THE POWER THAT WORKETH IN US (5)
[p. 418] THE POWER THAT WORKETH IN US (5)
Joshua 5: 13 - 15; Joshua 6: 1 - 27
JT What is in mind for the two readings ahead of us, in the main, is conflict, but I believe the Lord would have us to take a cursory view of the subject we have been engaged with, namely, qualification for the service of God, as it is pursued throughout the remainder of this book. Nothing is more evident than that these books one after the other are cumulative, and that the service of God is in view throughout, until we reach David. We read, in Stephen’s address, that Moses had the tabernacle of witness in the wilderness, and that it was carried over with Joshua into the land; and so it is in view in Joshua, Judges, and Samuel. Stephen says, until the days of David, “who found favour before God”, who had desired to find a tabernacle for the God of Jacob; but Solomon built him a house. The thread culminates in that way in the types, in David and Solomon.
In order to have a clear outlook as to this book, it may be observed that Joshua himself worships, according to the first passage read from chapter 5, and that he sets up an altar, chapter 8, and offers up burnt-offerings and peace-offerings. According to chapter 8, the direction of Moses in Deuteronomy is carried out as to the altar at mount Ebal, and the stones on which the law was written. The altar is not only set up, but there are offerings. Then we have the tabernacle again as seen in Shiloh; and Joshua carries on the thought of service in finally asserting, as to himself and his house, that they would serve the Lord. He denounces idolatry, and enjoins the people against it; and gives them an example, carrying down the great thought in Abraham as to the house — as to him and his house, they [p. 419] would serve Jehovah. That is how Joshua leaves the matter to be carried forward; as, indeed, it is, through Phinehas in Judges.
Then we have the provision for and the great subject of the Levites in this book, who are seen generally in Deuteronomy and Joshua as priests. The distinction between Levites and priests is small, for what is in mind is the heavenly calling of the saints, as over against the earthly calling of God. The service of God is, in that way, amply provided for in this book, as carrying it forward. It is a transitional state of things, until He came, who had been in the mind of God, who would do all God’s will; that is, Christ seen typically in David. The Levites are provided for, as marked off, and as having no inheritance on earth; so that the heavenly calling is peculiarly stressed in relation to the service of God in this book. So the Lord, in Luke, as the levites returned from their successful labours, reminded them of their heavenly calling; their names being written in heaven. They are to rejoice in that connection, the Lord introducing the whole matter into the realm of the Father in Luke 10. I thought it well to sketch the service of God, so as to show that the levites, the heavenly family, are linked up with the Father in Luke. That is the great culmination of the service of God.
The thought now is to proceed, as the Lord may help us, to see how the military side contributes to this as securing the inheritance; and what may be observed is — so as to have a clear outline before us — that the result is attained through bitter experiences amongst the saints, occasioned by failure. The end is reached, but in a most humiliating way. The result reached in Joshua 8 should have been reached as Israel entered into the land, for what was done according to that chapter was enjoined to take place as they reached the land — the rearing of the altar [p. 420] between Gerizim and Ebal. It is a comfort to know that God reaches His end, though in humiliating circumstances on our side.
HES If maturity is to be reached, all these exercises have to be gone through.
JT That is what this book shows. In the beginning of chapter 5 it states that great fear laid hold of the inhabitants of the land, because of Israel; and then, immediately, we have circumcision brought in; so that it should be understood that the flesh profits nothing in all this. It is to be put off, entirely repudiated, in the most definite way, with sharp knives. Joshua himself is hardly equal to the position, because he is asking the Captain of Jehovah’s host what side He is on. Joshua has the idea of a side; whereas it is Jehovah’s issue; He is Captain of Jehovah’s host. Joshua is told that he is on holy ground. It is due to the service of God, but imperative also as to the military side, that we should be holy.
AFM Is the parallel to this in the beginning of the Acts, and set forth in Peter and those with him, the apostles?
JT Yes. The conquest of Canaan in the antitype is in the service of the apostles. It was in their service that the principles of the world were brought down; displaced by divine principles. The land was taken possession of, on that basis, as Joshua 8 shows.
NKMcC Could we have another word as to the need for holiness in conflict?
JT You can see how it appears here. Chapter 5, whilst touching on the heavenly side, that is, in the old corn, is, in the main, an adjusting chapter, especially in regard of circumcision. After such triumph in the power of God at the Jordan, there would be the danger of elation and place being given for the flesh; so circumcision is immediately brought in after we are told that the hearts of the inhabitants [p. 421] of Canaan melted, and there was no spirit in them any more, because of the children of Israel. Then in verse 2 we read, “Make thee stone-knives, and circumcise again the children of Israel the second time”.
JTS Would the spirit of what we have in 2 Corinthians 10: 3, 4 apply? — “For walking in flesh, we do not war according to flesh. For the arms of our warfare are not fleshly, but powerful according to God to the overthrow of strongholds”.
JT That is an excellent scripture at this juncture — the resolve of a man; showing what one man can say about his service and indicating the great need for us in conflict. We can see how God saw the danger of elation at this juncture; and then, too, the need of holiness. Joshua is directed: “Loose thy sandal from off thy foot: for the place whereon thou standest is holy. And Joshua did so” (verse 15). Now he is on true military ground before God. This all comports with Colossians, which epistle has been before us; where we are said to be circumcised in the circumcision of Christ — no less than that — “putting off of the body of the flesh, in the circumcision of the Christ” (Colossians 2: 11). It is the totality of it, put off in such a way.
EuR Have you any thought as to why that comes in after the expression, “ye are complete in him, who is the head of all principality and authority”?
JT I suppose to protect the Colossians from any reliance on flesh; for they were greatly exposed to certain features of the flesh, that is, ceremonialism, philosophy, and vain deceit. These allow the flesh in a good sense, as people would say; but it is still the flesh as operative in the acquirement of the world’s learning; and along with it the side that appeals to the fleshly sentiment peculiarly, that is, ceremonialism. The cross is brought in in the chapter, as always, to show how completely God has [p. 422] dealt with the flesh. These things are all taken out of the way, God having nailed them to the cross.
Ques Would you say that the city of Jerusalem in the early part of the Acts is a counterpart of Jericho, inasmuch as it was in opposition to all the heavenly truth? Do we see that encircled by Peter and John, and brought down by Stephen’s address, in relation to the heavenly truth?
JT I think that is good. The encircling is a great thought. We begin with circumcision; that is, the flesh wholly renounced. Then Jehovah’s Captain, the Captain of Jehovah’s host. The first great thought is to get into our souls this moral element — circumcision, and what goes with it, the heavenly side. Israel had a good time, apparently; the enjoyment of their heavenly portion in a little way, eating of the old corn of the land, after the passover, with unleavened bread. They had, as you might say, a happy season together; but then there was the great moral element to be enforced, namely, circumcision. Then, the Captain of Jehovah’s host, and the battle is the Lord’s. Whatever may be dealt with subsequently, it is most important to get into our souls that the conflict is God’s — that, ultimately, we are to take on the whole armour of God. Here, it is Jehovah’s host, and Joshua is to learn that his movements are to be holy, not the unholy efforts of partisanship. God is dealing from heaven, and Joshua is to be brought into accord with this. The Man says to him in answer to his inquiry: “No; for as captain of the army of Jehovah am I now come” (verse 14). That is, it was not to meet an exigency in Israel; it was a predetermined plan. God had come in, in His own time. “For as captain of the army of Jehovah am I now come”, or, as in the note, ‘for I, the captain (or prince) of the army of Jehovah, am now come’. He is Commander-in-chief; He has come now; He selects the time, and it is God’s matter. As warriors we are to be imbued with this.
MWB Does chapter 5 give the moral education and constitution, so that we can be prepared for the method of conflict adopted in chapter 6?
JT That is the thought, I am sure. Chapter 5 is for adjustment. We can see the necessity for it in our own little conflicts; the renouncement of partisan feeling, however well meant; of taking on any special persons, special links. The flesh is always proved to be unprofitable. The scripture quoted in 2 Corinthians 10 shows the greatest of all military men, next to Christ, and how he looked at things — how he warred. Then, in relation to this question of holiness, we have to see that whatever advantage may seem to come to me by some manoeuvre, holiness forbids it. It is an essential quality to be ingrained into one as in divine warfare.
Ques Have we an example of that in Acts 8? Peter and John are concerned as to the Holy Spirit, and they have to face one man, who was saying that he himself was a great one. They face him as one having no part or lot in the matter, being unholy and unspiritual?
JT Just so.
PHH Do you see any connection between the sharp knives, or ‘swords of rocks’, as the note says, in the early part of the chapter, and the man with the drawn sword in the end of the chapter? Has the thought of circumcision, as brought before us in Romans, Colossians, and Philippians a bearing upon what you have in mind?
JT I think so. “For we are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God” (Philippians 3: 3), for instance, has a bearing on it. As to what the stone knives signify, it is not easy to say much as to the material of which they are made, save that there must be some allusion to permanency. It is not for [p. 424] the moment only; it is not merely historically done; but you are always circumcised.
Ques Is that why Joshua dwelt at Gilgal?
JT Well, that is the place of self-judgment and hence of power. Circumcision ought always to apply. Jehovah insists on circumcision with Moses at the outset; his wife said, “A bloody husband ... art thou to me! ... because of the circumcision” (Exodus 4: 25, 26). Evidently Moses had neglected it. Israel came out of Egypt circumcised: the scripture would show that we should have the thing done. Let it never be otherwise.
APT Is not Peter an example at a certain time of one who, though in the company of the Lord Jesus, would mitigate the circumcision as in his mind? (Matthew 16: 21 - 23). Later, when the Lord was about to offer Himself, he would interfere by using the sword against the high priest’s servant.
JT Yes. As seen in the Acts all is changed. Peter has now gone through death and burial with Christ. He is so free from the flesh that he can charge others with the same working of it that once marked himself.
Ques Is your thought that we arrive at the truth through failure?
JT God often reaches His end in us through our failures; He brings His people with Him. He has to exercise discipline to do it, but He does it.
GCG With regard to circumcision in Colossians 2: 11: “in whom also ye have been circumcised with circumcision not done by hand, in the putting off of the body of the flesh, in the circumcision of the Christ”. Are we to understand that we accept that on the principle of faith, as one of the things involved in the Jordan aspect of the death of Christ? and is the putting to death in chapter 3, the sharp knives of Joshua?
JT Colossians is the full thought. You do not [p. 425] get a statement so full as that in Romans. It is because of the progress made at Colosse, that the apostle could so speak; he would have them to take on the whole thought of circumcision. It had been effected, but not done with hand. They were in danger of going back to it as being done with hand, but in the circumcision of Christ it is not done with hand; the thorough cutting off of the flesh is seen there. Christ took it on vicariously, and it was thus judicially terminated through His death. “The body of the flesh” would allude to the totality of it; the power of it, too, all dealt with. It is to be taken in, not merely mentally, but appreciatively by us.
WSS It would appear that the old corn of the land could not be enjoyed without circumcision.
JT Just so. That is what comes out in verse 10; but it ought to be remarked that Gilgal is expressly stressed in verse 9. It is said that the reproach of Egypt is rolled away, that is a fixed matter, one of the great fixed principles over against the world. Then, “And the children of Israel encamped in Gilgal, and held the passover on the fourteenth day of the month, at even, in the plains of Jericho. And they ate of the old corn of the land on the morrow after the passover, unleavened loaves, and roasted corn on that same day. And the manna ceased on the morrow, when they had eaten of the old corn of the land; and there was no more manna for the children of Israel; and they ate of the produce of the land of Canaan that year” (verses 10 - 12). The old corn is linked with the passover, which is an objective thought. The circumcision is, of course, effected in Christ, but it really is a subjective matter as to us. The passover is a distinctly objective thought, and, I think, always intended to affect our affections: “Christ our passover ... sacrificed for us” (1 Corinthians 5: 7).
WSS Paul was, I judge, bringing in the old [p. 426] corn of the land, but, as seen in Galatians 2: 11 - 15, Peter was not for the moment in the good of circumcision, although having accepted it, and so was hindering the bringing out of the old corn. Paul had to rebuke him to bring him back to the truth he was setting aside.
JT Quite so.
ALB Do you link the passover with the assembly convened?
JT The chapter enters into the subject we have had during the last two days, but it is properly military; it begins with a military allusion. The conflict is in mind particularly; so that the heavenly thought is brought in, and we are adjusted to it; they actually partook of the corn with the passover. It is not called the feast of unleavened bread; it is just said they ate unleavened bread, but they ate it as made of that heavenly corn.
EuR Would Colossians bring in the glory of the Son of God as Head of the heavenly system, and so encourage us to shut the Jew out, and bring in the heavenly side?
JT I think so. Chapter 2 teaches circumcision in the fullest way; it is the putting off of the body of the flesh in the circumcision of Christ. Then we are also taught there that “the body is of Christ”. But our subject now is military. Our chapter begins with the enemies, the Canaanites, that they are in fear; this shows that the excellency of the power is of God as seen in the crossing of the Jordan by Israel.
JTS Would there be a link here with what Peter said (Acts 5: 29): “God must be obeyed rather than men”, and then, what the God of our fathers has done in raising up Jesus, and so on; and then the warning by Gamaliel: “lest ye be found also fighters against God”? (verse 39.)
JT Just so. We are now in the presence of the enemies. As the apostle began to operate militarily,
[p. 427] fear laid hold on the rulers of the world. “Ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine”, the high priest said.
JJ What phase of opposition does Jericho stand for?
JT It is the world simply. The whole thought enters into this chapter. The whole military thought in the book begins here. But after the capture of Jericho failure comes in and the victories are largely through discipline. The warriors have come through discipline. So that Joshua has to take the matter on in a more onerous way personally in dealing with Ai than anywhere else. He has to go through great humiliation as to Ai; he has to go through the conflict there in a peculiarly personal way. Jericho is the initial idea of warfare, and in order to see it, in the antitype in a historical way, we have to keep our eyes on the book of Acts, even as to the failures seen in the book of Joshua. The imprisonment of the apostle Paul has to be taken into account. What led up to it was allowed or ordered of God, so that we might have the great features of the war issuing from his prison.
MWB What bearing has this military chapter 6, in regard of the service of God, suggested in the end of chapter 8, to which you have referred? Is that a kind of climax in entering the land, for which this military victory was necessary?
JT The overthrow of Jericho was necessary on the part of the people of God for assurance. But what was done later, according to chapter 8, should have been done as Israel crossed the Jordan (Deuteronomy 27: 2). When a great power is invading a small, weak country, if he intends to take possession of the country, he just has to put his feet upon it and claim it. Joshua did not do that. If the invading power is weaker, or exposed to possible defeat, he should not take possession of the country until he [p. 428] gets his foot on it securely in a military way. I think the delay in Joshua was for the sake of the people; the matter was difficult. The direction was that they should do this as they entered the land, but it was not done. It was not done until Jericho and Ai had been taken (chapter 8: 30 - 35). They might have raised the flag, so to speak, at Ebal at once, for God was supporting them in His great power. What is seen in chapter 8 is the ground on which the land is to be held.
MWB The ark standing in Jordan would, in faith, have strengthened them to erect the flag, and assert God’s rights.
JT That is it exactly. The power was there: the ark of the covenant of the Lord of all the earth, and all that was necessary was that they should put their foot on the land, and take possession of it for God. That was the divine direction, but they deferred it; still, it was done, thank God!
WW Does Rahab in putting the scarlet line in the window represent the recognition of the redemptive rights of God? The power of God is seen in relation to her own household, and that power would give character to the people.
JT I think that is right. She has the thought of redemption in the passage of the Red Sea, and the overthrow of the big man, Og. The believer, in his natural greatness, goes in the overthrow of Sihon and Og. She had those thoughts. The point, I think, in the line of scarlet thread is herself; what she is to be in the land. It is not so much redemptive rights as what is effected by the work of God in the believer. Peter and John, for instance, say, “Look on us” (Acts 3: 4). That is what was in the line of scarlet thread — for that is what it is called. The two men sent by Joshua direct all this: it is not her suggestion. It is what marked Israel at this particular time. “What hath God wrought!” (Numbers 23: 23),
[p. 429] ought to have been the leading thought at Shittim, the final camping place before they crossed the Jordan. In the coming over of the two spies, that is in view. There is what God has wrought in Caleb, for instance, and God has the continuance of that in mind. The idea is in the cord; the basic thought being the flax. The spies expected to see that, and they did see it in Rahab’s window. I think it is really what the work of God had made her.
Ques Is the Spirit of God bringing us back to basic principles in conflict? “The battle is not yours, but God’s” (2 Chronicles 20: 15), Jehoshaphat says; and then later, “Believe in Jehovah your God, and ye shall be established; believe his prophets, and ye shall prosper” (verse 20).
JT That is very good. The battle is God’s. The thought is carried through; and what has been just said as to chapter 8 will help us to understand chapters 7 and 9, but particularly chapter 7: how the divine end is reached, although those responsible in the conflict are humiliated through failure. Could the law be written on them? For the idea in the stones is the saints; and what can be written on us. “The righteous requirement of the law should be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to flesh but according to Spirit” (Romans 8: 4).
EJMcB Would it be right to say the question of conflict is not merely the overcoming of the enemy, but the development in spirituality of the combatants? Is that the great thought in conflict, so that we can have spoil?
JT That is right. The word of faith by Joshua and Caleb in the wilderness was that the Canaanites “shall be our food”. The warriors are fed by the enemy in that sense. We become men in overcoming them; and I think it was thus necessary, under God, to defer the setting up of the stones in mount Ebal. The whole nation is there on the principle of [p. 430] circumcision; but then there is the principle of having things written on us, as indicated in Deuteronomy 27.
PL Had there been a deferring of the writing in regard of the great assembly revival in Philadelphia? The Lord said, “thou hast a little power, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name” (Revelation 3: 8). Is that linked with the great military exercises? In the “little strength”, has the crown come now, in principle? At the end of the Philadelphian epistle, the Lord is moving as a writer.
JT Yes. The overcomer in Philadelphia is capable of having great things written on him. It is a question of personality.
PL “He that overcomes, him will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more at all out; and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven, from my God, and my new name” (Revelation 3: 12).
JT Mark that; the name of my God. I am glad you brought that forward, because it is really the fulness of what we are speaking of; what the overcomer in our times is capable of; what the Lord can write on him. In Deuteronomy 27 the stones are required to be plastered; they are not said to be plastered here, but the law was written on them. God will write the law in the coming day on Israel, in their hearts, but the Lord is able to write these wonderful things on the overcomer in Philadelphia — “the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven, from my God, and my new name”. What quality in an overcomer in our own times in that sense!
NKMcC What would be “my new name”?
JT Well, I think the light is in the word new. We are accustomed to much now, after nineteen [p. 431] hundred years of nominal christianity, that has become old through unholy handling. Even the names of the Lord are hackneyed in merely religious mouths; but they become what they really were, as used in a spiritual way. The word new thus has force. I do not say there are not other things in it. We come into the freshness of things as they are taken up in a living way.
MWB Referring to the stones again, and your reference to the last chapter as to definiteness in serving God; there is a reference in Joshua 24: 26 as follows, “And Joshua wrote these words in the book of the law of God, and took a great stone, and set it up there under the oak that was by the sanctuary of Jehovah”. Is there a link in that between the assertion and maintenance of God’s rights and the sanctuary?
JT That seems so: if you link it with what is said of Abraham. God says, “I know him that he will command his children and his household after him” (Genesis 18: 19). Joshua is about to die; but he has a house, and he says, “as for me and my house, we will serve Jehovah”. He is handing on the great thought of service. He writes the words in the book of the law of God; meaning that there is addition to the book, through the exercises seen in the book of Joshua. The testimony is cumulative; the book is being added to; and he himself is a leader in the whole matter. The stone, I suppose, suggests a permanent witness. All this, you will notice, is in Shechem, not at Shiloh; meaning, I think, that Joshua is in the land administratively; he is speaking tribally, so to speak. Jacob gave two portions to Joseph, and I think Joshua has the idea of distinction in the tribes in mind.
CAM There is the great stone at Shechem and the heap of stones at Ai; what is the difference?
JT The latter would be, I suppose, the complete [p. 432] obliteration; disappearing under a curse of the Canaanite, and the idea of permanency as to it. In this chapter, “Jehovah said to Joshua, See, I have given into thy hand Jericho, and the king thereof, and the valiant men. And ye shall go round the city, all the men of war, encompassing the city once. Thus shalt thou do six days. And seven priests shall carry before the ark seven blast-trumpets; and on the seventh day ye shall go round the city seven times, and the priests shall blow with the trumpets. And it shall come to pass when they make a long blast with the blast-horn, that all the people on hearing the sound of the trumpet shall shout with a great shout; and the wall of the city shall fall flat, and the people shall go up, each one straight before him” (verses 2 - 5). That is God’s mind as to the matter in hand. That is all he says. Joshua opens up the next part (verse 6), and then the movement begins (verse 8); after that, verse 14 gives us the second day; and the final movement on the seventh day (verse 15). All is to show that it is God’s matter; that the power is of God. This military manoeuvre is altogether different from ordinary military tactics; indeed, reproach would attach to it in the natural mind. In the antitype, a reproach does attach to it. This encircling the city for six days, and then seven times on the seventh day, would be absurd to the ordinary military eye; but then the walls fall. The ark, and Joshua, and the seven priests blowing the trumpets explain the thing; the power of God is there.
Ques Would you say that the reproach is rolled in upon them, in that Joshua adds, saying, “Ye shall not shout, nor let your voice be heard, neither shall a word proceed out of your mouth” (verse 10)?
JT Yes. It is according to what we have often spoken of — the ability to remain silent when the service of God requires it. There is silence until Joshua directed the people to shout. There should [p. 433] be no useless talking amongst the people — in such circumstances. It is God’s matter, and no light talking can help at all. All is under the direction of Joshua. God has spoken, and now Joshua is moving and directing. In order to keep clearly in mind what the type means, the ark is, it seems, the objective thought — Christ apprehended objectively. We never hear of any increase of it, or magnification of it. It is Joshua that is magnified; the magnification is in the saints. It is the increased measure in which Christ is in us. Joshua is a man of like passions as ourselves; and though, showing the history of the saints, Christ is there spiritually, there is variation; but the ark is the divine standard, and there are no variations with it whatsoever. It is the great objective thought of Christ; understood as amongst His people, and running parallel with the idea of Joshua. Aside from Joshua, the type would fail; because there is need of power also. Joshua is Christ seen in a spiritual way in those responsible, and all the saints are responsible; but then, there is the great objective thought; the great standard that never alters — the ark.
Ques Would the priests bearing the ark represent the saints in a priestly setting, or are the priests in Jordan a necessary part of the ark as a type?
JT The latter is the truth: they refer to the element of holiness that attaches to the ark. The principle is attached to the saints, of course, but I think we must keep in mind that the priests bearing the ark are an integral part of the ark; it contained the stone tables of the testimony, but the idea of movement is not in the ark itself.
Ques Does “Christ in you the hope of glory” (Colossians 1: 27), link with Joshua on the subjective side?
JT Colossians 1 speaks of Christ, among the gentiles really — the hope of glory. He has a footing amongst the gentiles, but in this spiritual way;
[p. 434] not as He will come to Israel presently, which will be in an outwardly visible sense. It is the way He has come to us; and Paul shows that what he was doing was by Christ in him: “Christ speaking in me”, he says (2 Corinthians 13: 3). The power of Christ in him; what power was there! The Corinthians should have understood it, but they did not. So it is Christ in a spiritual way in our dispensation; none the less real than He had been amongst the Jews. Joshua represents Him in this spiritual sense, but then there is the great objective thought which must never be lost sight of.
JHT In connection with Colosse, and the apostle rejoicing in their order and firmness of their faith in Christ, would that be the military position? Then his concern that they should not fall a prey to the rudiments of the world, philosophy, and vain deceit: would that be to have them in the gain of the overthrow of Jericho?
JT Quite so.
DLH What is the spiritual application to us of the six days going round Jericho?
JT There are seven priests and seven days, in a general way; seven priests sounding the trumpets, and seven days which have to be passed. The military are going before the trumpeters, and the ark following; so that the trumpeters are before the ark of Jehovah: and then (verses 8 - 11), the record of the great general position and operation of the first day. In verses 12 - 14, we have a further view — the second day. The early rising would be a test to any of us. What does all this mean? It was a considerable journey to go round the city early, I suppose; and a large number of people. It would be today and tomorrow, and the same the next day, and so on, for the seven days. It would seem as if the flesh, if circumcision were not there, would inquire, What does all this mean? It is “the foolishness of God”,
[p. 435] as Paul says (1 Corinthians 1: 25); there is foolishness attached to it. “We are fools”, says the apostle, “for Christ’s sake” (1 Corinthians 4: 10). I think that is the thought; we have to go through that sort of thing initially, not to be afraid of being scorned in our methods.
Ques Does this link with 1 John 5: 4, “all that has been begotten of God gets the victory over the world; and this is the victory which has gotten the victory over the world, our faith”.
JT That helps. It is a question of faith and what goes with it. The movements, the encircling of the city each day, and then finally, on the seventh day, seven times — the intensified spiritual touch on the seventh day. There are the seven encirclings on the seventh day; so that we have seven strongly emphasised. It is the power of God that is stronger than men. So we are to go through these days experimentally, learning to be fools. “Ye are wise”, but “We are fools for Christ’s sake” (1 Corinthians 4: 10). The natural mind does not like this. “For ... God has set us the apostles for the last, ... we have become a spectacle to the world, both to angels and men” (1 Corinthians 4: 9). Paul preached and people fell down convicted. The world fell down before the testimony of God in him. The present religious state of things is Jericho revived. These seven days mean that we are to accept the foolishness that man attaches to us. Take it to heart, and admit that it is so, but in it is the power of God.
JCT Does Isaiah 42: 1 help in showing the kind of spirit that God beholds? “Behold my servant”, not crying, but bringing forth judgment unto victory.
JT Just so.
ESB Joshua rose very early in the morning, and in regard of the resurrection, in Matthew it is the dawn of the first day; in Mark very [p. 436] early in the morning; and in John, while it was yet dark.
JT John gives you the longest first day: the Lord comes in amongst the brethren late in the evening. John gives you the full thought of love’s energy. I think that is what is here in the early rising. The clarity of mind and the best of a man generally is in the morning; one finds that. If anything important is to be done, get up early.
MWB Would there be the permissible application of the seven days here, that in going through matters of controversy, much patience is needed in toil and detail, before the final touch of victory is seen?
JT Yes. We have to go through whatever is involved in any matter. One has observed this in Elijah: he prayed for dearth and it came; but he had to go through the thing himself: so with servants, we ourselves have to go through the consequence of our prayers. God says, I am going that way, but Elijah has to go that way, too. First in the east, and then in the west, after a long journey, a year there of extraordinary experience, but then, he reaches the end. He prays “again” and the rain comes.
PL “Because thou hast kept the word of my patience” (Revelation 3: 10). Is that how it works?
JT That is right: going through the thing; “my patience”.
DLH Might there be a suggestion of the saints becoming fully aware of the power of evil, which has to be surmounted, before the final overthrow of that power takes place? “Our struggle is not against blood and flesh, but against ... spiritual power of wickedness in the heavenlies” (Ephesians 6: 12). It is well for us that we should be aware of the full power of the enemy, and then take cognizance of the mighty power of God which comes in to overthrow it.
JT I am sure that is right.
HMS Might I add as to the seven days that one [p. 437] of these days would also include the sabbath. Has that any bearing on the Lord Jesus Christ in His service here, working miracles on the sabbath day? Does it emphasise the holy character of the warfare here, that even the sabbath day must be used?
JT I think that is good. I have wondered myself as to the sabbath, that Joshua did not give them rest; Hebrews 4: 8 may help. The sabbath would be used; the Lord used it to bring down the religious world, and He shows that the priests used it. Numbers 28 shows that offerings were presented on the sabbath.
HMS Hebrews had occurred to me. In that epistle it is said that rest had not been given them, but here, in a typical sense, God was giving them rest.
JT It has to be taken up spiritually; we are laying hold of the inheritance, and whilst the world stands the battle has to go on. Our warfare is spiritual and there must be no cessation of it while enemies are in our territory.
EuR Has it to be completed, so that we get spoil? “And all the silver, and gold, and vessels of copper and iron, shall be holy to Jehovah; they shall come into the treasury of Jehovah” (verse 19).
JT Quite so. They are metals, not clothing as elsewhere; meaning, I think, that they are elements that are of God even in the world. The world has some things with which God endowed man particularly, such as government. I think we need to be reminded that government is of God, and is to be respected, in whomsoever it may be. Abstractly, it is of God. The metals specified particularly here in verse 19, which has been quoted, would include that — the principle of government.
HWU What should we gather from the blowing of the trumpets?
JT It is the testimony sounded out; over against the prohibition of ordinary speaking, we have these [p. 438] loud trumpets which they blew in marching; meaning, I suppose, that the testimony is being called attention to; the ark is being carried; the trumpeters are before it, and the military are before that; so that attention is evidently called to “the ark of Jehovah”, the ark following up immediately.
Ques Do we get help in this encircling of Jericho at our local care meetings? Often we are up against conditions that make it impossible for brethren to go forward. Do we encircle the matter and look at it from all angles? God manifests His power after thirteen times.
JT That is good. The shouting that followed the blowing of trumpets in chapter 6: 16 is like the “shout of a king;” a shout of triumph, and power, now made audible. The trumpeters call attention to the ark; in the antitype, Christ carried in testimony by the priests. The shout is the sense we have of a victorious end reached. One could point out evidences of it in the Acts 5: 20, for instance. The apostles are put in prison, and an angel opens the prison; they are out in the morning, and early in the temple. They are told, on being released, to “speak ... all the words of this life”. That is, Christ is expressed. Then they are arrested again; the people are interested in what they are saying; the leaders cannot use violence, but still they are haled before the tribunal; and finally, Gamaliel says, “Withdraw from these men ... lest ye be found also fighters against God”. The apostles are released, and it is a marked triumph.
HMS Do we hear that shout of triumph in 1 Corinthians 15: 57? — “thanks be to God, who gives us the victory”.
JT Quite so.
Ques Would the shout be heard in the prison in Acts 16? All the opposition of man is there; but there was an effect in the whole [p. 439] prison.
JT Quite so. There was victory, but in the sense of singing; what a beautiful thought! The service of God really is there. In prayer, they sang praises to God, and the prisoners heard. That is the idea. This thought of the prison is worth considering; how the world came down. We read, “the foundations of the prison shook ... and the bonds of all loosed” (Acts 16: 26). In the midst of all the opposition, see the beautiful spirit that is there! Really the spirit of Christ is in Paul and Silas, and they say, “Do thyself no harm, for we are all here”. The result is: “Sirs, what must I do that I may be saved?” The answer is, “Believe on the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved, thou and thy house”. It is complete triumph, but in grace: the world is really broken down; Jericho taken in that way. Then there must be the idea of replacement; if the prison and all that it means is broken up, what is to replace it? Well, it is the household as saved. That is the great idea in Philippi; the households of the saints. Is the world broken up in them? The apostle immediately speaks the word of the Lord to the jailor and to all in his house.
Ques Trumpets were also used “for the journeying of the camps” (Numbers 10); and three tribes were to move under one standard, etc. (Numbers 2). How would the three move simultaneously under the one standard? Would it work out district-wise? Is there scriptural warrant for brothers meeting district-wise, apart from temple character?
JT There is a good deal worth inquiring into in what you suggest; but in Numbers the trumpets are silver. It is not a question of silver, i.e., redemption, here, but the power of the ark, and how it brings down the world. What you are speaking of really belongs to Corinthians, and it is quite a good thought to bring in, but one thing ought to be clearly [p. 440] said; there is no such thing in Scripture as a district meeting — meetings are always in a “city” or “place”.
Ques Would you say that there is anything wrong in brothers from a number of meetings coming together for a brothers’ meeting, in view of sharing what help they have got?
JT It must always belong to a particular locality, however many meetings there may be. A district meeting is not warranted. In 1 Corinthians 1: 2 we read, “the assembly of God which is in Corinth ... with all that in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ”. The local is linked up with the universal thought. In 2 Corinthians 1: 2 we have added to Corinth “all the saints who are in the whole of Achaia;” but manifestly all administrative matters were connected with Corinth.
All meetings in a district are liable to be influenced by some particular thing, hence certain instruction may apply to all. You have this in relation to the assemblies in Galatia, Colosse and Laodicea. The letters sent to the latter two were to be read in each; to hear them read the saints at Colosse were not to go to Laodicea, nor those of Laodicea to Colosse. The idea of each assembly is maintained. The administration of the light and blessing of the present dispensation, and all that enters into it, works out in local assemblies — not ‘district’ or ‘general’ assemblies.