ADMINISTRATION (5)
[p. 340] ADMINISTRATION (5)
Exodus 28: 1 - 26; Exodus 25:1 - 9; Deuteronomy 33: 1 - 5; Deuteronomy 34: 1 - 12
JT In further consideration of the subject of administration we should look at Moses as administering the law, his building of the tabernacle, his blessing of the tribes, and, finally, what may be called the eulogy of Moses by the Spirit in the last chapter of Deuteronomy. Reference was made at our previous reading to Numbers 12, and it was suggested that something further might be said as to it. It belongs to the section in our subject that is personal. “The man Moses” comes before us and this brings up the whole question of manhood, for he was a type of Christ. Moses, like David, was, in measure, a man after God’s own heart who did all His will. And we are reminded by the facts recorded that he was envied, which is a common thing where a man is being used of God. The instruction for those of us who are in the service in any way would be that we should follow the example of Moses, who was meek and lowly, reminding us of the Lord Jesus who said, “Come to me, all ye who labour and are burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am meek and lowly in heart, and ye shall find rest to your souls”, (Matthew 11:28,29). So that an administrator in the things of God has in Moses an example that points to the Lord Jesus, as in all such persons. Every one of them converges on the Lord Jesus.
JAP In Hebrews 3 we have Moses as faithful in all God’s house, the reference being to Numbers 12.
JT Moses is brought in there by way of contrast. He was a servant in God’s house but Christ is seen as Son over God’s house. I think that is the distinction that should be made on that point, because Hebrews is contrast, even if it be Moses. It alludes, as you say, to this chapter of Numbers, which brings out the [p. 341] character of the man and how great he was as to his office, so that no prophet compared with him. He beheld the form of Jehovah. Jehovah says, “the form of Jehovah doth he behold”, (Numbers 12:8). This enlarges on what we had as to Moses being constituted God to Pharaoh. It brings out how personally qualified he was as a man.
JTJr Does meekness need to be understood also in relation to what is said of him as going out from Pharaoh in a glowing anger?
JT It reminds you a little of the expression ‘the wrath of the Lamb’ in Revelation. This is a remarkable phrase, because the idea of a lamb is not wrath, it is meekness. But what need there is for wrath in the book of Revelation, for the Lord will be stirred up as the Lion of the tribe of Judah, and His wrath comes!
AMacd Does that fit in with the Lord’s entry into Jerusalem, meek, and mounted upon an ass, and then His entry into the temple and His zeal for Jehovah there?
JT Yes; at that time He made a scourge of cords and cast all the sellers of oxen and sheep and doves and the money changers out of the temple, showing how the Lord can turn from meekness to wrath. Any one of us who is in the service ought to learn to turn to indignation if necessary. If there is some conduct that is obnoxious to heaven, we should be indignant, as the apostle says to the Corinthians, “but what vengeance ...”, (2 Corinthians 7:11). He speaks of their vengeance in executing judgment on the incestuous man; and yet that man was restored, showing how wrath in that sense is essential and useful in bringing about repentance.
RH Would shepherding with an iron rod be a similar idea?
JT Just so.
LVD God speaks of Moses as being faithful in all His house. Both qualities would come in, meekness, and indignation to those ignoring the rights of God.
JT So Moses says, “He that is for Jehovah, let him come to me. And all the sons of Levi gathered to him”, (Exodus 32:26). Then there was a heavy slaughter. That conveys the idea. He was faithful in all God’s house, even to severity.
RH God is prepared to defend a meek man.
JT Is it not comforting that God defends a man who is like Himself, who corresponds to Christ?
AR This chapter is a warning to all of us as to how we speak about the Lord’s servants.
JT Just so.
FHL Meekness is one of the great features of the kingdom, according to Matthew. The Lord was operating in those qualified to inherit the earth.
JT And it is in that gospel that He said of Himself, “I am meek and lowly in heart”, (Matthew 11:29). That section of Matthew is the turning point in the Lord’s history and ministry on earth. It is where He was rejected; therefore He had recourse to what should happen. “Woe to thee, Chorazin! woe to thee Bethsaida! for if the works of power which have taken place in you, had taken place in Tyre and Sidon, they had long ago repented in sackcloth and ashes”, chapter 11:21; this shows, that at that point, the Lord being rejected. He asserted the righteous judgment of God, and at the same time, in the same section. He asserts His own meekness, saying, “I am meek and lowly in heart”. He is the Centre of everything there as always. So He opens up to His Father: “At that time, Jesus answering said, I praise thee”. He is speaking to His Father as if there were a secret voice that He had heard. “I praise thee, Father, Lord of the heaven and of the earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them to babes. Yea, Father, for thus has it been well-pleasing in thy sight. All things have been delivered to me by my Father”, verses 25 - 27. That is, He is beginning over again, but He is beginning in [p. 343] meekness and at the same time He asserts the kingdom throughout chapter 12, which follows; “and behold, more than Jonas is here”, verse 41. This means there was power there in the kingdom. All that is linked up with a meek man.
RH In 2 Corinthians 10, the apostle entreats the saints by the meekness and gentleness of Christ, and then goes on to say that he was ready to avenge all disobedience when their obedience was fulfilled.
JT That is a good scripture to bring in here.
TEH Timothy is exhorted: “In meekness setting right those who oppose ...” It is to be done in meekness.
JT Just so.
AAT When there was a personal attack on Moses, he was very meek, but in dealing with the golden calf his anger burned.
JT Three thousand were slain at that time. The sons of Levi came to Moses’ side and defended the rights of God, and hence the great judgment executed.
RH In verse 4 of Numbers 12 it says, “Then Jehovah spoke suddenly to Moses, and to Aaron, and to Miriam”.
JT Suddenly is another word to be noted. It is found also in Luke. “And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host”, chapter 2:13. God was acting urgently when the need was there and when His pleasure was involved. And so Luke 24 says, “two men suddenly stood by them in shining raiment”, verse 4. These two men came suddenly on the scene to assert the resurrection of Christ to the women who were there. It is therefore a question of being urgent when urgency is needed. And so here, Jehovah called these three out suddenly. He was going to execute judgment on Miriam. It was a question of a sister and two brothers. They were three members of one family; two of them opposed in envy against the other, showing how [p. 344] natural relationships often intrude into the things of God. The natural link did not save them from being opposed.
WWM Would you say that the forty years’ experience Moses had in the wilderness would have brought about his meekness, because when he started out he was not so meek? Between the time he slew the Egyptian and the time Jehovah spoke to him at the mount of God forty years had elapsed.
JT Yes, indeed; showing that there was progress with Moses through the circumstances of the forty years. It should be a concern to us all the time as to whether or not we are progressing. It is not how we are progressing in public matters, but how we are progressing in the service of God.
AR God must have been near to Moses. He says, “Mouth to mouth do I speak to him openly”, (Numbers 12:8).
JT This would show the intimacy there was between God and His servant. John, the beloved disciple, uses that expression, saying, “... not with paper and ink; but ... mouth to mouth”; meaning that the relations between him and the one to whom he wrote were very close, as remarked. Such proximity to one another is proper to Christians in holy fellowship in such meetings as these. It is what we have come to. It really amounts to what is said in (Hebrews 12:22): “but ye have come to mount Zion; and to the city of the living God, heavenly Jerusalem; and to myriads of angels, the universal gathering; and to the assembly of the firstborn who are registered in heaven”. The dignity of the brethren is displayed at these meetings. What happy seasons these are and they should be so because of the quality of the persons present.
AI Would “mouth to mouth” involve the service of God?
JT I think so. We are speaking to one another of the things of God. There are two things; we speak to [p. 345] God and we speak to one another. We are speaking to one another now and it is a question of the kind of mouths we have, because, in this same book we have, “Who gave man a mouth?” How attractive it is according to God! Man is His masterpiece in creation, and the organ of speech for communication one to another is remarkable. The conversational idea evidently began with Paul and those with him at Troas and it was after they had broken bread, Acts 20:11. Before they broke bread, Paul discoursed to them, which is a different thought.
JTJr Would this chapter show how God dislikes any interference in His administration or with that of the assembly?
JT How often we have had persons among us taking sides with those under discipline, thus disregarding assembly discipline. It is one of the most painful things we have to contend with and it promotes ill feeling and even division in the households of the saints. So that God is assertive of His rights in such matters, if anyone interferes with His administrative discipline. It is not uncommon that someone thinks he loves more than all the brethren, whereas he is not loving at all in disregarding the administrative righteousness of God in discipline.
RH The attack against Moses takes the form of what is personal. It is not in connection with a principle; it is in connection with the Ethiopian woman which Moses had married.
JT No doubt alluding to who she was, as if Moses did not have a right to marry whom he pleased. The Lord is defending that, and it widens out to the brethren as under reproach. The Lord would defend us, especially when we are under reproach in the Lord.
Rem The root of the attack on Moses seems to have been jealousy of his authority.
JT Quite so. No doubt there was a bit of pride in Miriam that was hurt because she should have such a [p. 346] sister-in-law as the Ethiopian woman, and Aaron shares in this same sentiment. How easily this sort of thing comes up!
RDG Would it seem evident that Miriam was to blame for it? Aaron is not rebuked as she was.
JT The evil of pride was in her, but both Aaron and she were in it together. They spoke against Moses.
RH Would it be right to link this with a condition in a locality that we might be inclined to discredit? The Ethiopian woman had to be recognised as the wife of Moses.
JT Quite so. If it is a locality where the brethren are poor and there is no distinction after the flesh, we may be under reproach because of that; and generally the saints are of that class, because 1 Corinthians 1: 26 contemplates this: “consider your calling, brethren, that there are not many according to flesh, not many high-born” Then a list of things is given, each of which would bring us under reproach, in that sense.
ANW It is interesting that God takes the occasion of the attack on Moses to bring out his faithfulness, “he is faithful in all my house”.
JT “Why then were ye not afraid ... ?” (Numbers 12:8). God brings that out; how readily we speak against each other and especially in regard to servants that are prominent!
FSC It would seem as if it were an old matter. They said, “Has he not spoken also to us?”
JT Yes, and they were assuming to be on the same level as the minister and to some extent they were, because the three are put together in the minor prophets; and the three were engaged in the service of God, and in a certain sense they had a status in the service, but they were not on the same level as Moses in God’s account, showing there are grades in God’s service, which is an important matter.
[p. 347] Now, we should consider the law in Exodus 20. There is a point which we have often noticed, but it is important that it should be noticed now, because, in this chapter it is a question of God’s rights in love. There are persons who love Him and He is speaking about them. The saints come under God’s eye, because they love Him. “If any one love not the Lord Jesus Christ let him be Anathema Maranatha”, (1 Corinthians 16:22), which means accursed at the Lord’s coming. This is a solemn matter but Jehovah is able to say here, “... shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments”, (Exodus 20:6). It is not those that should love Him, but those who do, showing there are those that love God whom we might not have noticed. He has them in mind in making this royal law, which it is called, and of which Moses himself would say as to it: “From his right hand went forth a law of fire for them. Yea, he loveth the peoples, all his saints are in thy hand, and they sit down at thy feet; each receiveth of thy words”, (Deuteronomy 33:2,3). It is very beautiful that Moses is able to speak thus.
RH Deuteronomy refers to “the myriads of the sanctuary” and Exodus to “thousands of them that love me” . What would be the link there?
JT I think Deuteronomy’s reference is fuller and more abstract and refers to the manner in which God came. The allusion is to the holy myriads and it is God’s love for the people, not their love for Him as in Exodus. Deuteronomy therefore contemplates in this part of the book, the work of God as based on the truth of the brazen serpent as set out in the book of Numbers. The brazen serpent contemplates the possibility of the work of God, “What hath God wrought!” (Numbers 23:23). Deuteronomy is the work of God; Deuteronomy is to bring out what God hath wrought. That is, in this sense, the only thing worth speaking [p. 348] of.
CN So in Deuteronomy 33:4 it is a question of “the inheritance of the congregation of Jacob”.
JT Yes; that is the law of the inheritance; how valuable it is! And so the “royal law”, as James calls it. Our chapter in Deuteronomy is based on the work of God; what God has wrought; whereas in Exodus and Numbers a larger number is contemplated. There were probably two million people in the whole congregation, but they were not all the subjects of the work of God. And so it says in the New Testament, “For not all are Israel which are of Israel”, (Romans 9:6), showing, I think, that those who are really Israelites are those that are wrought in by the Spirit of God and they only will be taken account of. That is all God will have eventually.
AR Dan leaps out of Bashan according to Deuteronomy, whereas in Genesis 49:17 he is an attacker. In Genesis he represents antichrist.
JT In Genesis Dan is an adder by the way and bites the horse’s heels and the rider falls backwards. That would be Dan in a bad sense whence antichrist comes, showing the sort of thing that will eventually rise up, but it will be overcome, and the real Israel will come to light. The real Israel would be what is set out in the tribes in this chapter. In verse 22, it says, “And of Dan he said, Dan is a young lion; he shall spring forth from Bashan”. Here, it is the work of God that is viewed in Dan, not the antichrist as in Genesis 49, where his father speaks of him. This is the work of God. “At this time it shall be said of Jacob and of Israel, What hath God wrought!” God is entitled to speak only of that.
EEH How does the giving of the law in Exodus 20 fit in with the idea of administration? Is it intended for regulation?
JT I was thinking that. The law and its result, in a responsible sense, are contemplated in the whole chapter. “And Jehovah said to Moses, Thus shalt thou [p. 349] say to the children of Israel: Ye have seen that I have spoken with you from the heavens. Ye shall not make beside me gods of silver, and ye shall not make to you gods of gold. An altar of earth shalt thou make unto me, and shalt sacrifice on it thy burnt-offerings, and thy peace-offerings, thy sheep and thine oxen: in all places where I shall make my name to be remembered, I will come unto thee, and bless thee. And if thou make me an altar of stone, thou shalt not build it of hewn stone; for if thou lift up thy sharp tool upon it, thou hast profaned it. Neither shalt thou go up by steps unto mine altar, that thy nakedness be not discovered thereon”, verses 22 - 26. This paragraph is the result, in the mind of God, in the Israel of responsibility (which is the Israel of the Old Testament), and the Israel to whom Christ came, and the Israel that is being set up according to Deuteronomy, presently. But Exodus 20 refers to the Israel that was; the responsible Israel, and what God brings out of it. He discriminates between the altar of earth (what we must have or there can be no worship at all) and the altar of stone, which is Christ risen. This means that the service of God can go on in a low or shallow condition amongst the saints; whereas if there is an altar of stone the highest level of worship would be reached. But if you do not have the altar of stone, you can carry on the worship of God on the altar of earth, showing how considerate God is that we might all be in fellowship, because the very youngest is in fellowship (if he is in it) as well as the eldest.
CAM When we bring God into our administrative matters it would result in this answer to God’s heart in sacrifice in some measure.
JT I think so. God is very considerate of us. We have a goodly number here today, but there is a great variety, and we are graded from the shallowest or weakest up to the most spiritual, so that the instruction here would include all. All are carried on in fellowship [p. 350] although only some can worship at the altar of stone, but all have the status of worshippers according to what we have here, even if it is only the altar of earth.
SW In Exodus 20:21, it says, “And the people stood afar off, and Moses drew near to the obscurity where God was”. Moses was made conscious of his ability to stand before God personally in that way.
JT Quite so; all is based on what we have already said as to what he was personally. Then later in chapter 24: 2, Moses alone was to come near; and then in verse 12, Jehovah says, “Come up to me into the mountain, and be there”. It is in this position that he received the instructions as to the tabernacle. That is where he learned God. God came out in all His administrative services. Moses knew how to stand in His presence.
SW God would have us to be conscious of this fact.
JT “Moses and Aaron among his priests”. That is, Moses was a priest as much as Aaron and more, so that he had a right to go into the presence of God at any time. According to Numbers 7 he went in to speak to God but God spoke to him, showing that He changed the matter. God spoke to him first which brings out the gracious feelings that God had toward Moses in the position He had given him.
CN Would you say a little more about these two altars? One seems to be compulsory and the other optional. In verse 24, it says, “An altar of earth shah thou make unto me”, and then in verse 25, “And thou make me an altar of stone”.
JT All that is very good. We have already touched on it a little. The compulsory side refers to the humanity of Christ; even though we may not understand much as to His deity we must have the altar of earth; whereas in the second passage, the ‘if’ requires that we know Him risen from the dead, and as the Son of God — “marked out Son of God in power, according to the [p. 351] Spirit of holiness, by resurrection of the dead”, (Romans 1:4). These two altars show how the truth stands as to our worship and how the feeblest are recognised. We are distinguishing between two altars, but both together cover very many genuine Christians. All have a right to worship according to the first requirement. If they do not have a right to it they are not worshippers at all. Worshippers are genuine Christians. They are recognised as worshippers, but the’if in relation to the second altar brings in those who are advanced in the truth. In the use of the altar of stone, we have more spiritual and intelligent persons contemplated. So that we have graded conditions in the worship of God, but all having the status of worshippers.
APT The Jewish Christians that Peter wrote to would understand a little about the stone side.
JT They would, indeed. “... yourselves also, as living stones ...”, (1 Peter 2:5). I think what we are saying is most important, because you are thankful if the young Christians here understand that they really have a status before God as having faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, even though they may not have advanced very much. In Leviticus we have a case of a person who can only bring a little meal, Leviticus 5:11 - 13. He is accepted in the sin-offering without blood. That is important. There is a distinction made in regard to the sin-offering of a person not having sufficient to meet the full requirement. The man with a handful of meal is accepted under certain circumstances as before God, and the meal does not mean that death is brought in. It is simply humanity, or the order of Christ as Man. That establishes a ground of acceptance under certain circumstances.
APT Luke 18: 13 says, “O God, have compassion on me, the sinner”. He would not be established very far in the truth but that would be the idea.
JT Yes; God would take account of him. The Lord says, “This man went down to his house justified rather than the other”.
CAM The thief on the cross seems only to have offered the meal. “This man has done nothing amiss”, Luke 23:41. That would correspond with the fine flour you were referring to.
JT He did not go on to the death of Christ, but the Lord says, “Today shalt thou be with me in paradise”, verse 43.
RDG Would Elijah’s measure be seen in that he was able to build an altar of twelve stones? 1 Kings 18:30 - 39.
JT That is good, but it was really a time of reparation. He repaired the altar. That is what is meant. It is a great matter to repair things, provided you bring it back to the full thought. If there has been failure, reparation should bring us back to the full thought. The eleven apostles were not the full thought but they were reparable. They added another that was of the same kind as themselves, so the full thought is recognised, and the Lord appeared not to the eleven, but to the twelve, (1 Corinthians 15:5).
RH Is the altar of stone more the Colossian presentation?
JT That is good, I have often thought of that too. We have referred to Romans 1:4:”... marked out Son of God in power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by resurrection of the dead”. In Colossians we have: “... in which ye have been also raised with him through faith of the working of God who raised him from among the dead”, chapter 2:12. That is the status we are in, according to Colossians, and it brings us into Canaan in our worship.
AI Why is profanity mentioned in relation to the altar of stone?
JT “For if thou lift up thy sharp tool upon it, thou hast profaned it”, verse 25. That would shut out all that [p. 353] is expended in science and refinement in the service of God publicly in certain sections of the profession. Tools are essential to manufacturing trades, and they serve to bring out the skill of man, whereas the use of them here is profanity. The stone is a question of what Christ is personally. “They no longer saw any one, but Jesus alone with themselves”, (Mark 9:8). We do not need anything else but that for worship. It is the real worship, too. It was “Jesus alone with themselves”, when they came down from the mount.
JAP Would you say there was a worshipful attitude with the centurion? “Truly this man was Son of God”, (Matthew 27:54). Is that the altar of stone?
JT I would say that. His expression, “Truly this man was Son of God” would show that the light was shining, even for that centurion. It was what he observed in what happened before his eyes. What a thing it is to see and feel the light shining; the light of the glory of Christ!
JTJr The speaking is from heaven. “Ye have seen that I have spoken with you from the heavens”, (Exodus 20:22). But it had in view the setting up of the tabernacle, so later we have speaking from between the cherubim that overshadowed the mercy-seat, (Exodus 25:22).
JT Speaking from the mercy-seat would mean that God had drawn near and this is fully seen in the Lord as man here. The full thought of the divine system is in mind. Speaking from heaven, while distance is there, conveys authority. Consequent on Christ’s return to heaven, the word is, “See that ye refuse not him that speaks ... from heaven”, (Hebrews 12:25). This is contrasted with the oracles speaking on the earth.
CN Say a word as to “Neither shalt thou go up by steps unto mine altar”, (Exodus 20:26).
JT It goes with the tool of which we have been [p. 354] speaking. It is nature being exposed. God abominates that in His service.
RH Colossians speaks of being “vainly puffed up by the mind of his flesh”, chapter 2:18. That kind of mind would inflate and is the kind of thing that is forbidden.
AR There were winding steps in the temple. What is the thought there?
JT That is all inside; it is all covered, where things are secret, and the same idea does not come in here. This is open. This is what is going on publicly. The law is being given. God is coming out and asserting His rights in love (because that is the point) and yet He is concerned about things being seemly and right. It is the public worship of God. One meaning of the idea of worship is that it is public. The Lord says, “Ye worship ye know not what; we worship what we know”, (John 4:22). That is public worship, and of course. God is concerned that everything should be right.
Then the offerings are alluded to in Exodus 20: “... and shalt sacrifice on it thy burnt-offerings, and thy peace-offerings, thy sheep and thine oxen: in all places where I shall make my name to be remembered, I will come unto thee, and bless thee”, verse 24. This is a precious thought in regard to the altar of earth, but in chapter 25, in relation to the building of the tabernacle, it is the heave-offering. There is an allusion there, in the note, to the heave-offering in Leviticus 7: 14. Our passage reads: “of every one whose heart prompteth him, ye shall take my heave-offering. And this is the heave-offering that ye shall take of them: gold, and silver, and copper, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, and byssus, and goats’ hair, and rams’ skins dyed red, and badgers’ skins; and acacia-wood; oil for the light; spices for the anointing oil, and for the incense of fragrant drugs; onyx stones, and stones to be set in the ephod, and in the breastplate. And they shall make me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them”, verses 2 - 8. That is, the [p. 355] offerings required are what is needed for the tabernacle in which God is to be served. It is a question of the kind of thing needed in this offering. And it is a heave-offering, which would mean the heaving up of the affections. It would mean, typically, that there is a real living state of things amongst the saints springing up into everlasting life.
FNW Would the heave-offering be seen in John 4 in the woman? Would she be a product of the administration of Christ as referred to in the end of chapter 3?
JT Just so; “The Father loves the Son, and has given all things to be in his hand”. That is a very good connection. The fourth chapter of John would bring out the feminine side, which no doubt (if not openly, certainly secretly) alludes to the assembly, where we have the feminine side. It is intelligently seen there in her, for her body is to be used. “The water which I shall give him shall become in him a fountain of water, springing up into eternal life”, (John 4:14).
AR Would you say how we can furnish the material for the ephod and the breastplate?
JT It says: “And this is the heave-offering that ye shall take of them ... stones to be set in the ephod, and in the breastplate”. That points to the affections of Christ. It is a unique thing provided for in the service of the sanctuary in chapter 28, when we come to the priesthood. Precious stones would represent what would be most excellent in the offerings of the saints, and I believe Ephesians and Philippians would be that. These are the epistles that contemplate what is more excellent. It says, in Philippians 1: 10, “that ye may judge of and approve the things that are more excellent”. In Ephesians we have, “... and to know the love of the Christ which surpasses knowledge”, chapter 3: 19. Then, in 2 Corinthians 5:14, we have, “The love of the Christ constrains us”. These are things which are more excellent.
CAM [p. 356] Would you say that in exercising assembly administration there is such a thing as going on from the responsibility side to the privilege side? There would be that distinction perhaps between chapters 20 and 25.
JT Just so. And then there is addition in chapter 35. We do not have time to go into all the detail, but just to get the general view. Chapter 35 is an addition to this chapter as to the materials that were offered. So the word is, “And Moses spoke to all the assembly of the children of Israel, saying. This is the word which Jehovah has commanded, saying. Take from among you a heave-offering to Jehovah: every one whose heart is willing, let him bring it, Jehovah’s heave-offering — gold, and silver, and copper, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, and byssus, and goats’ hair, and rams’ skins dyed red, and badgers’ skins, and acacia wood, and oil for the light, and spices for the anointing oil, and for the incense of fragrant drugs; and onyx stones, and stones to be set for the ephod, and for the breastplate. And all who are wise-hearted among you shall come and make all that Jehovah has commanded: the tabernacle, its tent, and its covering, its clasps, and its boards, its bars, its pillars, and its bases, the ark, and its staves; the mercy-seat, and the veil of separation; the table and its staves, and all its utensils, and the shewbread; and the lamp-stand for the light, and its utensils, and its lamps, and the oil for the light; and the altar of incense, and its staves; and the anointing-oil, and the incense of fragrant drugs; and the entrance-curtain at the entrance of the tabernacle; the altar of burnt-offering, and the copper grating for it, its staves, and all its utensils; the laver and its stand; the hangings of the court, its pillars, and its bases, and the curtains of the gate of the court; the pegs of the tabernacle, and the pegs of the court, and their cords; the garments of service, to do service in the sanctuary, the holy garments for Aaron the priest, and [p. 357] the garments of his sons, to serve as priests”, verses 4 - 19.
I think the sabbath prefaces all this and gives light to it. How much we need to get rest, spiritually, in order to have to do with these exalted things that are used in the sanctuary of God. We need to be restful, because many of us are not equal to the thoughts of God because we are tired out. We have too much to do and are affected in this way, not only physically but spiritually and we become jaded. There is, perhaps, too much taken on and we miss a time of rest and quietness in the Lord’s presence. The point for us is that we make use of the rest of God. It is necessary for God to have us with Himself. “For in six days Jehovah made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed”, (Exodus 31:17).
APT There is much that happened after chapter 25, for there was the sin of the golden calf involving the general breakdown of the people. That all enters into the matter, necessitating a better and deeper understanding of the holiness of God.
JT Yes. If we are not growing we become stunted and we are not in liberty in the divine service. Hence there is the need of spiritual restfulness of which so much is made in the type before us in Exodus 31 and 35.
AR Please say a word about the creation. There is an added word in Exodus 31:17 that is not in Genesis, “... and was refreshed”.
JT Yes, God was refreshed. You only get it there. We need that refreshment. It is the principle of providing things for the sanctuary of God. These are the exalted things that the epistle to the Philippians especially contemplates.
AMacd Would you say just a word on the fact that they had to be restrained in chapter 36.
JT That is another thing. It is well to be balanced. Many of us add much that is not necessary. If our wills at all enter into the service of God it only [p. 358] does harm.
AMacd Would that fit in with your thought of restfulness?
JT I think it does. What I am saying is most important.
ANW Do you mean that we take on too much in business or in our homes, or do you mean we may take on too much levitical work?
JT We have to discern what is hindering us in our service to God, even if it is weariness. God may come in, as He does very often, and we are less tired when we go out of the meeting than when we go in. But we have to watch tired and jaded conditions.
APT Does John 4 indicate there is no cessation of the Lord’s service to the Father on account of His weariness?
JT He sat just as He was by the well, wearied with His journey. Christ was there and He carried on. He took advantage of the presence of the woman to open up the greatest things in spite of His weariness. We have the availability of the priestly service of the Lord. He attends to us in our weariness so that we need not be denied through it.
ANW He says, “My yoke is easy, and my burden is light”, (Matthew 11:30).
JT That would suggest to us that we can go on, and that we are not tired out. Of course, one can overcome tiredness by the grace of the Lord; the high-priestly grace of the Lord enables us to overcome. But we have to keep in mind that we are not to allow ourselves to become run down physically. The Lord knows what we need and He provides rest as we seek it.
APT What do you make of Mark’s gospel where it says, “For those coming and those going were many, and they had not leisure even to eat”, chapter 6:31? He says, “Come ye yourselves apart into a desert place and rest a little”.
JT They were with Jesus. They were not playing [p. 359] tennis. It was not a holiday that the Lord contemplated — or to have recreation. The Lord saw what they needed and that was to be restful. Rest a little, not very long, but a little.
RH It says, “they sit down at thy feet, each receiveth of thy words”, (Deuteronomy 33:3).
JT That is restfulness. The Lord told the people to sit down on the grass when He was going to feed them.
ANW Deuteronomy is most attractive.
JT What Moses says of the tribes is very beautiful because it is a question of the work of God, and then chapter 34 eulogises Moses, which we should notice. Although he never entered the land, in the ordinary sense, he saw it all from Jehovah’s point of view. God honoured His servant here at the end of his course, and he died in full natural vigour.
CAM You were recently stressing the completion of the word of God. Deuteronomy 34 really completes the personality of this remarkable servant.
JT You feel how suitable that there should be a tribute paid to him such as is given here. The completion of things is largely characteristic of Matthew, the assembly gospel. Every subject is finished, not only what relates to Christianity, but what relates to the nations and Israel.
CAM That is very impressive and instructive.
JT So that we do not want to leave our subject unfinished now, but we can only touch on it briefly. We have already said as to Deuteronomy 33 that it is a question of the work of God. “What hath God wrought!” Moses can bless the people according to God. There is no discrepancy. In Jacob’s blessing there are discrepancies as we have already noted in Dan, but here it is all Israel. And then in chapter 34 we are told the view that Moses got of the land: “And Moses went up from the plains of Moab to mount Nebo, to the top [p. 360] of Pisgah, which is opposite Jericho. And Jehovah showed him the whole land, Gilead to Dan, and all Naphtali, and the land of Ephraim, and Manasseh, and all the land of Judah”, verses 1,2. If we consider the antitype, heaven is shown us with people in it. It is not a bare idea or a peopleless realm; it is a peopled realm. Heaven is viewed in Scripture as a peopled realm; not empty. So that what Moses sees is not simply the bare land but “the whole land, Gilead to Dan”; that is, the tribes are named as there, and that, of course, is where the glory lies: “Nor what is next Thy heart can we forget; Thy saints, O Lord, with Thee in glory met”. That is not simply heaven in the abstract, but heaven with people in it! That is what Moses saw: “the whole land, Gilead to Dan ... unto the hindmost sea, and the south, and the plain of the valley of Jericho, the city of palm-trees, to Zoar. And Jehovah said unto him. This is the land that I swore unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, saying. Unto thy seed will I give it: I have caused thee to see it with thine eyes, but thou shalt not go over thither. And Moses the servant of Jehovah died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of Jehovah. And he buried him in the valley in the land of Moab, opposite Beth-Peor; and no man knows his sepulchre to this day”, verses 2 - 6. Jehovah buried him. The whole matter is a tribute to Moses. No other man was shown the land as he was, and no other man was buried by Jehovah as he was. And then it goes on to tell us about his age: “And Moses was a hundred and twenty years old when he died; his eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated”, verse 7. That is another thing for the servants to be concerned about; that their voices do not give out, nor their hearing and eyesight; but that we may be able to go on in our service to the saints. Moses was as able to serve at the end as he was earlier. “And the children of Israel wept for Moses in the plains [p. 361] of Moab thirty days; and the days of weeping and mourning for Moses were ended”. And then we have another tribute given: “And there arose no prophet since in Israel like Moses, whom Jehovah had known face to face; according to all the signs and wonders that Jehovah had sent him to do in the land of Egypt, to Pharaoh, and to all his servants, and to all his land; and according to all that mighty hand; and according to all the great terribleness that Moses had wrought in the sight of all Israel”, verses 10 - 12. That is what I would consider the eulogistic tribute to Moses, which is very suitable and beautiful.
Ques It was said of the Lord that He spoke with a loud voice and gave up the ghost. Is there any relation in that to Moses- strength?
JT Quite so; you mean that the Lord died in power. Everything converges in Christ; even if we speak of the physical power of Moses at one hundred and twenty years, it points to Christ. He did not die an ordinary death; He died in power.
SW Is there any connection between Moses being shown the whole land here, and the apostle John being taken up into a high mountain to see the new Jerusalem coming down out of heaven?
JT What John saw would be greater. Moses saw the land of the tribes.
FNW Is there a final administrative touch seen with Moses? He imparts something to Joshua in the way of wisdom: “And Joshua the son of Nun was filled with the spirit of wisdom, for Moses had laid his hands upon him”, verse 9. His administration was to be carried on.
JT That is another very important matter to be noted — that what he was administratively is carried down to Joshua, aiding him in his administration when the time came for it.
TEH Who wrote chapter 34 of Deuteronomy?
JT I do not know. You also wonder who wrote [p. 362] the last verses of the book of Joshua, and other passages. We have to leave these things with God.
RH Is the blessing to be regarded as the great end of administration? Would the blessing in chapter 33 be the spiritual end?
JT What a great man Moses was to speak of the work of God in such a beautiful way without any discrepancy in it. What God wrought is perfect, so that new creation is touched on here.
JTJr Moses is brought into the New Testament on the mount of transfiguration with Elijah. This would show how such men were honoured later by God after their testimony was over.
AR In what way is new creation seen here?
JT Just in the description given. It is what God has wrought. “At this time it shall be said of Jacob and of Israel, What hath God wrought!” (Numbers 23:23). It runs on into our own order of things. “The old things have passed away; behold all things have become new: and all things are of ... God”, (2 Corinthians 5:17,18).
RH Is that why the thought of excellency is mentioned in Deuteronomy 33? It refers to “the sword of thine excellency”, verse 29.
JT I think that the nearer you come to the end of the things with which we are dealing, the nearer you get to excellence and refinement. I believe the epistle to Philippians deals with this side of our subject.