APPRECIATION OF THE INHERITANCE (1)
APPRECIATION OF THE INHERITANCE (1)
EJMcB In proposing this scripture, you had the inheritance mainly before you?
JT Yes. Taking possession of the inheritance requires in us a state formed by the Spirit. This book furnishes us with examples of the state that appreciates the inheritance; so that, in that way, it corresponds with the epistle to the Ephesians. I think that the Lord would emphasise in these days the importance of our continuance; of our going on to the end. The teaching of the Pentateuch is completed in the book of Joshua; that is to say, this book presents the end of a course of dealings on the part of God with His people. The book of Judges opens up another chapter in the history of the people. I think that the Lord would emphasise the importance of our going on to the end subjectively. Of course His coming is the end; that is His side; our side is that we should continue to the end. In connection with that I wish to point out the difference between the inheritance as given by Moses, and the inheritance given by Eleazar and Joshua, for one observes that many in this day are content with what Moses gives.
Ques Do you refer to what Moses gave to the two-and-a-half tribes?
JT Yes; but what the two-and-a-half tribes were content with, all the others had; yet the others had much more besides. The two-and-a-half tribes were content with what they received from Moses, but the other nine-and-a-half tribes, in addition to what Moses gave them, had also what Eleazar and Joshua gave. We shall notice in chapter 13 the [p. 85] extent of the inheritance that Moses allotted, but there was an inheritance which Eleazar and Joshua gave which went far beyond that. It helps us in the understanding of the book of Joshua to consider the man himself.
EJMcB I think your opening remarks about the question of spiritual state bring in the importance of the first appearance of Joshua on the scene — where he comes in to oppose Amalek.
JT Yes, he appears first in Exodus 17; and he appears where the waters flowed at Rephidim. Now I think you have there the suggestion of the Spirit. The rock was stricken, the waters flowed, and there Amalek appeared; he appeared at Rephidim. When the Spirit begins to appear in the history of the saints, Satan works through the flesh in order to prevent spiritual formation. That is what Satan is set against — formation; so here we find in type the flesh and the Spirit: Amalek is there and Joshua is there.
ENH Do you think that Joshua illustrates Christ acting in the power of the Spirit; whereas Eleazar is more Christ as Priest who is absent, and therefore he does not come so much into prominence, but he is behind the scenes?
JT Yes; I think that is quite right. Eleazar is mentioned first in the allotting of the inheritance. I think it would greatly help to the understanding of the subject to see how Joshua appears. He appears first to contend with Amalek; that is to say, when the soul is relieved Satan would prevent formation; he would hinder the work of the Spirit. So Amalek appears just there, and Joshua takes up the conflict when Amalek appears. It is not Moses, it is Joshua; and that conflict goes on “from generation to generation”, Exodus 17:16 because it is as if God would give room for the work of the Spirit in the soul.
EJMcB And another thing — there is Joshua’s [p. 86] intimate association with Moses in relation to the communications on the mount.
JT Yes; he is called Moses’ attendant, and he accompanied the mediator on the mount, So that his leadership provides for all the light vouchsafed in regard of the tabernacle; and then after that he is in the tabernacle permanently. So that the soul is linked up through Joshua with the divine system.
EJMcB Will you just make a remark as to the difference between the thought of Moses and Joshua typically?
JT Moses is ever the authority of the Lord; and you will find there is no direct communication to Joshua from the Lord until Moses dies. As you see in this chapter, after the death of Moses the Lord speaks to Joshua; but prior to that the communications to Joshua are through Moses.
ENH Would you say the authority of Moses is illustrated by his rod? His rod can take them through the wilderness, but it could not take them into the land.
JT But whilst Moses lived he was the mediator. All communications from the Lord for Joshua came through Moses, so what Joshua represents is subordinate to the authority of Christ. Now the authority of Christ is what is always necessary; it is specially evident when your will is active. Joshua had no rod; he had no symbol of authority.
EM I should like to get a little help as to Joshua coining in to oppose Amalek. The Spirit is opposed to the flesh.
JT Joshua represents the independent authority of the Spirit. Joshua becomes endeared to the people — he comes into evidence with the people as a military man; and he comes into evidence not as having a symbol of authority, but on account of his military prowess. What Joshua represents is the moral authority of Christ in your soul which through [p. 87] the Spirit overthrows the power of the flesh. Satan would prevent spiritual formation; that is what he is against; but he cannot prevent the Spirit coming into the believer. You cannot get the Spirit by any act of yours.
EJMcB Would you connect the thought of Joshua with the true spiritual state in the believer?
JT Yes. He is a figure of that which combats Satan in the flesh.
JB Will you kindly trace Moses’ and Joshua’s authority as here given?
JT Well, Moses comes right up to the banks of the Jordan, and until he dies Joshua was not formally and directly recognised by the Lord; so we must leave every room for the authority of Moses.
EJMcB It is interesting to see that Joshua was connected prior to this period with all the spiritual activities of the people. He is not mentioned in Hebrews 11.
JT And he is not even mentioned in the book of Leviticus, where it is a question of approach; but in Joshua it is a question of the spiritual energy that takes possession. He refers more to what is hidden in the believer’s history than to what is public.
RL Does Joshua get his commission here, where the Lord says to him “as I was with Moses so I will be with thee”? Joshua 1:5.
JT Yes, he is now definitely in control; that is to say, it is that element in the soul that definitely controls you; it is not something from outside; it is something within you. We see an instance of it in Caleb — a man who with unwearied energy and appreciation of the inheritance would lay hold of it; he would get it at any cost. Caleb represents the energy and aim of Joshua seen by itself.
ENH Would the condition of soul by which the inheritance is taken hold of be indicated in verse 3: “Every place that the sole of your foot [p. 88] shall tread upon, that have I given unto you” Joshua 1:3; whereas in the second verse it is more from God’s side: “arise, go over this Jordan, thou and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them” Joshua 1:2.
JT Yes, that is a very good distinction.
TMG That supposes energy.
EJMcB Do you think the 15th to 17th verses of Numbers 27 help in relation to this energy: “Moses spake unto the Lord, saying, Let the Lord, the God of the spirits of all flesh, set a man over the congregation, which may go out before them, and which may go in before them, and which may lead them out, and which may bring them in; that the congregation of the Lord be not as sheep which have no shepherd”. Numbers 27:15-17.
JT Yes, so that full provision was made in that way. And then in Deuteronomy 34: 9, it is said: “Joshua the son of Nun was full of the spirit of wisdom; for Moses had laid his hands upon him: and the children of Israel hearkened unto him, and did as the Lord commanded Moses”.
EM I should like to ask what is the difference between Joshua being hearkened unto, and of Joshua as typifying spiritual energy?
JT It is just this: “as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God”, Romans 8:14. The authority of the apostles was the authority of Christ, and it necessarily governed everything — like the banks of a river. The Scriptures now do that.
ENH Would that be like verse 7? The way we have authority now is by what is written; and so now we have the apostles’ writings.
JT Yes. In Acts we see that the apostles respected the Scriptures; but in chapter 2 it is not said of the saints that they continued stedfastly in the Scriptures, but that “they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers”. Acts 2:42. They had respect for the apostles’ authority. But then the coming of the Spirit developed a spiritual state in the saints of God; and that is what the book of Joshua presents — a state marked by the energy that lays hold of what God proposes for you. The apostles could not put the saints in possession of the inheritance. All that the greatest of them could do was to open it up, and pray for the saints that they might enter into it; see Ephesians 1 and 3. The apostles brought in the great scheme of Christianity, but the Spirit only can give you possession of what is presented in it. So that there is great latitude for the work of the Spirit.
JM There appears to be a very intimate link between the Spirit received in the believer and Christ as set forth in Joshua. Christ as Leader, as you have been speaking of Him, does not appear to be so much presented on the objective line as on the line of what He is in the believer.
JT Well, in Romans 8 where we have the great truths connected with the Spirit, one thought is introduced there: “If Christ be in you”; that is more than the Spirit in you. “If Christ be in you the body is dead on account of sin, but the Spirit life on account of righteousness”. Romans 8:10. Christ in you now is in control. Now that really lays the basis for Colossians; for the mystery of Colossians is “Christ in you, the hope of glory”. Colossians 1:27. That is to say, if He is in you glory is secured to you; He will place you there; so that Christ in the saints implies His headship.
JM Would it involve a measure of formation?
JT It does; Colossians supposes formation. Romans 8 does not teach it, but it lays the basis for it.
Rem To be strengthened by the Spirit in the inner man is the idea antitypically in Joshua.
JT That is Ephesians, but you see how it is developed in Scripture. Romans 8 shows us what the Spirit is in the believer. Romans does not develop [p. 90] the formative work, but it shows what is there. But when it is said “If Christ be in you the body is dead because of sin”, etc. Romans 8:10, it means more than having the Spirit. There are conditions in your soul that enable the Lord to come in.
Rem I was thinking of the remark made at the start in relation to the five books of Moses, and Joshua being the completion of the Pentateuch; we read that “Israel served the Lord all the days of Joshua, and all the days of the elders that overlived Joshua”, Joshua 24:31. If you have the days of Joshua, you have not the departure that is met with in the book of Judges.
JT No. So that the truth of Ephesians is always the great objective of the Spirit.
EJMcB Will you explain the difference between what Moses gives and what Joshua gives?
JT What Moses gives is Romans. The possession of the Spirit is a very great inheritance; but one may have the Spirit and yet live in one’s family.
EJMcB In what place does the position I hold in relation to the tabernacle system as under Moses come in?
JT Well, Corinthians and Romans run together. Romans treats of the individual — God’s work with an individual, so that he is adjusted in regard of God here. God is publicly vindicated in him. God was vindicated in all that He said about Job but then God takes up the inward work in Job. God vindicates Himself in taking you up; you pay your debts, and so you do not discredit God. A good Roman believer justifies God, and God is justified in him; so that he can be here in connection with the tabernacle. If you are in the truth of Romans you are a righteous man; you love the brethren, and God is not ashamed of you. But all that is short of [p. 91] the inheritance.
Ques Would you say there is formation in Romans 8?
JT No; it is alluded to in that chapter, but it is not developed. You have sufficient means to discharge every obligation, so that you are righteous, publicly; you do not discredit God; hence God can set you up in relation to the tabernacle.
Ques Where do we first get formation?
JT In Colossians and Ephesians.
EJMcB I suppose Romans 8 deals more with the Spirit than with the believer?
JT Yes; the Spirit is the subject, and chapter 8 shows that there is enough to qualify you, and set you up here, so that you do not discredit God. In Exodus 17 we have the water, and we have Joshua; then we have the covenant, which opens up the heart of God to us, and all that is found in Romans; therefore the believer in the light of Romans is qualified for the tabernacle.
EJMcB In speaking of the inheritance which Moses gives, it is not merely the portion given to the two-and-a-half tribes, but all that system of things that came to them through Moses.
JT Yes, all the tabernacle system; the light of it is there.
ENH While some may only have the truths of righteousness, liberty, and sonship, God would have us to pass over to the other side.
JT Yes; if you get hold of the thought of Christ being in you — you are now on Joshua’s line, because the Spirit acts of Himself; before you come to Jordan the Spirit “springs up”, John 4:14. If Christ be in you, you have headship. And if Christ has full sway in your heart, He will lead you on to the inheritance.
Ques Is “If Christ be in you” individual?
JT Well yes; in Romans I think it is. “If Christ be in you, the body is dead” — not your bodies are dead Romans 8:[p. 92] 10.
RL Would there be any connection between Joshua 1:6: “Be strong and of a good courage: for unto this people shalt thou divide for an inheritance the land which I sware unto their fathers to give them”, and the armour referred to in Ephesians 6?
JT When Christ gets a place in the soul there is no more consideration for the flesh. And the circumstances you encounter are terrible to the flesh. It is altogether different from wilderness circumstances.
RL Yes; that is what we get in Ephesians. We are to be strong in the Lord.
JT Yes. Now you are in the circumstances where there is no consideration for the flesh; it is the territory in which you have no sympathy whatsoever outside of the Spirit. We need the whole armour of God here.
ENH I should like a little help on verse 4.
JT If your home is in the land you can influence to any extent. The hindrance is that we endeavour to influence the land from the wilderness side; that would be using position, or anything that you have in the world, to influence the assembly.
WK If that were to be the right thing to do, Moses should have stayed in Pharaoh’s court, for Moses was in the best position anybody ever had been for that purpose.
JT You may influence as much as you can from Canaan, because the influence there is right; it is heavenly.
RL In Deuteronomy 1 you get the same extent of territory. It was the divine thought that Israel should influence all that territory but the limit of their dwelling place was to be Canaan. Jordan was to be a boundary.
JB Will you say a little about the possession?
JT It is Christ that puts us into possession. There is the reception of the Spirit, the work of the [p. 93] Spirit, and then Christ in the saints, And “if Christ be in you, the body is dead” — there is conquest so far.
JB Have we arrived at a certain judgment when that takes place?
JT I think we are conscious that Christ controls us; one may be quite conscious of being controlled by Christ; so it makes room for headship, and you are led into possession of the inheritance in that way.
WH Do you connect the thought of leadership with Christ in you?
JT Yes — Joshua’s leadership; whereas the leadership of Moses is Christ as Lord, and His authority expressed through His apostles, and if needs be, the elders. You see in the assembly there were not only apostles, there were elders ordained in every city. Now the elders represent the authority of Christ — most necessary for young believers in the house of God; but no elder could put you in possession of the inheritance.
ENH An elder may not lead you into the inheritance, but what he can do is to control things, and maintain divine order.
JT Christ in you is subjective. If people are governed by a council, or by an archbishop, or bishop, or a pope, that is perfectly intelligible to the world but the mystery of “Christ in you” they cannot understand.
WH Speaking of outward order, that would be greatly helped if the internal thing were right; that is to say, Christ in you.
WK Is it not interesting that in Colossians the outward order is referred to: “Though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joying and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ”. Colossians 2:5. And so then the question of formation comes in in connection with a company in that way maintaining what was suitable to [p. 94] the locality.
JT Yes, that is a good point; showing that the Colossian was formed; there was order there. But then that was all short of the inheritance.
Ques Does “Christ in you” lead on to the thought of Christ in you (collectively), the hope of glory?
JT Yes, I think so. It is a wonderful thing that Christ would have a place in the Gentiles’ hearts.
Ques In view of all this, what encouragement, or comfort, would we be warranted in taking from verse 5 of this chapter: “There shall not any man be able to stand before thee all the days of thy life; as I was with Moses so will I be with thee: I will not fail thee nor forsake thee”. Joshua 1:5.
JT Well, that is Christ in you. Nothing can stand before Christ in us.
Ques Are we to count upon a life of victory?
JT Yes, you are; “if Christ be in you the body is dead”; well there can be nothing feared from a corpse. Later the body is presented to God “as a living sacrifice”. Romans 12:1. This shows that it is now energised by the Spirit, and so under control.
EJMcB They were not able to resist Stephen; no man could stand before him.
JT Quite so; there was a man in whom Christ was. And so in regard to Paul; no man could stand before him.
Rem Stephen saw the land.
JT Yes; the time had not come for the development of the land, but he saw it.
RL “If Christ be in you”. What is the force of that?
JT The force of it is that the Spirit has so wrought that He has formed a body for Christ — there is a place for Him. The mere reception of the Spirit is not enough for that.
Ques In what way does Satan seek to prevent [p. 95] that?
JT By working through the flesh. The flesh would seek to assert itself directly you receive the Spirit. The flesh has its own claims, and puts them forward.
EJMcB If Christ be in you the body is dead. Prior to Christ being in you, will was there.
JT Yes, and Moses, so to speak, had been helping Joshua. Joshua is not enough. The flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit is against the flesh, but ultimately the Spirit overcomes, and Christ comes in. The apostle’s great desire was that Christ might be formed in the Galatians. Not that there should be a sort of mongrel — an Ishmael — “a wild-ass of a man” Genesis 16:12. The responsibility was with Abraham to cast out the bondwoman and her son. Sarah had a typically right state; she would not have that lad there mocking her son. Now Jerusalem above is our mother. Sarah’s state was right, but the responsible person was Abraham. Both are combined in the believer. So you are responsible, and when your state is right, you act, and you cast out the bond-woman and her son. Now it may be that you love Christ, but you want to retain that unnatural system; but God will not have it. That is the line the apostle is on in Galatians; and he was really travailing about it, it was such a serious matter.
Rem Abraham failed over Ishmael.
JT He did; but it is simply nature. He brought it all on himself. Ishmael is a remarkable character: the product of a human contrivance to bring about the will of God.
Rem That is really religious flesh.
JT Yes; it is often found in young believers; they do not see the “Almighty God”, and they set about to bring things to pass in their own way; to make contrivances; and there is a mixed state brought about in the soul. But, really, it would be much better to be without it, because you have the [p. 96] painful exercise of casting out your own product. Then after Ishmael is brought in, God says: “I am the Almighty God” Genesis 17:1 — meaning that there is power available to bring in a true son. Just wait; have patience; have Christ before you, and the Spirit will work through your exercises to form Him in you, and you will have true happiness. Now, the next thing is that after Christ is formed in you, you make a feast for Him; you so recognise Him that you make celebration for Him and that is the day in which Ishmael mocks.
RL There is no attempt at all to mend Ishmael.
JT No; the word is, ‘Cast him out’. He is not to inherit with Isaac. Christ is now in possession. Although Isaac was only a babe he was the chief figure in the house. And what is to be noted is, that he could not do anybody any harm; he was only a babe. A child of that age is most attractive. And therefore it shows what a character Ishmael was; he mocked that child. Sometimes you wonder why people persecute you; but it shows what Ishmael is — the man after the flesh.
EM The man after the flesh cannot tolerate the spiritual man.
JT He persecutes him that is born after the Spirit. It is the product of the Spirit that Ishmael hates.
RL There was nothing insubject about Ishmael previously; it was only when Isaac got his place that he mocked.
JT You may be a popular preacher, provided you have not “Christ in you”. It is remarkable how popular preaching has become in certain quarters. I know thousands of people flock to hear popular preachers — but, what about Christ being formed in the preacher? If Christ be formed in him the religious world will attack him at once. You will find that it is Christ in the person that is attacked. It is not Christ in heaven.
[p. 97] L As soon as Isaac got his place, the mocking commences.
JT We do not read of Ishmael saying anything about Isaac when he was born, it was when he was given his place in the house.
EJMcB It was when Isaac was weaned, that is, when he was independent of natural resource, that the attack was made.
R Will you say another word about being free of fleshly resource?
EJMcB There comes a time in the believer’s history when the sense of the sufficiency of Christ puts him on his own feet; and it is at that time Ishmael comes in to mock. I do not think anything is of greater objection to Satan than to see a believer really sustained by Christ. I think Ishmael knew very well that when Isaac was weaned, everything was for Isaac.
JT It works out in the same way collectively, too. If we resolve to be governed by Christ and His principles, the religious world will persecute us for it. This would do away with all the systems of Christendom.
WK I hope it will be seriously thought of, what was said about a mongrel Christian — part Spirit, and part flesh. What we seek for is that Christ should be formed in us.
JT The great aim of the apostle in Colossians was that Christ should be “everything, and in all”. That is the great end down here. Satan opposes that, and if Christ gets His place in our hearts He will put us in possession of our heavenly portion.