UPRIGHTNESS

^[p. 537] UPRIGHTNESS

Galatians 2: 14; 2 Samuel 1: 17 - 19; Joshua 10: 12 - 14; Deuteronomy 33: 4, 5

My purpose is to speak about uprightness amongst the people of God. I have thus ventured to read the scriptures in 2 Samuel and in Joshua, relating to the book of Jasher, which word is said to denote uprightness, and, inasmuch as it is evidently a book of poetic productions to be conserved, the thought seems to be to teach us uprightness in an attractive manner, to make it attractive to us, to make it worth while. It leads to the collective thought in Jeshurun, which carries the thought not only of uprightness, according to its meaning given, but peculiar attractiveness, the word ‘darling’ being, as some think, suggested in its meaning. It is an upright people, not only an upright person, but an aggregation of such, and thus peculiarly attractive to Christ, He being also attractive to them. The more upright we are, the more we shall appreciate this feature in Jesus, who is the embodiment of it, as He is of every divine grace; hence He is in type King, we are told, amongst them — “king in Jeshurun” — but not simply amongst so many persons, but “When the heads of the people And the tribes of Israel were gathered together”.

Well now, we have to look at this matter negatively, as indeed in such cases the negative side of it only enhances the positive quality involved. The quality is to be kept in mind, for, as I said, it culminates in the saints being viewed as lovely in Jeshurun, free from all those objectionable traits so developed, alas! in us, which sometimes cause us to be the opposite, causing certain ugliness, unattractiveness. Hence we are obliged to call attention to two great servants between whom the issue arose,

^[p. 538] the issue of uprightness, or the absence of it, namely, Peter and Paul. I suppose we are entitled to regard them as the greatest servants of God without any exception: the one called the leading apostle among the twelve — “first Peter;” the other our own apostle, to whom so much was committed, who said of himself by the Spirit that he “laboured more abundantly than they all”.

The chapter from which I have read shows them together, first in council at Jerusalem in regard to a work of the enemy which had in view to introduce legality, involving indeed apostasy in which it reaches its full consummation; for the effort of the enemy was to add to the Galatian christians something that God did not add to them, but what He would subtract from them — namely, legality. This epistle shows how even the great personality of Paul has to be thrown into the scale against this vicious doctrine which the apostle calls, “another gospel”, and he said that any one who preached it should be accursed. There was no mincing of matters with him, so that he throws his whole personal weight into the scale against it, not only was there what he said against it — most forceful words and epithets — but his own personality is thrown into the scale against it; so that he says, in Galatians 5: 2, “I, Paul, say to you, that if ye are circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing”. Think of that in view of modern public christianity! How the legalists, those who have returned to Judaism, and, alas! paganism, too, have cut themselves off, in principle at least, from “all profit from the Christ”. In keeping with that remark, he says, “I, Paul” — it is a question of his personality, what he was in the testimony, what he was personally, for he says, “by the grace of God I am what I am”. He throws his weight, as I said, into the scale against this wicked doctrine ^[p. 539] that had been propounded from Jerusalem and taught among the Gentiles.

It began early, by Satan employing what had been once accredited, to set aside the current thing that God had introduced, namely, christianity. It was a successful weapon of the devil to bring in what had been to set aside what is. We have to begin with what is, what is of God; hold to that whatever has been. We shall never understand what has been unless we understand what is. The apostle was contending for what was in his day, that is, christianity, as over against what had been, which was now polluted, adulterated, and used by the devil to set aside what then was, especially the ministry of the apostle Paul. We have to speak with feeling, in subdued tone, as to the great servant Peter being brought under the influence of this evil, if it were but for a little while. It surely is not written to discredit the great servant in our minds, it would be hidden for ever in oblivion were it not that the Lord intends that we shall gain by what happened; that the most spiritual of us should see how he is in danger of coming under an adverse influence, even if it be only for a while.

The apostle here, in the verses I read, brings in this thought of uprightness. He says, “when I saw that they do not walk straightforwardly, according to the truth of the glad tidings, I said to Peter before all ...” — that is, he rebuked openly his great fellow servant. The chapter shows us what occurred at that memorable meeting at Jerusalem, when Paul and Barnabas taking Titus with them went up there and had a conference in regard to these matters. We get an insight as to how we are to stand with one another in the service of God, how we are to regard one another, and how careful we are to be as to those who are in distinction amongst us. The apostle says, he spoke “privately to those conspicuous among them”. We have to be on our guard as to what we say as to the Lord’s servants; so the apostle spoke about those with distinction, but he says “to me those who were conspicuous communicated nothing”. Yet there were Peter and James and John who seemed to be pillars — they were outstanding even then. The apostle Paul, I am sure, had great satisfaction in discerning them at that time, and then he says, they discerned us too — they recognised “the grace given to me”. Happy indeed that brethren are so free from prejudice as to see what is of God in each other! for the gifts are varied and no gift can detract from another, in the abstract, anyway; it can only add to another. Increased gift rightly used is increased wealth, and we can only rejoice in every bit of ability the Lord gives. So Paul discerned that these three great servants were pillars. The word “pillar” carries its own meaning according to the use made of it in the testimony.

Then he says that “James, Cephas and John, [who were conspicuous as being pillars] recognising the grace given to me, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship” — a very happy situation, boding well for the work of God among the Gentiles; but, alas! subsequent influences diverted from this — interfered with it. So far it was a happy state of things, and Peter came to Antioch evidently clear of these influences — a great servant, as he was. As soon as Paul is on the scene, according to the historic account (Acts 9), Peter goes everywhere — he went “through all quarters”, meaning that he was instinctively in accord with this new great instrument that the Lord had introduced — “an elect vessel”, as He says of him, “to me”, through whom He would establish the principle of local assemblies. Peter went through all quarters, he was free in spirit. In the end of ^[p. 541] Acts 9 we see how he moved in support, anticipatively, of what God was about to introduce through the great servant He had just brought into view at Damascus, who preached the Son of God in the synagogue. The great economy we are brought into as amongst the gentiles, set up in assemblies — not simply in one assembly as at Jerusalem, but in assemblies; that was already in view and the apostle anticipated it. Hence he goes down to Joppa and says to Aeneas, “rise up, and make thy couch for thyself” — that was the sort of thing that was coming in — Aeneas was to be ready for it. Then he raises Tabitha and presents her to the saints and widows alive — another thought; that means that the new economy should be marked by a sense of local responsibility and by a living state of things in each locality.

Well now, that is Peter, and chapter 10 opens up to us how nobly he comes under the direction of heaven, for no servant is worthy of the name who is not amenable to the influence of heaven; the great bodies up there are emblematic of the power that is there spiritually for good, especially guidance. So Peter is amenable, and by his mouth, he says, the gentiles — that is, we ourselves in our forefathers — heard the gospel. Surely we can but speak well of one through whom such light is given to us! He justified the whole matter, too, in Jerusalem, and then, as I said, in Jerusalem, according to chapter 15, Peter with James and John gave to Paul and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship — a very unifying thought. The work of God is now to move on in unity and happy sympathy; the great leaders being of one mind. So he came down to Antioch, apparently in this frame of mind, but as certain came from James; that is, the influence of Jerusalem was transmitted through some sinister agency, for ^[p. 542] it was not simply a word, but certain persons under James’s influence came and influenced Peter.

Now that is what is in mind in these verses, so that an issue arose in regard to straightforwardness or uprightness; the Spirit of God introducing it at this juncture, in relation to the issue at Galatia which is constantly occurring amongst the people of God, to warn us against any element other than uprightness, any opaqueness, any want of transparency, any want of brotherly simplicity and confidence between those who serve, and between the brethren generally. The apostle says, “when I saw that they do not walk straightforwardly ...”. It was a very real issue, the truth of the gospel was involved, but it was a moral issue, too, this matter of uprightness. For a man to come out and say something wrong, is one thing, but to be underhanded about it, to be inconsistent in it, to be manifestly darkened by some adverse influence in it, is another thing — that involves what is moral, a state of soul. So it is introduced, as I said, in this great issue, by the apostle Paul, and he contends with Peter “before them all”. It is an open matter now, he had already said things privately at Jerusalem, lest he might “run or had run in vain”, for it is not of God to bring great servants into discredit publicly — surely not; but when there is a doctrinal issue of this kind, we had better speak publicly, we had better speak out — and that is what he did. He did not take Peter aside at this time — he did at Jerusalem under other circumstances, and so did Aquila and Priscilla in regard of Apollos, they “took him to them” — but this time it is a public matter; all the saints are involved, and all the saints are to understand what is at issue and are to judge the whole matter. For, after all, christianity is not only in the leaders, let that be understood. Christianity is in the saints, it lies in the assembly; it is what ^[p. 543] we are in relation to one another that affords opportunity for God to work out the great thoughts that He has in mind in christianity; it involves every one of us, and so the saints are to understand. If there be an issue so serious, it is well the saints should understand; and so the apostle does not shrink from speaking to Peter before them all, from rebuking before all, his distinguished fellow-servant, his elder brother, as I might say — “he was to be condemned”.

Of course, as in the case of David, the more distinguished a man is, the more serious is any defect or any sin in him; here Peter was to be blamed, there was no doubt about it. Whatever people might say in regard of the apparent indiscretion of a younger man rebuking an older one, the matter was too serious to admit of anything else; it was a matter of the want of uprightness; for Peter at heart knew the truth and ultimately stood by it; as the sequel shows, he loved and valued Paul, but for the moment he came under the influence of others. The most spiritual of us is exposed to that, and there is nothing more subtle than influence of this kind coming from another. With the very best intent I just listen to a brother: why should I not believe what he says? Well, why should I, if it involves another brother? why should I, if it is a question of the truth? Even in Paul’s own case, the Bereans, we are told, “searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so”. So that the point is to be sure about things, not just to take them for granted; because one witness is not enough in any matter, it is in the mouth of two or three witnesses that every word is established. However distinguished a brother may be, his word is not enough if it involves another brother or brothers, and in this case it involved the truth, and so strong was the influence from Jerusalem that even Barnabas, Paul’s fellow-worker ^[p. 544] among the gentiles, was carried away; it was a question of dissimulation.

The doctrine, of course, was the most serious thing, but think of such men coming under the influence of a vicious wind of dissimulation and carried away by it! That is all I have to say about that, it is only to bring out the truth that is in mind, namely the truth of uprightness, how it leads up to a moral victory, also a victory for the truth.

The facts show what one man can do even against odds. The combination against the apostle Paul was strong at that time, but eventually his faithfulness gained the day. How the apostle Peter came back to Paul is very beautiful; I suppose he never spoke so well about him as he did when he was about to put off his tabernacle. It is well for us who are older in the service to remember that the time is drawing nearer when we must put off our tabernacles, unless the Lord comes. It is well to have our eyes on the younger men, and not to discredit them in any way. If we are about to breathe our last we shall be glad surely to look around and see that the ground will be held. The best is said about the apostle Paul when Peter is about to put off his tabernacle, and he places his writings on the level of the Holy Scriptures; he could hardly honour him more. That suffices in regard of Peter. One would like to leave with the brethren, especially the young ones here, a right impression of the great apostle, and how the work of God brought out in him at the end perfect consonance with the testimony of the apostle Paul.

Now I go on to David to show how this matter of Jasher, of uprightness, appeared in him. I have read from a section in his history which was transitional, and it is these transitional periods that are most testing, for in regard of a brother today there may be still a question as to whether he is ready ^[p. 545] to come forward into prominence, and he is apt to take short cuts which will always be against him in time. The whole road to the desired result has to be travelled from this point of view; distinction in the service of God is reached by a road which has to be travelled. Not that this should ever be a goal in the eyes of a servant, but it is apt to be, in young men particularly, and in transitional periods, that is, when their position in the testimony is still uncertain. Things, in the government of God, have happened and may cause us elation, if they are in our favour; they may cause us to make unseemly remarks seeing that the circumstances may involve humiliation in others, disaster in others. Indeed, it may be in those who have served, but now have ceased to do so, and we are so likely, in these transitional periods, to make statements and take up attitudes that are unseemly, and indeed to overlook what the persons have been in the service of God; namely, that they have been really anointed. If a man has ever been anointed and served well, that is to be remembered and never to be forgotten whatever his subsequent history, whatever his end; what he has been as anointed of God can never be forgotten, nor will any one who is upright, whose name or composition is worthy of the book of Jasher, make little of one whom God has used.

This is how matters stand in the passages I have read. Saul had been slain on the mountains of Gilboa — one of the most sorrowful parts of Israel’s history! How will David take the news? He is the ostensible king now, but then, you never can be sure in such circumstances; our calculations often fail us. Not that it could be so in this case, for David was king according to divine choice, but I am making a present application, for our calculations do not always mature. Now as the tidings come of Saul’s disaster, David is rightly affected. I want every one ^[p. 546] here — including myself — to drink into this lesson how rightly affected he is. It meant a change for the better in his whole life, it meant unquestionably the kingdom for him; but he is not thinking of that, he is thinking of God’s servant that had been. Think of such a man as Jonathan slain in his high places! “The beauty of Israel is slain upon thy high places”. “Saul and Jonathan, beloved and pleasant in their lives, Even in their death were not divided”. In truth David must have had real enjoyment with these men in earlier days; we know he had with Jonathan — his love surpassed all human loves to him, and he associated him with his father. How could he be complacent in such circumstances? How could any true lover of Christ be complacent in such a disaster? For in truth the enemy has had a hand in it, and it has brought a once-valued man, a once-distinguished man, once anointed with oil as king over God’s people, into a disaster — slain by uncircumcised hands. The very messenger who brought the news has to die! Such is David’s feeling, and he is a real man; no feigned feelings with David, he was genuine, he felt the thing, and hence this lament of his.

I speak thus, just to bring out what is becoming in us, as, it may be, on the road to distinction in the service of God, or, I should say, perhaps, more correctly, on the road to more usefulness — for that was exactly the case here — on the road to serving the people of God better than they had been served. So it may be that many of us are in such a transitional state of things, and the outlook is that the saints need help, they need leaders, they need service and rule. David is brought in to show his feelings here in song; “the song of the bow”, I suppose, is the proper title of it — and all that accompanied it, both in this chapter and later, in regard to Ishbosheth and Abner. In these three ^[p. 547] cases what happened was in his favour, but his expressed feelings were genuine; he could not but feel that such things happened. If Satan has a hand in anything that happens to one of the saints, we cannot but feel it if we love God and love our brethren.

So we have this lamentation, and it is in poetic form, and that is a point I wish just to mention, because we have the thing put thus into the best form for us, in this song of the bow. The Authorised Version, as you will observe, has “the use of the bow”, and no doubt David had that in mind, because Saul had fallen by the archers. It was no doubt a weapon, formed perhaps secretly, which gave them an advantage, I have no doubt it was a transitional period in the use of weapons. David’s history shows that there was no lack of skill in him, and he certainly could not fail to excel in anything the Philistines might have. So this song had a known place in the annals of Israel, disclosing dexterity in the great warrior king, and not only the great warrior king, but “the sweet psalmist of Israel”, the charming leader God had introduced. Surely every such production must be cherished in the hearts of all Israel.

So it is to “teach the children of Judah the song of the bow”, and, according to the way it is translated in the best translation, we have the song of the bow in the words that follow right down to the end of the chapter. Let us look into it. It is not simply the use of the bow, it is really better to read it in the sense of the song of the bow, for the song of the bow will keep the thing in our minds, as the very weapon of warfare involved in sorrow. Paul speaks of the weapons of his warfare — they were spiritual, he says — and every spiritual item may be put into poetry. It is a question of uprightness, of how matters are in the warfare of God. Let ^[p. 548] us look into this book of Jasher and breathe the poetic spirit of it. Let our spirits be affected by it, for it will enable us to discern whether, in war, we are using dissimulation as the enemy was using it in seeking to adversely influence the people of God in Paul’s day; let everything be open. If we learn this song, I think it will be always a challenge, as to our methods and skill in spiritual warfare, for we are not to be behind in anything. The weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds, casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ (2 Corinthians 10: 4, 5). We must have these weapons.

Now I want to say a word briefly about Joshua. What I have said about David will help us as to influence with men. David speaks about one that ruleth among men, what he must be, and what I have been speaking of enters much into the kind of man that is to rule amongst men. He must be just, he must be upright, he must be as the dawn. In “the last words of David” he tells us what a man should be who rules amongst men, and in truth, it is a very important matter; for, after all, it is not a question of the service of any one of us, but what one is — personality is an immense thing. Gift is out of place in any who is out of accord with it in his own qualities and spirit. “The ruler among men shall be just, Ruling in the fear of God” (2 Samuel 23: 3). In 2 Samuel 3: 1 we are told that “David became continually stronger, and the house of Saul became continually weaker”. It does not say the house of David grew stronger, it was David himself. He had to say, it is not so with my house, but as to himself, what a man he was! What a spirit he had as a ruler among men! So after all David’s experiences, to which I have alluded, in ^[p. 549] relation to those men, all Israel came and made him king — all Israel, we are told earlier, loved David. So it is a question of what one is among men in his service, what influence one has, whether one leads the saints aright.

Now in this part of Joshua, it is not one’s influence among men, but what influence I have up in heaven. You may think that a peculiar thing to say: but it is a fine thought, and there is not anyone of us, who prays, who has not some influence in heaven. You will notice what is said in the passage; it is not exactly a prayer, it is more like a familiar request — as of one having personal liberty with God. The Lord uses two words, as you will remember, in the New Testament, begging and demanding, the latter alluding to what He was entitled to, the former is simply supplication, begging things, asking for things in that sense. Now Joshua here, we are told, “spoke ... to Jehovah”, as much as to say, Do this for me. In speaking thus, I am seeking simply to urge that the saints should get into the idea of their greatness in heaven — these qualities having developed, and hence to understand what liberty they may have with God. David, as I was saying, developed the spirit of a man who should rule among men, but then, he was a man who went up too; he says, immediately after what we have been dwelling upon, Shall I go up? And God says, Yes, as much as to say, ‘You are the kind of man that should go up’. “Who shall dwell in thy holy hill?” Well, the upright man, the pure in heart, he is the man that can go up. So David goes up, Jehovah telling him where to go; he asks Him and Jehovah tells him — he went to Hebron and then to Jerusalem. Now, as I said, the point in our chapter in Joshua is what influence I have above. I believe it is commensurate with what influence I have below, that is, as I take on the heavenly ^[p. 550] character. If I have power with God, like Israel, I have power with men.

Now, with this in mind, I want just to follow out what this matter of uprightness means here, to show that it involves power with God; that is, I can say to Him, Such and such a thing is needed. God likes that in an upright man, a man who knows what is needed, whose boldness of access He would encourage. There are many short prayers in the Bible; long ones are rare. The word here was, “Then spoke Joshua to Jehovah in the day when Jehovah gave up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand still upon Gibeon; And thou, moon, in the valley of Ajalon! And the sun stood still, and the moon remained where it was, until the nation had avenged themselves upon their enemies”. The necessities of the case required this, it was an intelligent word; it was as if Joshua said to Jehovah, This is needed. You are doing a great service to us, You are giving victory over the Amorites; but I want to complete the matter. Unfinished matters are very frequent. An illustration of a finished matter is seen in 1 Samuel 7, where Samuel offers up a sucking lamb to Jehovah, a whole burnt-offering — beautiful thought! Christ dependent here in type — and whilst he did it, whilst the offering went on God thundered on the Philistines. You say that is enough — but it is not, the passage goes on to say, “the men of Israel went out” — they finished the matter; they “pursued the Philistines, and smote them, as far as below Beth-car”.

Now, if we take the present dispensation; we say to the Lord, Come. Many of us may say it in the most sentimental way, without having faith about it, but then I am to consider what is in the mind of God about this dispensation. Is it to be finished? Do I want it to be finished? I may ask God to ^[p. 551] interfere with the powers that be; for if they go on as they are going on, and God does not interfere, we shall have the antichrist presently, we shall have the finish — but what do I say as to that? The Spirit is here, the assembly is here, and Scripture abounds with the idea of long-suffering, of patience, and that all the elect are to be saved. What do you think of that? Is the day to be lengthened out? May be it is necessary for it to be lengthened out. God is pleased with a man who thinks like that, who says, It is needed that You should interfere with the powers that be. The first mention of these heavenly bodies in Scripture is that they were to rule — well, they are to rule, and God has set up rulers on earth and they are going forward, but the night of complete apostasy is coming very quickly if they have their way unhinderedly. Hence God may stay the current trend, and the upright man says, It is right that they should be stayed — God is pleased with that; He likes us to be in accord with the principle governing the dispensation — “the acceptable year of the Lord” — I want to be imbued with the spirit of it.

So Joshua spoke to Jehovah, and he spoke to the sun, and he spoke to the moon. Think of a man being able to do that; and then we have the poetic words in the sight of Israel: “Sun, stand still upon Gibeon; And thou moon, in the valley of Ajalon!” Is not such an exploit worthy of a place in the annals of the people of God? It is indeed. It is enshrined in the book of Jasher, and if, so to speak, I open that book, it challenges me. You will understand that I am speaking in a figurative way; this book is not extant now, but the thing it represents is, carried down in living power by the Spirit. It is a question of uprightness in the things of God, and what power the upright man has. He speaks to God, and then he speaks to the governing powers,

^[p. 552] and they stop. May there not be an equally great result today in view of what I have been saying, as intelligent, upright men speak to God as to what — among the governing powers — may hinder the testimony of God going forward? I have not a doubt of this.

Then, as I said at the beginning, there is the collective idea in which all this culminates, namely, the saints viewed as Jeshurun. I need not add much to what I have said, but you can see that if each of us takes this in, in his local situation, we shall be upright with one another; not simply that we break bread together, and have a meeting room and set meetings, including all the meetings we have — these may proceed and yet we may not have Jeshurun. Jeshurun is a great collective thought involving delight to the heart of Christ, for I believe that is what is meant. It is to be reached in every company of saints represented here moving on these lines, moving with God. The Lord sees them together, “the heads of the people”, the heads meaning those who have wisdom, who are there in the wisdom they have derived from God, or now, from Christ as Head; as such are available, there is control and leadership. Then “the tribes of Israel”, meaning all those that are available to the Lord, set in relation to one another in love. The Lord says, in effect, that is delightful to Me, and He comes there. Moses, typical of Christ, was king in Jeshurun, when the heads of the people and the tribes of Israel were gathered together.