THE SERVICE OF GOD IN THE ASSEMBLY
[p. 363] THE SERVICE OF GOD IN THE ASSEMBLY
Exodus 40: 17 - 38; 2 Chronicles 5: 11 - 14
JT What I have in view is ground often covered, that is, the assembly as seen in the letters to the Corinthians and Ephesians, and these scriptures, I think, serve to amplify the truth set out in those letters; Exodus corresponding with Corinthians, so that we have what Moses did and everything is according to the commandment, the giving of distinctive persons not being in evidence, but rather the giving of the people as a whole, and the work attributed to them. Although Moses, as representing the Lord in His authority over us, is active, the work is attributed to the people and the giving too, and the glory coming into the tabernacle prevents the entrance of Moses, the priests not being mentioned; whereas in Chronicles the giving, in the main, is by David and Solomon and certain other leading ones, and we have the service of the priests and the service of song making way for the entrance of the glory. The two parts, therefore, of the assembly as convened, seem to be amplified in these two scriptures.
One may add that in moving about one observes more reference to the Lord, as such, than the constitution of the assembly requires or admits of. One notices the references to the Lord carried on almost to the end, that is, what is presented in Moses is carried forward, whereas Chronicles would emphasize the song side as making way for the glory.
FWW Are you speaking of the meeting for the breaking of bread?
JT Yes, service in the assembly; that is, the assembly normally, as when we come together to break bread. Enough room is not made for the heavenly side, nor is it discerned, as far as I see, that the wealth of the assembly leading to the heavenly,
[p. 364] is from God directly through Christ, as in the type through David and Solomon; whereas what is in the assembly from the Corinthian side, is more what comes through the saints. Taking the types as they stand, there is very little said in Chronicles about the offerings of the people generally and yet the wealth is excessive. David himself contributed a hundred thousand talents of gold and a million talents of silver. What you get in Chronicles is that “all the work was finished that Solomon made for the house of Jehovah. And Solomon brought in the things that David his father had dedicated; and the silver, and the gold, and all the vessels he put among the treasures of the house of God”, verse l. You get nothing like that in Exodus; it is what the people contributed. They contributed more than was needed, but there is nothing said about any special person giving for the tabernacle, not even Moses. It is generally the people as a whole.
HEF Do you mean that if things were normal when we come together, the first part of the meeting would answer more to Exodus and the latter part to Chronicles?
JT Yes; I think Exodus is carried too far in most of our meetings.
Rem Have you in mind that the song makes room for God as Father?
JT Yes, that is to say, Psalm 22. “In the midst of the congregation will I praise thee”.
HEF Would you say that the psalm is the result of our appreciating all the wealth?
JT We recognize that all the wealth comes from God. That is what David says, “Of thine own have we given thee”, 1 Chronicles 29: 14. Everything that was there was from God. Chronicles is headship; God himself is Head according to the last chapter, verse 11.
HEF So it is as we enter into the thought [p. 365] of what we are in the purpose of divine love, that the song is produced?
JT That is what I understand.
FWW That is indicated in 1 Corinthians 11 — “The head of Christ is God”.
JT It is just indicated; you hardly get headship in Corinthians. It is the order in creation. You get God being Head of Christ, and Christ the Head of every man, and the man the head of the woman. That is the position of creation which is preliminary to the assembly. You do not get that in Colossians or Ephesians; you get Christ as Head of the assembly and Head over all things to the assembly in these epistles.
FWW You get it developed there.
JT Quite so; you do not get the idea of God being Head of Christ in Colossians and Ephesians. Christ in Colossians is Head; He is not made Head; He is that, by virtue of His Person; but in 1 Corinthians 11 it is what He is as Man here, in relation to men. I would like that the brethren should consider what is a widespread practice — the carrying through of Exodus in the assembly, whereas it is introductory. The assembly properly is where God shines, and that is what you get typically in the ministry of David and Solomon; that is where God shines in the fulness of the revelation of Himself as Father, so that the Son, in Solomon typically, makes room for that. You do not get the idea of sonship in Moses; it is authority — lordship.
DJ Is the thought suggested in the early part of Exodus? He brought them out that He might bring them in. Your thought is that we do not know what the bringing in is, but dwell more on the bringing out?
JT Thus in the song in chapter 15. Moses goes so far as to say, “Thou shalt bring them in, and plant them in the mountain of thine inheritance, the [p. 366] place that thou, Jehovah, hast made thy dwelling”. That includes the ministry of David and Solomon.
HEF Have you in mind that Chronicles has not previous history in view?
JT Yes, as this is seen in Colossians and Ephesians. In 1 Chronicles 11, Israel says to David at Hebron, “We are thy bone and thy flesh”. Spiritually this corresponds with Ephesians. Then there is the wealth that comes in through David and Solomon. I think we ought to see how headship and wealth go together. It is not what the Lord commanded David, but what he did, and what Solomon did, and the immense wealth accruing. It is important to notice the wealth that comes in, especially through David: one hundred thousand talents of gold. If you compute that according to modern values, you will see what is meant. It suggests the “unsearchable riches of the Christ”. Then a million talents of silver; and these are just two items. There was refined gold and silver that he furnished from his own private means.
DJ Why does it not say the weight of the copper or the brass?
JT It is all to emphasize the idea of the volume of the wealth.
Ques What would you say about the glory coming in in Exodus as well as in Chronicles?
JT The glory comes in whether the assembly is viewed in the wilderness or in the land. They merge. In the wilderness Moses was unable to enter because of the glory; in the land the priests could not stand to minister by reason of the cloud. The ministry of Moses and the ministry of David and Solomon really coalesce in Christ. If Moses had entered into the land, merging, as it were, in David, and had a son, whom you might call the “son of the father’s love” such as Solomon was, and a son taken up by God Himself as His son, then you would see the [p. 367] thing more clearly. But time has nothing to do with this, and we have to link the two ministries together; both are intended to enter into the assembly. We have to regard them in the light of the assembly: Exodus referring to Romans for the individual, and Corinthians for the public company; and 1 and 2 Chronicles to Colossians and Ephesians. If they are taken up in that light, there is immense wealth of instruction, and we begin to see that at a certain point Moses’ ministry ends; the glory brings it to an end, so to speak. He could not enter the tabernacle. Of course, it might be said that the ministry of the priests ends, too, in Chronicles, but it is in direct connection with their service that the glory comes in; still, the priesthood is an official thing in itself, and so ends also.
FWW What would indicate that change of position in a practical way?
JT I think the Lord’s supper comes under Moses; that is to say, it comes under Christ as in authority; but as soon as Christ is apprehended as Head, you are on the ground of 1 Chronicles, and it is a question then of the wealth that comes in, the wealth that you apprehend in Him, inclusive of course of all that is in the assembly. But you begin to see it is all from Him, and it grows.
FWW So it is not a question of a particular time in the meeting, but a certain spiritual apprehension.
JT Yes, although the breaking of bread must have its place. Then we ought to be governed by the light that governs any position; because a good deal enters into the part we take, and whether it is taken intelligently, whether in the light of Exodus, or in the light of Chronicles.
FWW In the latter part the song would be directed to God.
JT Surely; the end in it is the glory of God.
[p. 368] Rem In Exodus it says that the glory filled the tabernacle, but in Chronicles it filled the house of Jehovah.
JT The tabernacle suggests what was movable, the wilderness position. The temple affords a greater thought. The staves of the ark were drawn out; there was to be no more movement, you reach finality here.
Ques Is it the same in 1 Kings? We get the same expressions as in Chronicles, of the glory filling the house.
JT Just so. Kings does not give you the service of song, that is in Chronicles. In Kings headship is not so prominent. David is weak in Kings. The glory is in both; but Chronicles provides for the singing.
GWW Why do you put so much emphasis on the singing?
JT Because that is what the Lord is engaged with as He has His place in the assembly. You do not get any singing in the tabernacle. You have the one song in Exodus 15 but you get no singing in the service of God in the tabernacle, and that is in itself a guide.
Ques Is that what you mean by carrying Exodus too far? It really hinders the singing.
JT Yes; singing in the assembly is in relation to Christ as Head. It is, as it were, under Solomon.
FWW An apprehension of this would greatly help us as to oscillation. We often find the Lord addressed, and then the Father, and then we come back to the Lord and so on.
GWW Singing to the Lord, and apprehending the song the Lord raises in the midst of the assembly, are two different things. Is that what you have in mind?
JT Yes. The first is quite right, a song to the Lord. It is suitable that we should greet Him, not [p. 369] exactly as in our midst, but in heaven. A song to the Lord is quite acceptable to Him, and seemly. It belongs to the wilderness; lordship in that sense belongs to the wilderness.
Ques Why does it say in 2 Chronicles that the priests could not stand to minister?
JT I think priesthood is official, as lordship is official. That is to say, it refers to the exclusion of evil and the state of holiness we are in; but that is to bring us into liberty, so that we might take up sonship.
Rem In one way it meant that no one could stand to minister in the assembly when the glory filled the place.
JT I think sons as such are free. I do not think priesthood will be necessary in heaven, because there is no unholiness to exclude. It is mediatorial, as exclusive of evil and maintaining what is due to God. Holiness is a relative thought, to give us liberty to be as sons before God, in family relationships. The cessation of service as the glory enters indicates that the scene typified in itself is delightful to God — even without activity.
EJS Would singing to God the Father indicate a state of liberty to address the Father apart from all that is on the responsible side, as entering into what is purely privilege?
JT That is just what I was trying to bring out from these passages; the first dealing with the public position under the authority of the Lord, every one being in his place. You will observe in the passage read, that every item of the tabernacle was set in its place, and was functioning; it was not set there in an ornamental way or waiting to be used, every item was functioning.
EJS So there is something amiss with us if there is not this functioning?
JT Yes. Normally each member of the assembly [p. 370] is in his place, and is functioning in his place; he is not simply sitting there idly, waiting to be used. It is a living organism all under Moses, so to speak, and all is constructed according to commandment, but headship is not prominent.
FWW It would be connected with the expression, “the Lord’s day”, preparatory to “the first day”.
JT Exactly; the Lord’s day fits more with Corinthians.
GWW What you mean by “functioning” is that you see the candlestick lighted, the table with the shew-bread arranged, and so on. It is not merely that the things are there, but they are actually fulfilling the purpose for which they are there.
JT Exactly. Thus (in the anti-type) each is in his place. It is a question of recognizing the Lord’s authority and ordering.
FWW This functioning would characterize both brothers and sisters?
JT Quite so; if a sister is there, she is not there as a piece of wood, she is living. Corinthians, especially chapter 12, shows the organism.
Ques You spoke of it as being a question of an intelligent apprehension of the position. Do you think the secret of not moving on would be our state? There is the authority of the Lord and as coming under Him as Head, if the suitable state were there, we should move on.
JT I think so; you would be ready for the Lord to take up another attitude — that set forth in David and Solomon — which He is ready to do as soon as He is accorded His place as Head.
HEF I was wondering whether we have sometimes grasped the thing in intelligence, but have not been in the exercise of it.
JT Well, it is a question as to whether we have grasped the thing in intelligence, for if we had, we should not have the oscillation that has been referred [p. 371] to. We have hymns and a giving of thanks to the Father, and then maybe a brother gets up and gives thanks to the Lord, and thus carries us back to Exodus. I wonder if there is much intelligence, notwithstanding all the Lord has been bringing before us.
EJS What goes on in the assembly should be progressive.
JT I think so. If we are on the ground of 1 and 2 Chronicles, we shall give the Lord full latitude. He is Head, and what will He not lead to! The wealth becomes greater and greater, as you apprehend Him thus.
Rem The exercise should be to take it up intelligently.
JT Yes. Then, of course, the affections must be in keeping with our intelligence; as you get in the two prayers in Ephesians. First, the “spirit of wisdom and revelation in the full knowledge of him ... that ye should know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints”, what God has there; and then “the surpassing greatness of his power towards us ... which he wrought in the Christ”. Then in chapter 3 the apostle prays that the Father “of whom every family in the heavens and on earth is named” might give us to be “strengthened with power by His Spirit in the inner man”; that we might be “fully able to apprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and depth and height; and to know the love of the Christ which surpasses knowledge; that ye may be filled even to all the fulness of God”. Those two prayers apprehended prepare us for the service of God in the assembly as it is presented, typically, in Chronicles.
GWW Would you carry the thought of priesthood into Colossians and Ephesians?
JT I think priesthood always has place in our [p. 372] service whilst we are here in this world, as needed to protect us, and to protect the things of God. We cannot read the types without observing the very great importance attached to priesthood, whether in Christ or the saints. The maintenance of what is for God in every way depends upon it — that is, in view of the continuance of sin in the world. It enables us to enjoy sonship.
GWW That is what I want to get at, so when the Lord speaks of singing, the brethren come into view: “I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee”. We are contemplated there as brethren of Christ and sons of God more than as priests.
JT Surely. The doors being shut is a priestly thought, it is for the exclusion of what would hinder us. Then, “he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him”, and love being made “perfect” casts out fear. All that fits us for having part in the assembly.
Ques How far does the covenant suggested in the cup, take us?
JT It brings God to us more; as known it sets us free as regards God. It does not take us as far as the family of God. The covenant is between God and men, between God and Israel. We come into it, but it is not between the Father and His sons; that is clear enough. What do you think?
Rem I wondered whether it was preparatory to assembly privilege.
JT Certainly it is. It deals with us in our responsibility here, as in Romans and 1 and 2 Corinthians, but not as in Colossians and Ephesians.
Rem The box would be connected with the first part of the meeting and the responsibility side.
JT That is right. All matters relative to the wilderness position belong to the first part of the meeting; that is clear enough. You do not need the [p. 373] box in heaven; it is other riches you get there — the “unsearchable riches of the Christ”.
HEF Would you say that if Christ gets His place as Head with us, we should move with Him rather than address Him?
JT Yes; He is then on our side.
HEF And therefore, He would move towards the Father.
JT Clearly that is the thought. This is well-known ground, but I do not think Exodus and Chronicles have been seen as clarifying it.
DJ So you make a difference between singing to the Lord and singing with Him?
JT Surely; there is a very great difference there. He is on our side when we sing with Him. “In the midst of the congregation will I praise thee”.
DJ It is a necessity for Him to have a company in which He can sing; is that the idea?
JT Yes, the assembly is necessary to Him in the service. Then the wealth which He brings in comes into view. It is all from God.
GWW We are then in the presence of the “unsearchable riches”.
Ques Where is the wealth introduced in the scripture in Chronicles?
JT David thought of numbering the people, which will never do for the assembly. Of course, the Lord does value His people, but not from David’s standpoint. He was numbering the people as an ordinary monarch would, but that will not do for the house of God. In chapter 21 the judgment is meted out to him, and he is directed by the angel through God to go to the threshing-floor of Ornan the Jebusite, and he goes there and sees the sword sheathed there. It is not at the tabernacle; he was afraid to go to the tabernacle because of the sword of the Lord, but it was sheathed at the threshing-floor. Now he says, “This is the house of the Lord God” — it is where judgment has come to an end. There is no punitive judgment in the house of God. There may be discipline, but not judgment. The sword is sheathed there. David saw that, and he bought the place. He gave fifty shekels of silver for the threshing-floor; but here it is six hundred shekels of gold in weight; which is far more valuable than fifty shekels of silver. He bought the place, meaning evidently that he would have plenty of room for building.
Rem There was nothing there yet actually.
JT No, but to his mind the house was there.
FWW Would you say he had rather God’s side in view? The shekels of silver would be more on our side.
JT Yes, in 1 Chronicles 21, we are on much wider ground than 2 Samuel 24, “And David gave to Ornan for the place in shekels of gold the weight of six hundred shekels”.
GWW Chronicles contemplates his buying a place for the house and all the courts. He sees God’s delight in having courts filled with people pleasurable to Him.
JT That is it, and we ought to get that idea in the assembly. 2 Samuel confines the record to the altar and the offerings; 1 Chronicles includes the house.
GWW The vastness of the whole thing!
JT In chapter 22 David says, “This is the house of Jehovah Elohim, and this is the altar of burnt-offering for Israel”, and then he begins immediately to provide for it. “And David commanded to collect the strangers that were in the land of Israel; and he set masons to hew wrought stones to build the house of God. And David prepared iron in abundance ... and brass in abundance ... and cedar-trees innumerable”; and so forth. Later he says, “In my affliction I have prepared for the house of Jehovah a hundred thousand talents of gold”, verse 14. If anyone can compute the value of that the immensity of the wealth will be seen. “And a thousand thousand talents of silver; and of brass and iron without weight, for it is in abundance”. Then he directs Solomon to add to that.
GWW You cannot say that the tabernacle in itself gives any great idea of costliness, but the house does. The construction of the house leaves you with that which you cannot comprehend; the immensity of the wealth is more than the mind can grasp, but you can easily apprehend the wealth that comes before you in the tabernacle.
JT That is what I thought. We begin in sitting down according to Corinthians. It is a question of order, each one being in his place and everything according to the commandment, and functioning. That is how the matter stands, and the glory comes in in that connection. Now that glory would not be what you get in Chronicles. It is connected with guidance; the cloud is there for guidance, with movement in view; you have not reached finality yet, there is something beyond this. Of course, it is wonderful if the Lord is apprehended coming in in that way, and God coming in in that connection — but we have not reached finality in that. We ought to see that headship in Christ, leads to finality.
Rem The introduction of Christ as Head at that point would produce the song and bring the wealth to light.
JT You begin to see the wisdom of the Head, and the vastness of the things connected with Him.
Ques How is Christ introduced as Head?
JT It is in our being able spiritually to pass from Moses to David and Solomon, especially Solomon, because it was Solomon who built the house; it is a question of being able to pass from one thought to the other. The attitude and movements [p. 376] of Christ in the assembly are affected by the state of those forming it.
EJS It says that He was made known to them in the breaking of bread; what would that correspond to?
JT I think that is the transitional period. As they were saying that, the Lord came in according to Luke 24.
EJS I was thinking that it would be the moment when we pass from His lordship to headship.
JT That is so. You will notice that in Luke He does not go much beyond what is seen in Moses. It is priestly, but it is the wilderness position. “Have ye anything here to eat?” That is the position down here.
FWW You do not get the mount of Olives and the singing of the hymn in Luke; that is more the Solomon side.
JT The reference to Luke 24 greatly helps on this point, because the Lord may have need to adjust us, however intelligent we may be as to what we should do. They were perturbed; they were not just ready for a manifestation, and so the Lord adjusts them.
FWW Is that why the passover occupies such a large place in Luke?
JT I have no doubt it is so, and what happened after the resurrection had in view the service in the gospel testimony, that they should be prepared for it. But in John 20 the doors were shut, and there is no perturbation at all, nor, as compared with Luke, does the Lord say much. That is, you have introduced the idea of enjoyment. He says, “Peace be to you” twice, that is leading us into what belongs to the first day of the week, which synchronises with Ephesians.
Ques Would the song come in when we are beside ourselves to [p. 377] Him?
JT Well, we are beside ourselves if we are; I should like to meet some people who are or have been!
Ques Is it possible for a few moments?
JT It is if we pursue these lines. You are absorbed in the Person as you apprehend Him.
GWW Why do you think we are so detained on the Exodus side and so slow to pass over to the Chronicles side?
JT It is want of heart and power in the inner man. One observes it even with intelligent brethren, that they seem to remain on Exodus ground.
FS Do you think if we waited we should enjoy it?
JT Yes, spiritual power in silence, as in John 12: 2, 3. There is nothing to indicate that they were taken by surprise in John 20, they were prepared through Mary’s message. They were enriched by it.
GWW That was the opening of the treasury.
Ques To go back for a moment, I wondered what you had in mind in regard to each one taking his place on the Exodus side?
JT Each one would sit down, not as a member of a congregation, but as intelligently alive to his position: “We being many are one bread”. That is the idea; we are linked up together in a living way. All is under the lordship of Christ for the moment, but as soon as He is accorded His place as Head, you have a change and the wealth comes into evidence.
GWW Do you think we accustom ourselves in our daily individual pathways too much to lordship overlooking headship? We have proved Him as Lord in our various pathways, but we have not been to Him for impulse as Head? Is that the secret of the slowness that there is, and the oscillation. It is very precious to realize headship, and we are not to be satisfied with just a few minutes; it is to be the characteristic of the main part of [p. 378] the meeting.
JT I am sure if we were set for that the Lord would lead us into it.
GWW We would not perhaps go against any commandment of the Lord; but that is not headship.
JT The headship of 1 Corinthians 11 is to prepare us for headship in the assembly, so that a man, in his house, ought to set it out in some little way. Every christian household ought to get not only the idea of authority but of headship.
Ques We would hardly get it in the assembly if we did not get it that way?
JT That is so. Corinthians prepares for headship in the assembly. You have there, “So also is the Christ”, that is, the anointed vessel here, what is public. That is the tabernacle anointed, and everything in its place and functioning; the recognition of Christ as Head comes in under these circumstances. The temple was not anointed. The dignity is not in the anointing as regards the temple, but in the material there, the gold, and the various timbers used. The dignity is typically in the persons there; not in anything being put on us, but what we are. That is where the dignity lies. What we are before God is not a question of the anointing, but of what we are personally; it is a question of relationship — sonship, in which we have the Spirit as the Spirit of adoption. Anointing is for testimony.
GWW The fact is we have to give ourselves more to the understanding of headship. We have said the Lord must have His way and must be submitted to, and that is imperative but it is not headship.
Ques Do you think the owning of Christ as Head would give character to us day by day?
JT If you see a man in his house moving in intelligence according to the pattern set out in Christ, the whole house gets light from that, and so when the members of it come normally into the assembly,
[p. 379] they see headship perfectly in Christ, and the wealth that belongs to it.
GWW In that way a house properly adjusted is education for those who are in it.
JT It is remarkable how in Chronicles you see the houses of certain men contributing to the service of song.
GWW Their sons and daughters are spoken of in detail.
JT A study of the word “head” in 1 Chronicles is most instructive as to this point; David brings it forward and attributes it to God Himself, see chapter 29: 11.
FWW You referred just now to the second prayer in Ephesians. It is a question there of the “inner man”, what one is.
JT Quite so, and that is what gives dignity to the second part of the meeting. It is not only a question of regularity and order. You are struck in the end of Exodus by the stress laid on anointing and order, but in Chronicles it is that “Solomon assembled the elders of Israel, and all the heads of the tribes, the princes of the fathers of the children of Israel” — all that spiritual wealth — “to Jerusalem, to bring up the ark of the covenant of Jehovah out of the city of David, which is Zion. And all the men of Israel assembled themselves”. Notice “themselves”; it is a question of spiritual intelligence and power to assemble ourselves. “And all the men of Israel assembled themselves to the king at the feast, that of the seventh month”. That is to say, we are in the full height of the spiritual year, the seventh month. “And all the elders of Israel came; and the Levites took up the ark. And they brought up the ark, and the tent of meeting, and all the holy vessels that were in the tent: the priests, the Levites, brought them up. And king Solomon, and all the assembly of Israel, that were assembled [p. 380] to him before the ark, sacrificed sheep and oxen which could not be counted nor numbered for multitude”. There you see Solomon and typically all that wealth of spiritual intelligence, not only in him, but also in those that “assembled themselves”.
GWW Do you think it would be safe to say that unless we come in for this side of things we shall not be men of spiritual wealth? We may be under lordship, right and proper in its place, but that in itself does not make you a man of wealth.
JT It is most important to see as in Chronicles, that as Christ is apprehended as Head, His great wealth comes into view — “the unsearchable riches of the Christ”.
Ques Would you mind going on to verse 8 of 2 Chronicles 5?
JT It says in verse 7, “And the priests brought in the ark of the covenant of Jehovah to its place, into the oracle of the house, into the most holy place, under the wings of the cherubim; and the cherubim stretched forth their wings over the place of the ark, and the cherubim covered the ark and its staves above. And the staves were long, so that the ends of the staves were seen outside the ark before the oracle”. That might mean that the staves were drawn out, which was probably the case. “But they were not seen without. And there they are to this day. There was nothing in the ark save the two tables which Moses put there at Horeb”. That is, you get a clear view typically of Christ — apart from what He is in relation to the wilderness. The pot of manna and the rod of Aaron were not there.
GWW That is, the One who is Head. Under headship you get direct spiritual impulse.
JT Yes, we are for the moment out of the wilderness. You see what an assembly such as is indicated here would be: “All the men of Israel assembled themselves”. They are doing it. It was “men”; intelligence is in evidence.
EJS And the result is there is one voice in the singing and praising; they are brought to that point of unity. There cannot be anything less than unity if we are really under the direction of the Lord as Head.
JT “When the trumpeters and singers were as one”, verse 13.
FWW The trumpeters are very prominent.
JT The passage is full of spiritual richness. The parenthesis — from the middle of verse 11 to the end of verse 12 — is to enhance the wealth.
Ques What about Colossians in regard of singing? It says, “Let the word of the Christ dwell in you richly, in all wisdom teaching and admonishing one another, in psalms, hymns, spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to God”.
JT That is general. It is not properly the service in the house, but it keeps you at the spiritual standard; your state is kept on a high level by that means. Notice it says, “When the trumpeters and singers were as one, to make one voice to be heard in praising and thanking Jehovah; and when they lifted up their voice ...” There is great spiritual richness expressed harmoniously through musical instruments and song. The great number of trumpeters and corresponding volume of trumpet sound here, must be connected with Numbers 10: 10. It alludes to the acknowledgment of the rights of God’s love. They are not simply blowing into an instrument and making a noise, but here the voice is saying something, and rightly taken, it is expressing certain thoughts in the heart. It is a definite consequence of the divine work in the heart that there is an answer going back to God, and what greater triumph could there be for God at the present time than that there should be people in these conditions [p. 382] we are speaking of, that are brought under headship and answering to the purpose that God has in view for them. There is wonderful triumph for God in that.