Exodus brings out the building — a habitation prepared for Jehovah. Before we reach that, however, we have these altars built by [p. 385] Moses.
WM Do you not think the idea of God’s house was in Moses’ mind at that time? His song had anticipated that (Exodus 15: 2).
JT It may have been, but “I will prepare him a habitation” is not generally accepted as authentic. The proposal is in chapter 25: 8: “And they shall make me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them”. The qualification of a man as a minister comes out in how he builds an altar without any direction. That is, it raises the whole question of those who minister among the saints — how their worship works out and is seen — the place God has with them in that relation.
WM Do you think the destruction of Amalek was the incentive for building this altar?
JT That is the setting of it. We might see what this altar means; what it means in the mind of the one who built it and what it means to those in relation to whom it was built; it is called “Jehovah-nissi”.
JWD Whom do you include in the expression, ‘those who minister’?
JT In Ephesians we have, “But to each one of us has been given grace according to the measure of the gift of the Christ”, Ephesians 4: 7. So that ministry in principle belongs to every christian; but then there are those who are qualified to minister in a special way, and Moses represents these. He represents those who are formally called into the ministry as qualified. Every christian is obligated to minister. For instance, Phoebe was “minister of the assembly which is in Cenchrea”, Romans 16: 1. That is to say, she qualified in that, but it was a question of herself — of qualifying in that way. Moses is representative of God. The minister implies representation of God, as a commission in the army represents the government. The commission represents those who give the commission. A minister represents God, if he is anything at all. So that it is said of Moses, not that he should be a God to Pharaoh, but God, a very great thought.
[p. 386] WM Do you think the apostle Paul represented the Lord to the assemblies?
JT Exactly. He was representative of God’s authority and that works out in all who are qualified of God for service, because there is the idea of a commission. There is the idea of doing what your hand finds to do and doing it with your might, but there is also the idea of representation. After all, what is anything here save the divine stamp is on it?
Rem Although Moses had the secret of this early in his life, it was very late in his life before he became a representative. And on his way back to Egypt after forty years in Midian, he did not even yet seem to be right with God.
JT He had the thought that God would give Israel deliverance through him, but he took the work up too early and in a fleshly way. God conveys His mind to a minister early in his life, but he has to go through much before he receives his service formally, as, for instance, Saul. Saul was to be a minister, ‘an appointed official servant’, according to Acts 26, but, as we learn later, not until he was in Antioch for some time and other things had happened is he formally in the service as representative. “Separate me now Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them”, Acts 13: 2. That was subsequent to Saul’s conversion and calling. So with Moses. He had the thought in his mind that God would deliver the people through him. He did intend to do so, but not at that early stage nor in the way that Moses had undertaken to do it.
ANW Referring again to Phoebe, the apostle uses the expression, “who is minister”. Perhaps you will say a further word about that.
JT It is what she was, apparently not an official. The original word is “deaconess”, but her service was more general and dignified (see footnotes). Phoebe is spoken of by the apostle in a complimentary way.
[p. 387] ANW She would serve as a deaconess. It does not say she is a minister, but “minister”.
JT Serving the assembly characterised her. Evidently she was a woman of means, and being devoted to the Lord, served the assembly as indicated.
SWP Scripture says: “And Moses rose up, and Joshua his attendant” (chapter 24: 13). There were certain characteristic features in Moses, so that Jehovah could speak to him.
JT Quite so. God was acting through Moses. Joshua was his attendant. He had a great advantage in being the attendant of such a man, but he had a good way to go to carry his cloak, as Timothy would have a good way to go to carry Paul’s cloak. Elijah threw his cloak on Elisha. All that is suggestive. When shall I be able to fill that cloak? I have to learn that I am not ready yet. God brings in a model, and He conveys to you that that is His ideal and you are not that yet. Even as Joshua succeeds Moses he is called ‘Moses’ attendant’. So that Moses stands out in Scripture as the representative of this thought. But he had to be educated for this, and so, as failing in his own method of deliverance in slaying the Egyptian, he goes to Midian and sits by a well. What becomes of his activities? Typically he is saying in effect, I am seeing now that power for the work of God is not in me; it is of God and I am to avail myself of it. He sat by a well. That is the first thing mentioned of him as in Midian, meaning that he now recognises another power. It takes him forty years to come to that. There is great need for ministers among the Lord’s people. There is the thought of what your hand finds to do, do it. There is that thought. You may be crude in it, but still you are doing it, and God values the man or woman who starts that way. The work is to be done and he is doing it as he can, but God intimates He has His own standard of service, and, although He may bear with you at the outset, there is a time when you should learn how to do things [p. 388] according to Him. The levites were put into the work at twenty-five, although the standard was thirty. They were to be five years with experienced persons and would thus learn how to serve.
JS It has been said that Moses was forty years learning to be somebody, and then he was forty years learning to be nobody.
JT Yes. He was learning that he could not succeed on his own line. He began with the right motive but he could not succeed, not having learned God’s way.
WM He began with exploits.
JT Yes; he killed an Egyptian and hid him in the sand. I do not know what the population of Egypt was in those days but it would have taken him a long time to kill them all! You have to see the futility of your efforts. So when he reaches Midian he sits by a well. He recognises another power.
RWS It says: “And say to Archippus, Take heed to the ministry which thou hast received in the Lord, to the end that thou fulfil it”, Colossians 4: 17. What does “in the Lord” mean?
JT The Lord can identify Himself with it. “In” implies the sphere and power of the ministry. Archippus received his ministry in such a setting.
APT Paul says of Tychicus, “the beloved brother and faithful minister in the Lord”, Ephesians 6: 21.
JT That is the same form. “Prisoner of the Christ Jesus” (Ephesians 3: 1) means that the Lord, as it were, had imprisoned the apostle, but in the next chapter it is “the prisoner in the Lord”. The Lord can identify Himself with him. He is not in the prison as a felon. Marriage is “in the Lord”; it is in the sphere of His authority and power. Thus those in it have His protection and support: a very great matter.
This thought of sitting down by the well is what young men and women ought to see. God killed a good many Egyptians later — He undertook to do the killing. But Moses effected nothing in the way of general deliverance [p. 389] by smiting the Egyptian. When he attempted to reconcile his brethren he could do nothing. He had to flee. It is the “well”, the Spirit, who gives me power. That is what the minister gets. I may have energy like Moses, but moral power is what I need if I am to be God to Pharaoh. How could he be that, save by moral power, by taking on the likeness of God? Every minister must have before him that he represents God — and that is a solemn matter.
ANW We have rather boasted that we have moved away from the idea of the minister, but perhaps we have gone too far on that line.
JT A clergyman is another thing. They use the word “minister”, but let us use the word in its scriptural meaning.
Ques Would you say that every minister should be sitting by the well and the burning bush?
JT The burning bush is the commission and the sitting by the well is the qualification for it. Moses sits by the well and certain persons come to the well to water their flock, as it were God bringing some opportunity of service to your attention. How are you going to serve? He does not slay the shepherds that interfered. He has learned his lesson in that respect. He does not slay the shepherds that wronged the daughters of Jethro. He helped the women, and watered their flock. He is a man that can take part in some useful work, and that is a good way to start — that you are not doing it all. Then they went home to their father. He says to them, “Why are ye come so soon today?” Exodus 2: 18. They say, “An Egyptian delivered us”, but evidently there was no offer by those he helped of recompense, hospitality, or the like. He is not getting much recognition after all. That is a good experience, because there is nothing a young brother looks for more than recognition, for the brethren to say how well he preached! There is no evidence, however, that Moses tried to get recognition. Jethro extended Moses hospitality, and he “was content to dwell with the man”. After having been a prince in Egypt it would be a great come-down socially to be there; but he accepted his circumstances — he was “content”. That is the idea of patience, of accepting whatever the government of God opens up to you; and finally he is looking after the sheep of another. He never acquired a flock like Jacob, nor asked for wages. All this marks a minister who is approved of God. A clergyman looks for wages, like Micah’s priest, Judges 17. The very term “living” is synonymous with the clergyman’s salary. After he gets a call, he gets what is attached to it. Moses never thought of anything like that. He is simply unselfishly doing the thing that has to be done, and at the end he leads the flock to the backside of the desert, to Horeb, the mountain of God. He came there and now he is in the position for God to give him a commission, and hence the wonderful appearing in the bush.
WM “The good will of him that dwelt in the bush”, Deuteronomy 33: 16.
JT He comes into that. I thought we might see that this first altar is by such a man as this. He is building it in relation to the brethren. It is a chapter that all the young saints should read, because the first great spiritual battle is the battle of Rephidim, the significance of which young people have to learn. This altar stands in that relation, “Jehovah will have war with Amalek from generation to generation”. The altar built here is to stand; it is “Jehovah-nissi”, Jehovah my banner. That is, I am a worshipper of God as helping me against the flesh. It is a question of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit against the flesh.
WM Every new generation has to understand this battle.
JT That is right. It involves Romans 7. One would like to enlist the attention of the young in regard of chapter 17, because we have to understand this altar [p. 391] if we are to understand Exodus, and profit by the ministers that God raises up. It says: “And all the assembly of the children of Israel journeyed from the wilderness of Sin, according to their journeys, at the command of Jehovah; and they encamped in Rephidim; and there was no water for the people to drink. And the people contended with Moses, and said, Give us water, that we may drink! And Moses said to them, Why do ye dispute with me? Why do ye tempt Jehovah? And the people thirsted there for water; and the people murmured against Moses, and said, Why is it that thou hast brought us up out of Egypt, to kill us and our children and our cattle with thirst? And Moses cried to Jehovah, saying, What shall I do with this people? Yet a little, and they will stone me! And Jehovah said to Moses, Go on before the people, and take with thee of the elders of Israel, and thy staff with which thou didst smite the river, take in thy hand, and go. Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock on Horeb; and thou shalt strike the rock, and there shall come water out of it, that the people may drink. And Moses did so before the eyes of the elders of Israel. And he called the name of the place Massah, and Meribah, because of the contention of the children of Israel, and because they had tempted Jehovah, saying, Is Jehovah among us, or not?” (verses 1 - 7). That is the state of things. Typically, the Spirit is owned as there, but it is not said that the people drank. If I have the Spirit, I have Him at the cost of the sufferings of Christ. Here it is a question of smiting the rock (Christ), so that we might have the Spirit, but it does not credit us with having drunk.
Ques Is this answered in Romans 5: “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts”?
JT In Romans 5 the Spirit is brought in to fill out the truth. The apostle speaks, as it were, of his experience and that of others, without assuming that it was true of every Christian. It is characteristic of every true christian. It is a great general thought to fill [p. 392] out the truth of the gospel. There is such a thing as that, the love of God being shed abroad in the hearts of people, including Paul and others that he knew of. I do not think this chapter goes as far as that. They are not even accredited with having drunk, although the Spirit is there. It is to bring out the small stature of the saints at this juncture and how, because of this, the enemy works through the flesh. Amalek is the enemy assuming that he has right of way. It is not an Ephesian position. It is to bring out the low state of the saints at this period, and how God provides for them.
Rem At Ephesus they did not know the Holy Spirit had come.
JT They had not received Him. The same may be said of some believers today; others have the Spirit, but are not characterised by Him. Those who have drunk are characterised by Him. In Numbers 20 the rock was smitten, but smitten contrary to the divine command. Yet, in spite of that, the water flowed and the people drank and the cattle drank. It stresses the drinking, and in Numbers 21 there is the recognition of the Holy Spirit as springing up, not from a rock, but from a well. Here they are not accredited with having drunk. Of course they drank literally, but what the Holy Spirit does not say is as important at times as what He does say. The omission here is important. It alludes to the low state of the brethren, that although they have the Spirit, they are not in the power of the Spirit. The enemy knows it and attacks, and what comes out is that the ministers come into this. They have to bear the brunt of the thing. It says: “And Moses said to Joshua, Choose us men, and go out, fight with Amalek; tomorrow I will stand on the top of the hill with the staff of God in my hand. And Joshua did as Moses had said to him, to fight with Amalek; and Moses, Aaron, and Hur went up to the top of the hill. And it came to pass when Moses raised his hand, that Israel prevailed; and when he let down his hand, Amalek prevailed” (verses 9 - 11).
[p. 393] Young people do not realise or admit, or know, that they are dependent on the ministers at this juncture. The idea is to get a true conception of the ministers — what God provides — and learn to respect them. You are, under God, dependent upon them.
APT Would the first epistle to the Corinthians fit in here? There was a low state prevalent among them, and the apostle says: “Thus there is not a wise person among you”, 1 Corinthians 6: 5.
JT Just so; although they had the Spirit. They were babes, but babes in Christ, which is important.
APT The second epistle would perhaps be the “banner”. The difficulty was met by the apostle in the power of God.
JT The epistles work out the importance of the ministers. Paul says: “Whether Paul or Apollos, or Cephas ... all are yours”, 1 Corinthians 3: 22. The ministers belong to the saints, but then the Corinthians were despising them. Paul was ready to do anything for them, but they were despising him. There were certain ones there that would discredit and displace him — a sure way of the devil to get rid of the true ministers of God!
SWP In Jeremiah 14 the prophet says, “And their nobles send their little ones for water, they come to the pits, they find no water; they return with their vessels empty; they are ashamed, they are confounded, and have covered their heads. Because the ground is chapt, for there hath been no rain on the earth, the ploughmen are ashamed, they cover their heads”. Is that because of the breakdown on the part of the ministers?
JT That is included, as we learn in verses 13 to 16. The breakdown of the ministers is also seen in Numbers 20. God says, I will give the water in spite of that. The clerical system has been standing in the way of the water. That is Numbers 20, but here (Exodus 17) Moses, Aaron, and Hur go up to the top of the hill and labour. What an arduous time it was for Moses!
[p. 394] If he gives way the battle is lost. Young people are not apt to think of this side of the position. God would have you understand that what He has provided must be respected and counted on, because Scripture says: “for they watch over your souls”, Hebrews 13: 17.
Ques How do young people support the ministers?
JT The first thing is to respect them, as seeing that they are a divine provision.
Ques What is the significance of the fact that we never hear of Hur again?
JT He represents an element in this setting — His name is said to mean “purity”. Young christians have to understand this. The enemy’s power comes in very largely through impure motives, through the flesh.
WM This condition of things would be met in Romans.
JT Yes. Romans is the normal setting out of the truth. Chapter 5 is the full result of the work of Christ, as to the individual, before he enters Rephidim — what has accrued through the death of Christ. It is on the side of the kingdom. It is what has come to us “through our Lord Jesus Christ”. Romans 7 has to be learned. That is the great “classic” for young people. It enables us to overcome in the battle of Rephidim. You will find that it opens up the way to the great thoughts of God. Chapter 19 says, “they departed from Rephidim, and came into the wilderness of Sinai: and encamped in the wilderness; and Israel encamped there before the mountain” (verse 2). That is the point, you leave Rephidim. After that battle they go on into the sense of God’s thoughts for them. Now you are in the presence of divine resources, but you have to come to the recognition of them. The mountain really implies all that lies in the Spirit.
Rem We may not appreciate the ministers because we do not realise our own helplessness.
JT Quite. Then we get Joshua. Moses says: “Choose us men”. It is not a partisan matter, but “Choose us men”. It is a general thought; this war is carried on in relation to the divine economy — what God has provided for the whole assembly. This is the first appearance of Joshua — a very remarkable thing that he comes in here as a warrior. You get in him a glimpse of Christ as the spiritual Leader or Captain of Jehovah’s host.
JWD Would it work out in a practical way locally, that there should be exercise that gift be brought into the locality in the way of special meetings and addresses. Is there not a danger of being satisfied with what is local, of being too exclusive locally?
JT Making room for the ministers is a great matter. Where they are available, get them.
Joshua has a great place here. You learn more about him later. This chapter is initial in this sense; and so in Romans 7 you begin with great regard for Christ, that you should “be to another”. There is such a One that you should be to. Christ comes into your mind. He “who has been raised up from among the dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God”, Romans 7: 4. He comes into your mind. That is a sort of heading to Romans 7. And then you enter the conflict. What a conflict it is. Some of us take years and years to go through it, but you begin with that and end with this, “I thank God, through Jesus Christ our Lord”. You also say, “So then I myself with the mind serve God’s law”. “I myself”. You have found your feet as an individual christian in the conflict; you are not overthrown. That is the way it works out.
WM That is what the analysis has produced.
Rem The believer connects himself with the right identity.
JT That is right. He has found his feet and he has decided in his mind that he is going to serve the law of God, but the deliverance is not through himself. It is through “Jesus Christ our Lord”. “I thank God”, that is giving thanks intelligently because of the deliverance [p. 396] through a certain Person who henceforth is to be everything to you. This Person will be magnified in your life. So that you get later the idea of God magnifying Joshua.
Ques Would Romans 7 be like Moses building this altar?
JT Yes. You can see how God is before the soul, “So then I myself with the mind serve God’s law ...” In principle a thanks-giver is a worshipper. From this point you go to the mountain of God. You are to fit into the great system that God has in mind.
ANW You are referring to all this in principle now. You are beyond Amalek in Romans 7, are you not?
JT Well, you have overcome. The overcoming is, “I thank God, through Jesus Christ our Lord”. That is what I understand. You have learned the great idea of warfare in yourself.
Rem It says that “Joshua broke the power of Amalek” (verse 13), and you have made reference to young men. Have you any thought in connection with that?
JT That is what we should see at this point. It is a young man’s book. So that in relation to the next altar you get young men officiating (chapter 24: 5). This is a young men’s and women’s matter because God is calling in the most distinct way to them to get on these lines. The testimony needs them. He is honouring youth. This young man, Joshua, goes through the wilderness into the land.
APT There is a reference to Joshua as “a man in whom is the Spirit”, Numbers 27: 18.
JT He begins here as representative of spiritual power.
APT You are applying it rather to all the saints here?
JT Exactly. This battle goes on all the time. You will find even when sitting down in the assembly, that the enemy will attack you. Wherever he has an open door he will try to get in on this line.
[p. 397] Rem In Deuteronomy the people are told to “Remember what Amalek did unto thee on the way”, Deuteronomy 25: 17.
WM In connection with our brother’s remark as to young men, it is interesting that John speaks of them as having overcome the wicked one.
RWS Would this be the first book that was written, the book of the wars to be rehearsed?
JT This is the first formal mention of writing in Scripture. This fact by itself shows how important this subject is. It underlies the whole fabric of christianity in a practical way — this altar, Jehovah-nissi. It is a question of overcoming by the power of God. There is no other way.
Rem It says: “Write this for a memorial in the book” (verse 14).
JT The thing is to be remembered. It is to be rehearsed in the ears of Joshua. He is a spiritual leader in this respect. Every one of us ought to keep this altar in mind. It is Jehovah-nissi, my banner, “I thank God, through Jesus Christ our Lord”, and it is through this banner we carry on the warfare which is to be perpetual while we are down here.
Rem It is a personal thing.
WM What is the force of the hand on the throne of Jah? Is that the rebellion of the flesh?
JT It is so near. In the most spiritual settings you are conscious that the enemy would try to get in. You may think he is far away, but he is not. The hand on the throne would be to dislodge the rightful Occupant of it. It is for the saint to keep the right Occupant on the throne.
GMcP Would you connect the Spirit with the cloven tongues of fire in the Acts?
JT Yes; the fire would deal with the flesh, “For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh”, Galatians 5: 17. The lusting is of the flesh, but then the Spirit is against that. There is not only the [p. 398] Spirit but the throne of Jah. It is a poetic allusion. That throne must always have its right Occupant. Christ must always have the place, and if He has, the enemy will not get the upper hand. The flesh serves the law of sin. That being the tendency of the flesh the enemy is always ready to take advantage of it.
Rem Lucifer aspired to the same thing.
JT To get on the throne.
WM The hand would represent the ceaseless activity of the enemy.
JT The hand represents what one can do — his power.
Rem Also what you grasp after.
JT “If, by the Spirit, ye put to death the deeds of the body, ye shall live”, Romans 8: 13. I have the Holy Spirit. Up to Romans 5: 12 it is what is through Jesus Christ our Lord. It is what comes in through Him, it is His authority, and I want to keep Him on the throne. It says of Solomon that they made him king a second time. That is final. We want to come to finality as to the Occupant of the throne.
WM Those who tried to put their hand on Solomon’s throne nearly met their doom.
JT That is conflict within — the Lord seems to be always bringing us to it. So “Jehovah is my banner”, expresses the believer’s attitude henceforth. My warfare henceforth is to be in the power of God.
WM What do you think the banner suggests?
JT The banner is what is public, it is to be displayed because of the truth. It is that under which you fight. It is always victorious. The throne is that the Lord always has His place with you, and then the Holy Spirit is the power in you.
RWS The bride in Canticles says: “My beloved is white and ruddy”, or, as the footnote says, “lifted up as a banner”, Song of Songs 5: 10.
EGMcA Would the banner indicate that I am not yet defeated?
APT “Thou hast given a banner to them that fear thee, that it may be displayed because of the truth”, Psalm 60: 4.
ANW Say a word about “Jehovah will have war with Amalek from generation to generation”.
JT I suppose it alludes to His rights in each of us. It means that God gives no quarter to the flesh — Satan acting through it. If we allow the hand of the enemy on the throne, we leave Christ out and ignore His authority. I think that is what is meant. It is a constant war.
ANW How does this relate to God having condemned sin in the flesh?
JT Although in the types, that is thirty-eight years off, that truth is involved. What is seen here is earlier in the believer’s history, having the authority of God in the soul in view; yet Romans 8 enters into the working out of it. One has to learn that the flesh is condemned by God, “God, having sent his own Son, in likeness of flesh of sin, and for sin, has condemned sin in the flesh” (Romans 8: 3); not destroyed but condemned. It is there, but it is condemned.
Ques Is that the setting of the fourteenth verse of this chapter? “And Jehovah said to Moses, Write this for a memorial in the book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua, that I will utterly blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under the heavens”.
JT Yes. God has entered on that war and He will not desist while we are down here, for Satan is always active, through the flesh, against His rights. The flesh is dealt with judicially in its condemnation in Christ on the cross, but it is still here.
Rem It is the Lord’s battle in each one of us, working out God’s judgment against sin in our lives.
Ques Would you say something about the throne of Jah?
JT It is a poetic name of Jehovah. It is a question of spiritual understanding as to how deep it goes.
[p. 400] Probably, it is as near an expression as you can get as to the absolute existence of deity in the Old Testament, showing that it is a spiritual matter. This warfare is an entirely spiritual matter. God is a Spirit. He was against Satan before man was made. It is God against the devil but on new ground now, that is in man. But it is God in a spiritual way against the devil.
WM Do you not think that this is really Satan expressing himself through man?
JT It is new ground. God had to combat with Satan before man was made. It is the same God and the same Satan. Only the battle-ground is different. That is where my responsibility comes in; do I keep the throne clear?
JWD It says: “And Moses built an altar”. Is that the subject of ministry or what the minister is characteristically?
JT It is the minister, I think. “And Moses built an altar, and called the name of it Jehovah-nissi”, meaning Jehovah my banner. He is in the conflict. Of course it involves the divine economy because Moses, Aaron, and Hur would denote the great intercessory system, whether it be Christ interceding, or the saints. It is those that watch for our souls. It is what God has provided for christians, so that we begin to see and value what He has provided.
EGMcA You have been applying this warfare to each individual. Why does the minister build the altar and not the individual?
JT Well, that is the place the minister has. It is the divine economy. Moses comes into evidence — he builds it. It is the place God acquires with you as you see the results of your labours in the saints. You will find that constantly in the epistles; the ministers have in mind the results of their labours, (See Philippians 2: 12 - 16 and Colossians 1: 28).
WM Paul speaks of the gentiles being offered up through his [p. 401] ministry.
JT Encouragement in seeking to serve the saints is in results, and God is graciously showing that there are results among the brethren as they come into a clearer apprehension of the assembly. Thus the toil of the brethren “is not in vain in the Lord”, 1 Corinthians 15: 58. It is the fruit of the ministry through one and another. It is not to occupy us with persons, but with what God provides. It is the outcome of the divine economy.
FI Is Moses, in building the altar, bringing into evidence what is supported? Does he bring in what is at the back of his ministry?
JT Yes. God’s power; that is the banner the minister carries, so that Paul says in writing to the Corinthians: “that the surpassingness of the power may be of God, and not from us”, 2 Corinthians 4: 7.
ANW May I read a few verses in connection with that from 2 Corinthians 6: “but in everything commending ourselves as God’s ministers, in much endurance, in afflictions, in necessities, in straits, in stripes, in prisons, in riots, in labours, in watchings, in fastings, in pureness, in knowledge, in long-suffering, in kindness, in the Holy Spirit, in love unfeigned, in the word of truth, in the power of God” (verses 4 - 7). Think of all these elements marking a minister!
JT Quite so. You can see how he carried this banner, displaying it for the sake of the truth throughout his letters. Certain men there were vying with the apostle, seeking to displace him in the affections of the saints; Satan having in view to displace the authority of Christ, which Paul represented. The hand was on the throne of Jah at Corinth.
Rem They were speaking of the wrong thing — He was despicable in his speech, they said, but “the kingdom of God is not in word but in power”, 1 Corinthians 4: 20.
JT Now, in chapter 24 we see Moses building an altar in relation to the people again as committing [p. 402] themselves to the words of the covenant. In chapter 17 the altar really implies the Spirit. It is the minister’s work in that relation. The Spirit is recognised. It has that in view, that the power is of God, which means the power of the Spirit, ‘Jehovah my banner’ is the power of the Spirit, as in Romans, but in chapter 24 it is the saints coming into fellowship, as it were. You rejoice in seeing them committing themselves to the covenant. Moses does not write the words until they commit themselves to them. “And Moses came and told the people all the words of Jehovah, and all the judgments; and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words that Jehovah has said will we do! And Moses wrote all the words of Jehovah”. I would like the brethren to notice that, it is words that the saints have committed themselves to. They are written. He sees them all coming into fellowship. At Pentecost there were three thousand, “And they persevered in the teaching and fellowship of the apostles, in breaking of bread and prayers”. Acts 2: 42. They are coming into the thing and it says, “And Moses wrote all the words of Jehovah, and rose up early in the morning, and built an altar under the mountain, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel”. This altar suggests that Moses is looking at the effect of the work of God and bringing the saints into commitment to the covenant. There may be many among us now that have not definitely committed themselves. The altar is not reared up in regard of an individual, but in relation to all (the twelve tribes are recognised), because the fellowship is a matter of all the saints. It all lies in the words of the covenant, what God says in expressing His mind to us. How great a privilege to be brought into that! And the people say, We will go in for that.
WM The “all” is significant.
JT It is, “All the words that Jehovah has said will we do!”
WM We might accept what was pleasing to ourselves and omit the rest.
JT The altar here is in relation to the twelve pillars — it is Moses’ appreciation of the position, twelve pillars meaning that in his thoughts he has included all the saints. It is a whole idea. He is not leaving any out.
SMcC As chapter 17 suggests the earlier part of Romans, I was wondering if there would be a suggestion in Romans 12 where the one body in Christ is brought in, as to what we have in connection with this altar?
JT All are brought into it, and then the idea of measure is there. It is a question of the measure of faith, and I believe that is the allusion here in the youths. There is a measure of growth there, not full-grown men, but there is the growth indicated in “youths”.
Ques Would the first verse of Romans 12 be the committal: “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the compassions of God, to present your bodies ...”?
JT Yes. “Present your bodies”.
WM It is priesthood coming out in embryo.
JT Romans 12 is the definite beginning of priesthood. You have only your body to offer. It is not a spiritual sacrifice exactly, but it is an offering, it is something to present to God.
APT Would this chapter in Exodus go as far as John’s epistle: “and our fellowship is indeed with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ”, 1 John 1: 3?
JT Pretty much. That is the apostles’ fellowship — it is their fellowship. At Pentecost the three thousand converts came into that — the apostles’ fellowship.
WM We have not fellowship with the Father and the Son.
JT No, the apostles had that, but we come into their fellowship. Moses here represents more the apostolic side. He had been on the mount with God and it would be the sense up there of ‘God and I’.
[p. 404] God would convey that to him. So that Moses is representing God. He conveys all the words of God and the people accept them. And now he writes them down. What is written is fixed.
Rem In chapter 17 he is told to write them in the book, but here he does it of himself.
Ques What is suggested in this altar being built under the mountain?
JT The mountain had a great place in Exodus. It alludes to the place of resource — where God will open up His mind to us.
WM Moses disclaimed being a good speaker, but he was a wonderful writer.
JT The Lord says: “But if ye do not believe his writings, how shall ye believe my words?” John 5: 47.
FRA What is the thought in the blood in basins?
JT It is quantity. Under these circumstances divine love flows out. Romans 5 might be brought in here, it involves the covenant. The love of God is shed abroad — there is a plenitude of it. There is a large quantity of blood; it is put in basins and sprinkled on the altar and on the people, and, according to Hebrews 9, on the book, too.
FRA It is the only basis on which we could have the covenant.
JT The fact that there is so much blood is to call attention to the volume of love.
Rem It is not the blood viewed from the judicial side of the death of Christ, but the love of God.
WM Do you think the idea is that the book and the people and the altar were morally one?
JT The book was on God’s part; the people and the altar stood together. The covenant is thus ratified by death. God and His people are thus in the bond of the covenant. This comes in between the two thoughts of ascension — God directing them to go up and their going up (verses 1, 9). Between these verses you get the testimony to the committal of the people. God is [p. 405] calling upon us today to commit ourselves. It is worth our while. As the people commit themselves, Moses builds this altar at the foot of the mountain.
Ques Does the apostle Peter refer to this passage when he says: “by sanctification of the Spirit, unto the obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ”, 1 Peter 1: 2?
JT Just so, to that kind of obedience, and the sprinkling of the blood, too.
Ques Would you say a little in relation to the offerings? There are certain offerings that are omitted. There are just the burnt-offerings and peace-offerings of bullocks — what is for God and what is for ourselves.
JT Burnt-offerings are for God, affording sweet savour. Peace-offerings mean that we are in a good state of soul and at peace one with another as before God. They indicate spiritual prosperity. A meeting like this conveys the idea; God has His part in it, but the peace-offering implies that there is a spiritual richness among the brethren.
Ques. Why the youths?
JT There is growth there. They are not children; they have got beyond that stage. Young men convey the thought of freshness and vigour, and these features appearing in the exercise of priesthood are quite in keeping with a scene in which divine love as witnessed in the death of Christ is typically set forth.
WM Moses appointed these youths for this service without instruction also.
JT Yes. We know what to do under those circumstances. Under the mountain is the place of resource. Much is going to follow on this. The mountain of God has a great place in Exodus. It is the place of resource as was laid down in Genesis 22: “On the mount of Jehovah will be provided” (verse 14). That runs through.
Rem “And Israel encamped there before the mountain” (chapter 19: [p. 406] 2).
JT They have come to the place of resource and divine disclosures. Moses had already been there, chapter 3, and they were to “serve God upon this mountain”.
Ques Does the breaking of bread correspond?
JT Yes; it is the covenant and our committal to it.