HOW CRISES ARE MET IN THE ASSEMBLY
[p. 373] HOW CRISES ARE MET IN THE ASSEMBLY
Acts 6:1 - 8; Numbers 11:16; Numbers 17:24 - 30
JT The suggestion is how crises are met in the assembly through those who are reliable. Thus reliability is stressed. There is another scripture in mind, but one hesitated to read it, not wishing to take up too much time in reading. It is that in which Jethro made proposals to Moses so that he should not be exhausted in exercising his ministry among the people; Exodus 18. That may be in mind, too. These scriptures bear on the present situation among the brethren and show incidentally the need of augmentation of the administrative feature of the ministry, lest there should be exhaustion, in view of physical occupation tending to exhaustion and impairment of the vessels. In Exodus 18 God would remind us we have limitations physically, as well as mentally, and these might jeopardise the truth under certain conditions. In this event persons who are reliable may be reckoned upon to come forward according to the divine mind to lend a hand and relieve, so that the work may go forward unhindered. One would call attention to the fact that in Acts 6 we get the first attempt of the enemy to interfere with the work of God in Christianity, and how apostolic wisdom met it. The twelve needed relief apparently and we have in the passage read facts bearing on this, and the result, especially in Stephen, bringing out the idea of promotion, persons purchasing to themselves a good degree in the service, and great boldness in the faith, so that advance is made instead of retrogression. The enemy loses, the truth gains.
In regard of Moses in Numbers a sad breakdown had taken place, even Moses himself was affected by it, but speedily recovered, the incident bringing out [p. 374] what the Spirit can be in such circumstances, reminding us of His availability in the various distributions of the Spirit. That is what is in mind; no doubt the brethren will see the usefulness of the suggestion.
Ques There does not seem to be any suggestion of lack of material, “Look ye out among you seven men”, not, If ye can find them. Are they potentially there always?
JT The apostles did not require to go afield for them, or have recourse to other ways, but took on what was there, and what was there is God-provided, because they were to be men of faith. “The twelve, having called the multitude of the disciples to them, said, It is not right that we, leaving the word of God, should serve tables”, that is to say, should do the kind of work that was needed; others can do it as well or better. Then the word is, “Look out therefore, brethren, from among yourselves seven men, well reported of, full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom, whom we will establish over this business”. And then it says, “the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte of Antioch, whom they set before the apostles; and, having prayed, they laid their hands on them. And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples in Jerusalem was very greatly multiplied, and a great crowd of the priests obeyed the faith. And Stephen, full of grace and power, wrought wonders and great signs among the people”.
One might mention the thought was not so much to dwell on this well-known passage, nor on Exodus 18, but more to direct our minds to the distributions of the Spirit under pressure, need being met by qualified persons, reliable and available, the Spirit of God being the medium and directing power. Christianity is marked by the distributions of the Holy Spirit, it is the Spirit’s time and all operations are in His power. Really He is, as it were, in charge of the whole dispensation, and there is nothing lower than that in which He operates. There could be nothing higher, there is nothing lower. The dispensation is maintained at all times on that principle, the character of it being thus apparent. The Holy Spirit is the operational power, whether it be in new birth, or otherwise, the Spirit is the immediate power in the dispensation.
Ques Does that involve suitable vessels in which that power is to be exhibited?
JT That is the point, we are morally equal in each case, because the requirement was, “Look out therefore, brethren, from among yourselves seven men, well reported of” — moral qualities — “full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom, whom we will establish over this business”. In Numbers 11:16, the qualifications are also mentioned, “Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom thou knowest to be the elders of the people, and their officers; and take them to the tent of meeting, and they shall stand there with thee”. And in Exodus 18:21 Jethro says: “Do thou provide among all the people able men, such as fear God”. They will be there. God is ready to meet all these contingencies, but to meet them on His own ground, and these men could be relied on.
GWB Did you say it was not a matter of gift?
JT It became a matter of gift in prophesying in Numbers 11. What is stressed is the moral quality, but it became a matter of gift because the Holy Spirit and prophecy were involved.
AM What is the thought in the repeated word ‘full’? Full of the Holy Spirit, full of grace, full of power. Does it imply there was no obstruction in them to the Holy Spirit?
JT It is the idea of a vessel or vessels, a word God employs, for instance of Paul, “this man is an elect vessel to me”, Acts 9:15. I believe that is the thought.
[p. 376] That vessel is wholly fit in the sense of fulness. It is not half full, but filled for the work specified.
Ques Does the limited number suggest sovereignty in this matter?
JT There are seven chosen here, in Numbers 11, seventy. It is the same principle, whereas in Exodus 18 the principle is ten — a military matter. I suppose seven is a complete thought, meaning the whole idea is there.
Ques Would it show a small number relatively; that a crisis is met not by mere generalities, but by something specific coming forward in suitable vessels?
JT I think that is right, the idea of vessel is to be kept in mind. We are dealing with operational things, hence in the case of Elijah’s ministry the ravens served him, and the brook served him, 1 Kings 17:4. Ravens were living creatures, but the brook was not, but served on the principle of the universe, on the principle on which water is operated on, moving of itself. God affords ways and means in that sense, but when we come to the woman of Sarepta God said He had commanded her to maintain Elijah, 1 Kings 17:9. It was a full or complete thought and she was a woman under command, and is marked by the possession of vessels; she has means of serving the prophet, the oil and the meal being in vessels, where they should be, and she has skill for using the material, and the power, skill to make a little cake. It was a matter not simply of the material, but the ability to do things, and that enters into this matter of availability and usefulness to meet a crisis. The idea of skill must be there. God has been pleased to give men and women skill as well as material.
AM How would you distinguish between skill and gift?
JT There is a good deal of likeness between the two ideas, but skill in itself, I think, is more what God gives us constitutionally. The woman had skill [p. 377] to make a little cake, but it was skill that was native to a woman, because God has fitted her for that sort of work, of kneading dough. When Israel was to go into Canaan God demanded the firstfruit of their dough, meaning that the thing was already at hand for making bread, but skill was operating in it. God values such a gift as that, the gift which is the fruit of skill. The thing is in process, not yet finished. That is an important thing, the skill in operation in the process, the mind controlling discerns or reckons that there is an end to be reached, which in the dough would be bread. Elijah calls it a little cake, “Make me thereof a little cake first”, he says, 1 Kings 17:13.
FES Does that thought come into this matter of wisdom? “Full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom”, Acts 6:3.
JT It would. Wisdom is used by God, one of the things God specially stresses in the creation. It speaks of itself as a person. So much is it in evidence in the divine operations that it is viewed in that light.
PHH Are we to understand that as these matters are attended to the more spiritual matter of the word of God is set free, so to speak?
JT That is what is actually said here. There may be other things to say to modify that, Paul never having resorted to this method in his service. He is ready to do anything, to put wood on a fire, ready to do anything that had to be done, but this is a matter of apostolic dignity and office, and that was greatly needed. It was the main thought before the apostles as it is said in Acts 2:42, “They persevered in the teaching and fellowship of the apostles”, that is to say, they are stressed as characterising the dispensation, and primarily therefore their service needed to be conserved as much as possible, their power should not be expended on the work of deacons. What was needed on their part was the ministering [p. 378] of the word of God, and that should not be impaired.
PHH I would like to ask whether what is in your mind is that the administrative side is to subserve the spiritual side; what is spiritual is always to be in mind, is that it?
JT That is to be promoted, and apostolic power is intended to promote it, and should be conserved for that purpose.
Ques Do you think there may have been a tendency to put everything on them?
JT Yes, let them do it. Others might reckon thus, and ease off. The brethren ought to join in and do what they can and ease those who can carry on service of greater importance. How much do the brethren think, as a general matter, of the need of the service? How much does that enter into our minds, and what they can effect and what I can effect?
WC Is there any reason why they are referred to as the twelve?
JT I think it is to stress administration. The numeral denotes administration, and runs right through.
WC This crisis would serve to promote mutuality.
JT That is in the apostles’ mind in their remarks. They use the word ‘yourselves’, that is mutual.
WC They seem to initiate that and leave the choice to the people.
JT They bring the people into it as the choice involves many more than the seven, “the twelve having called the multitude of the disciples to them, said, It is not right that we, leaving the word of God, should serve tables. Look out ... from among yourselves”, that was the multitude.
WC The multitude being pleased shows the mutual spirit.
JT The saying pleased the whole multitude, and they did what it was suggested [p. 379] they should do.
JJT They seem to have brought the seven before the apostles after choosing them: in Numbers the seventy were brought before the Lord.
JT It is all a question of divine authority. The twelve men represent the Lord.
Rem So that the mutual side is not to interfere with the authoritative side. We are to work harmoniously. There is no reason why the two sides should not go on collaterally.
WC In Exodus Moses is advised to choose them, and in Deuteronomy he puts it upon the people.
JT Our service should not damage us physically, otherwise it may damage us morally. Jethro rightly says, ‘You will become exhausted’.
PHH Do you mean that there is a danger amongst the generality of us as brethren together of leaving too much to one or two persons, and thus fail in our common responsibility? Evidently the looking for these men would involve that the brethren knew each other, and knew the capabilities and capacities of each. Is that what we should know and discover in our local settings?
JT Just so. All these remarks are very important. I was thinking of knowing persons or things so as to use them. In Genesis 15, for instance, Abram was told to select certain creatures as meeting an emergency on the same principle as we are speaking now, Jehovah met an emergency that arose in the circumstances of His great servant Abram, so we are told, Genesis 15:1, “After these things the word of Jehovah came to Abram in a vision”, and so on, and it may be remarked here it is the first time we have the idea in the Scriptures of the word of God, and then in Genesis 15:9, God says: “Take me a heifer of three years old, and a she-goat of three years old, and a ram of three years old, and a turtle-dove and a young pigeon”. I just refer to that because Abram knew the cattle, he knew where to find these among his large flocks,
[p. 380] and knew their ages. That is very important to keep in mind, because we are supposed to know the brethren, perhaps visit them, or have them in our houses, so that we know each other, and the mutual side amongst us becomes practical and usable, so it says, “And the saying pleased the whole multitude, and they chose Stephen ...” They knew Stephen, and the others were known, it was no haphazard matter.
RSW Would it help in connection with easing off if we distinguished a little more than we do between different gifts, that of a teacher, and an evangelist?
JT I think we should. Scripture supposes we should distinguish. The Spirit of God gives us a list. “First, apostles”, for instance, in 1 Corinthians 12. In Ephesians 4:11 the word ‘apostles’ comes first, too. There are four different gifts — pastors and teachers referring to one person, the saints are to know that. We should know that a man like that can do certain work another cannot do.
WH These men would have applied themselves on this line before the selection took place, so that when the crisis arrived they were ready.
JT If a man like Stephen heard of the murmuring he, like Moses, would be distressed and do his best to meet it.
WH I was thinking of the word to Moses — “whom thou knowest to be the elders of the people”, Numbers 11:16.
WC When a skilful player on the harp was required a young man knew where to find David.
JT Just so.
Ques Not only what he could do, but what he was as a man.
JT Quite so.
WC “Behold, I have seen a son of Jesse the Bethlehemite, who is skilled in playing, and he is a valiant man and a man of war, and skilled in speech,
[p. 381] and of good presence, and Jehovah is with him”, 1 Samuel 16:18.
JT What a fine tribute. Jehovah would never forget that Saul had that tribute to David presented to him.
WC It was effective. The choice was suitable.
JOS Is this knowledge to which you are referring found with the apostle Paul in a fine way in the end of Romans and 1 Corinthians where a crisis had arisen?
JT That is a good point, because he salutes them. You can hardly serve the saints better, if you wish to call attention to them, than to salute them. So in the Roman epistle Paul salutes many persons. I suppose Phoebe brought the letter, maybe she read it on the way. If she did, she would know something of the saints in Rome, and could tell them something about themselves. Paul found out there were thirty at least he would wish to salute in his letter, and Phoebe would also salute them as soon as she saw them. She would say, You are Mrs. So-and-So. It is not easy to remember names, but it is important to have their names, to be able to say, You are Mr. — .
Ques Does it not often help in a reading meeting to have persons you can name? Does it not bring out the mutual side in a striking way at times?
JT It greatly helps to liberate us in our spirits when we know each other. John says, “Greet the friends by name”, 3 John 14.
Ques Would it not involve following up the commendation of the persons named? Phoebe would have something to attach to persons in addition to their name.
JT Phoebe was well spoken of herself in the letter. You can picture her saying, Well, I brought Paul’s letter with me. I know him well, he used to live near me. Corinth was a short distance from [p. 382] Cenchrea. He would know her well, and I can imagine she would tell the sisters, I know Paul well; he is a brother that can be relied on.
Ques In regard of Barnabas seeking out Saul, Acts 11:25, he saw the need there and sought out Saul to do the work, and the Spirit of God confirmed his choice.
JT How much it would mean for Paul himself! Paul said, “I went up to Jerusalem to make acquaintance with Peter, and remained with him fifteen days”, Galatians 1:18; he thus stayed two Lord’s Days with him; he could tell anyone he knew Peter.
Ques The link they formed at that time stood the strain later on, the personal side being so important between those who serve and those who are served, so that in times of difficulty there is something to stand the strain.
FK As regards knowing the brethren, is there a link with this and Adam naming the animals, the wisdom there?
JT That is the truth. God brought it in at the beginning to set out the principle of personal knowledge, the knowledge of things and persons, because Abram had to know the things God spoke of. He was obliged to find the creatures Jehovah spoke of, and I believe God intended that principle to be amongst men, hence in moving about amongst the brethren one acquires the knowledge of traits marking certain people. The brethren are worth knowing and saluting and that is the principle that comes out in the letter to the Roman saints — all these things enter into that.
WC Would the thought of surname confirm that?
JT It was to bring out where authority lay, the power of promotion, like the king knighting a man. He has authority to do that. Barnabas was surnamed Son of consolation, which meant he was that.
Ques I was thinking how the knowledge of persons [p. 383] and the naming of them comes out with David in 1 Chronicles 24 in connection with the service of God.
JT David always says something about a man when his name is mentioned.
FW The young man in Numbers 11:27 is able to name the two men prophesying.
JT These principles we are speaking of came in early in the Acts. They are to run through Christianity, because the things in the book of Acts are intended to govern saints of all times in the Christian era. Hence you get Peter and John. John does not say anything, but it is to call attention to the kind of man he was, he was a good second, not aspiring to be first. Let Peter lead. That was the principle, “first Simon, who was called Peter”, Matthew 10:2. Peter says, Look on us, Acts 3:4, he would have in mind what a brother was. So Jehovah impresses on Moses what a brother he had in Aaron, he is a Levite; that is the first mention of Aaron, and God said, he is coming to meet you and when he sees you he will be glad. All these things are mentioned to show what is suitable to Christians in their relations with one another. We are to be ready in an emergency to come in and lend a hand and see that the thing is done according to the dispensation.
PHH The spirit of reliability had already been discovered in Moses: “Have I conceived all this people, have I brought them forth, that thou sayest to me, Carry them in thy bosom, as the nursing-father beareth the suckling?” Would that indicate God’s estimate of reliability in Moses, so that when his spirit is put upon the elders, there is the reliability extended? Would that be right?
JT That is borne out in the general facts in Numbers 11, the divine thought of preserving the dignity of Moses, because the situation might lower his dignity and his influence upon the people, which God will not have. It is important that a brother [p. 384] should have influence, and you do not want to damage it, hence Jehovah says: “Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom thou knowest to be the elders of the people, and their officers: and take them to the tent of meeting, and they shall stand there with thee”. That is, Moses is honoured in the transaction, because God is going to make the most of Moses, he is not to be let down, he is a leading man.
Ques “And I will come down and talk with thee there; and I will take of the Spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon them; and they shall bear the burden of the people with thee, and thou shalt not bear it alone”.
JT God is showing us how He cares for a leading brother whom He has fitted to serve His people; He will protect him, though He will not ignore his failures. The man is the man, anyway, and the next chapter tells us all about this man, there is nobody like him, God says, We are told by the Spirit that Moses was the meekest man in all the earth. God is saying that to show how wrong it was for his brother and sister to make little of him. God will not have that, and that is a word we do well to observe. God will not suffer His servants to be maligned. He resents it. So the whole chapter is taken up with that incident between Moses, and Aaron, and Miriam.
Ques It says, “And he shall be made to stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand”, Romans 14:4. Is it not important for us to bear that in mind?
Ques “Has Jehovah indeed spoken only to Moses? Has he not spoken also to us?” Was that the spirit of rivalry coming out because it was not judged? Did they want a place of equality God was not prepared to give them?
JT The feminine element enters into the matter. Really it was Miriam’s naughtiness; Aaron was brought into it. He should have stood by his brother. Miriam was the one the enemy used. That is a word [p. 385] for the sisters not to be jealous of the brethren because of their husbands. Miriam brought up the matter of the Cushite Moses had married, and the enemy used that incident to bring all this about, yet God defends His servant. It was especially trying because it was his own sister and brother. Our brethren according to flesh are apt to be our worst enemies. It was a question of natural feelings.
HH Are you going to speak of Eldad and Medad prophesying in the camp?
JT I thought it was just as well to stress this passage, because it brings in the idea of the various distributions of the Spirit, which is a feature of Christianity. It comes up at this particular time to meet an emergency, and has in mind the whole dispensation. The Spirit was available, and hence Jehovah says to Moses, Numbers 11:17, “I will come down and talk with thee there; and I will take of the Spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon them; and they shall bear the burden of the people with thee, and thou shalt not bear it alone”. No one is to be in this, save those who have the Spirit. We are reminded it is the dispensation of the Spirit; He is the power. If there is to be any help it is to be the Spirit in which Moses had been operating, and there is to be no increase of, or addition to, what was there. The same Spirit was on those seventy men, hence the dispensation is maintained, and even the two in the camp prophesied. It is the sovereignty of God making way for His Spirit, even if the position is not right; the camp is regarded as another thing.
JJT Would that raise the question as to how we view those who have the Holy Spirit and are usable by God, but have not the light?
JT I think it opens up the whole question of the operations of the Spirit in Christendom. Even if persons are not walking in fellowship, God can use them. He reserves His own rights as to the Spirit.
[p. 386] The Spirit of God requires that the flesh should be judged in us, yet you may get the Spirit operating in a man not wholly in the truth. In the revival of over one hundred years ago persons from the denominations were moved and began to come to the meetings, and were allowed to break bread immediately, because it was a question of the work of the Spirit. But we had to modify that afterwards. God would honour the great fact of the Spirit being here, and He may use anyone under certain conditions.
Ques I think that is helpful, because one has wondered sometimes about this. Where there is movement with a good conscience in relation to the light received, you may find a man quite free to do a lot of things we could not touch at all, and obviously helped of God in the service.
JT There are many like that. At the same time you have an eye on what is suitable to the dispensation.
WC The fulness of the dispensation was with Moses. Is there anything in that? These two were of those written, Numbers 11:26.
JT It brings out what was in Joshua. Joshua said, “My lord Moses, forbid them! But Moses said to him, Enviest thou for my sake?” bringing out the character of the great mediator. How do we meet these matters; the operations of the Spirit with brethren not actually in the truth? Moses said, “would that all Jehovah’s people were prophets, and that Jehovah would put His Spirit upon them!” The Spirit is available. Moses did not say, Would that they were right in regard to the tabernacle, but that Jehovah would put His Spirit upon them. It is the time of the Spirit. God acts sovereignly in putting His Spirit on whom He will. We are to respect such persons, but have to bring the truth to bear upon them, too.
Ques Do you think there is some anticipative reference to what has come in in Christendom?
There is the integrity of God’s heart and the skilfulness of His hand, towards those who have not come into the truth as others. I was wondering whether sometimes in the sovereignty of God He leaves men to serve those who would be on starvation diet otherwise. We should do well not to discredit anyone who is being supported by God in his measure.
JT We must never forget we are on the side of the truth. How ready people are to say I have seven reasons for not coming into fellowship, meaning a wife and six children. They think more of these than of the truth.
Rem There is nothing in the scripture to support our not heeding the call. I was wondering whether from the sovereign side God has left some to prophesy in the camp.
JT That is a very important lesson here. It is the sovereign side; the conduct has to be left. Moses is not speaking of what was suitable. He is rather meeting what Joshua said in a party spirit, which was worse. The Spirit of God works in view of “the dispensation of God which is in faith”. If a man says, I have seven reasons for not coming into fellowship, he is not in faith.
HH Moses had two million reasons for going on — his children!
PHH Is it significant that the Spirit is referred to in John’s gospel, which is for the last days, as the Spirit of truth?
JT That is good. John says, “I have no greater joy than these things that I hear of my children walking in the truth”, 3 John 4. “My children”; what is the use of talking about children if we think there can be a lower level for them? How could John admit of a possibly lower level for his children than the truth, and yet we sometimes hear of a lower family coming into evidence now, which is not true. God is not admitting of a lower one.