PRIESTHOOD IN THE BOOKS OF SAMUEL (2)
[p. 58] PRIESTHOOD IN THE BOOKS OF SAMUEL (2)
1 Samuel 6: 10 - 16; 1 Samuel 7: 5 - 11; 1 Samuel 23: 6 - 12
JT We have got as far as chapter 3 with our subject, which is priesthood. It was pointed out that it arose in this book informally, first in Hannah and then in Samuel. Although Samuel was not of the sons of Aaron, he exercised priesthood with an ephod, and it came before us that in the introduction of the genuine priesthood, the spurious or merely official priesthood is exposed. When evil is exposed by the introduction of what is right in a positive way, it is morally at an end. It is only a matter of time for it to be set aside by the judgment of God, but there is no void, for the positive remains. So here the official priesthood in Eli is exposed not only to the man of God, but Jehovah tells Samuel about it. This comes out in chapter 3: 10 - 14. Then Samuel tells Eli, so that the judgment of God comes to Eli through the lips of this young man who is now officiating as priest, showing how young believers may come into the service at an early age, to be used of God in a priestly way.
We are told in verse 19 that Samuel grew and Jehovah was with him, and let none of his words fall to the ground; that is, He is seeing to it that the words of this young believer stand. There is divine support in what he is saying, and then we are told that Jehovah appeared again at Shiloh, and revealed Himself to Samuel at Shiloh by the word of Jehovah. He gets a fresh appearance from God, Jehovah showing Himself; His mind is made known by His word, and “what Samuel had said happened to all Israel”. God is making His word, through His young servant, to stand. So that it is not only a question of one’s own power in ministry, but God making it effective. That is always to be counted on,
[p. 59] God makes the ministry that He ordains effective, He gives it a peculiar character so that it remains in the hearts of the saints.
Then we get a sorrowful period, the ark of God taken, and no priest to care for it, it is in the hands of the enemy. It says, He “gave his strength into captivity, and his glory into the hand of the oppressor” (Psalm 78: 61). It is a sorrowful period, and Samuel is out of sight for the moment. What we are to learn is that God takes care of His own testimony even without a priest, and that is what develops in chapters 5 and 6. In chapter 7 Samuel appears as leader and in a priestly way; and throughout his ministry until he dies he is marked by this, effective priestly service Godward and manward, and then we find it in the king, that is in David, in chapter 23.
What is in mind for this meeting, and what one would specially desire to dwell upon is instinct. We have already spoken of it in Hannah, but here we find it in the milch kine, and we see how in the absence of intelligent priesthood, as indeed is the case in the major part of christendom today, God is taking care of His interests, and it is through spiritual instinct in His people. Although unintelligent in a large measure, still it is there. The milch kine, of course, belong to the lower creation, but they are brought in here to show that divine instinct was symbolised in them. They are moving, not according to their natural feelings, but supernatural; which are divinely produced for the moment; they acted contrary to nature, and that is a sure evidence of the work of God. They moved according to His will because they “went by the one high way”.
Ques Is there this instinct in every believer that would move us in the right direction?
JT Yes, that is what comes out typically in chapter 6. The milch kine are introduced in a peculiar way. They have calves; that is, what would [p. 60] demand natural feeling and care; they leave them evidently as governed by another principle than that of nature. The Philistines made the test that they were to “go up by the way of its own border”. That would be the proof that it was not by chance. There are no accidents in the ways of God, He always shows that such things are after His own ordering; even the ark with the Philistines was not an accident. It was a disaster, of course, but it was divine ordering, the result of the government of God. He delivered His strength into captivity, He did it because of the state of the people.
Ques Would you say that the natural man, although he has the proof, is not affected by it? The five lords return to their own country, whereas the milch kine moved contrary to nature.
JT Yes, the five lords were governed by nature; the kine were governed by what was above nature. God created testing natural conditions in their calves being shut up at home, and yet the kine are not held back. They are moved by another principle; and there is no hope at all for the testimony or for the salvation of God’s people apart from this principle of divine instinct, and everyone who is truly born of God has it.
Ques Whilst that would come into evidence where there is a lack of understanding of the truth, would you expect another element and more intelligence to be present with those who are brought up in the truth?
JT Well, that is the great advantage children of godly parents have, for they are brought up with right thoughts and terms. So that when the instinct begins to operate, they have an advantage over those who are brought up in Philistine circumstances, because after all, the Philistine is merely the big man in christendom, the big leader. The five lords represent [p. 61] what has been built up in this way. They represent an authority of mutual arrangement.
Rem Referring again to instinct, it would be a “good deposit”. Timothy had a good deposit.
JT Yes, God had seen to that beforehand, that from a child he knew the Scriptures, and when the time came for instinct to operate, he had a great advantage.
Rem It is a great thing, as governed by this instinct and principle, not to turn to the right hand nor to the left.
JT Well, that is the lesson in it, that in the case of a young person, or any person who is not well instructed, who has been brought up in Philistine surroundings, that is, worldly religious surroundings, if he is governed by his instincts and promptings, he will move in the right direction and the point is to get on that “one high way”, and that is what I think is found in these verses. “They went by the one high way, lowing as they went”. They felt the wrench of nature, but they were not turned aside by their feelings, they went straight on, and that is the sure way into the mind of God — to go straight on according to right instinct. Paul says, “if not of my own will, I am entrusted with an administration” (1 Corinthians 9: 17). His path was like the path of these kine, a path that he would not choose naturally.
Ques Will not those who move under the promptings of instinct find that there is much in the natural sphere that will oppose them?
JT Yes; a lesson for all young people, in relation to the promptings of the divine nature, as we may call it, at least the new birth, for it is said “that which is born of the Spirit is spirit” — “that which”. It is to be taken up abstractly in the mind, it is a thing that is called “spirit”. It is instinct peculiar to itself and it is true to itself, and if other elements do not interfere, it will move in one direction, it will [p. 62] move in relation to the will of God. The gospel comes in of course to enlighten us, but in itself it moves according to the will of God.
Ques So that is to be cultivated and followed — cherished, would you say?
JT Well, that is the point for us all, that is the lesson to be learned; there is this instinct, and as we move in accord with it we get intelligence. The truth of God comes in to regulate us; that is what teaching is for, to regulate this thing. So that it gives character to the person, it is not only the thing, but the person takes up the character, and that is what is implied in the words “born anew” in John 3: 3. They are radical, the whole person is affected by the work of God; all his moral being, all his faculties come under the effect of it.
Ques Would the family thought be brought in with the two milch kine? It was Hannah previously.
JT Well, Hannah presents a higher thought. She recognises nature and moves according to God in relation to it at first, but gradually she emerges out of nature by weaning her son. Weaning is the emerging from nature, it shows the state of her soul; then she comes on to priestly ground intelligently with her bullocks and her bottle of wine, so that even Eli worships. She is a power in the house of God, and her own contribution in the next chapter is of the most exalted kind. It is not instinct as in the milch kine, she is a real priest now. “For the priest’s lips should keep knowledge, and at his mouth they seek the law” (Malachi 2: 7). Here we are on the same principle as we saw with Hannah, but it is on lower ground, it is right instinct in Philistine connections. The milch kine are in Philistine territory, but they are set in relation to the ark, what is of Christ in that territory. There is a certain amount of intelligence there, as you will notice in these two chapters; if you read them carefully, you will see that while [p. 63] it is Philistine territory, there is remarkable intelligence there. The priests, the diviners, know about the passage of the Red Sea; they know about what God did for Israel, corresponding with what we get in the systems around us, but they do not carry the ark. They propose something, and this something was the milch kine and the new cart, and God comes in in relation to these milch kine so that they have supernatural instincts. It is the female side because in the female the natural is strongest.
Rem The ark is really carried by those who are truly affected by the work of God.
JT Yes. What should we have today, were it not that God worked this way one hundred years ago? He took up persons in Philistine territory, but there was intelligence there. Even the Philistines here have intelligence, and what they propose is more or less right and God comes in and uses it, but He uses it in relation to such instinct as He effects by His power.
Rem So that in christendom there is a certain knowledge objectively of the truth of God.
JT That is what we are to learn here. They knew certain features of the truth; they knew about God acting for Israel, they knew something of the history of Israel, and we get that in the religious organisations about us. God uses it or there would be no light at all there. The light that came in in the recovery alluded to, was God coming in afresh as He did in John the baptist. It was God taking up men in these Philistine surroundings and giving them other instincts and enabling them to move in relation to these instincts, and hence, place being made for the Spirit of God and the Scriptures, the truth was ministered.
Rem So they moved out of the sphere of the Philistines.
JT That is what happened exactly, corresponding [p. 64] with these milch kine. The end of the journey here is this “great stone” (verse 14). It says, “the cart came into the field of Joshua the Beth-shemeshite, and stood there; and a great stone was there”. It seems to me that the stone is a point reached of solidity and permanency, and in connection with the stone you have actual levites, that is, real servants of God; persons who are classified in that way. I believe what is seen here typically could be traced in the history of the assembly. In the recovery already mentioned the stone — sure ground spiritually — was reached, also the levites, the true servants of God; not milch kine any more. The idea of the milch kine merges in the levites; it is instinct merging in intelligence, for the levites represent intelligent ministry, and that is what we have, thank God. The sacrifice follows at once; the kine are offered: “And they clave the wood of the cart, and offered up the kine a burnt-offering to Jehovah”. It is the Spirit of Christ in suffering entering into the position in mind.
Ques Why is it spoken of as the ark of Jehovah, rather than the ark of the covenant?
JT It is here “the ark of God”, “the ark of Jehovah”, and “the ark of the God of Israel”. As in foreign hands God’s rights are involved, and hence He acts in power to recover the ark. His faithfulness, too, would enter into this position; implied, I suppose, in the ark of Jehovah being so often mentioned. “If we are unfaithful, he abides faithful, for he cannot deny himself” (2 Timothy 2: 13).
Ques Would this divine instinct eventually lead the soul under the sound of the gospel?
JT Yes. This is the position today and it is to exercise us all in regard to whatever ministry is presented to us. This instinct can be reckoned on in one born anew; what he further needs is the gospel, and the teaching. Paul taught the word of God at Corinth for eighteen months. (Acts 18: 11).
[p. 65] Rem So that God would address Himself to those in whom He has wrought.
JT Quite so; to all, of course, in the gospel, but there will be no result for Him unless there is new birth.
Rem If they were piped to, they will dance.
JT That is right. They will answer to the testimony, answer to the ministry of the truth. That is what came out in the Lord’s own history on earth, and what came out in the Acts.
Ques Is it that we have an unction from the Holy One and know all things?
JT Well, it is something like it, only the unction involves that one has the Spirit; it contemplates the believer on the full ground of the gospel, having received the Spirit.
What happened at Beth-shemesh brings out the intelligent side. The Levites (verse 15), “took down the ark of Jehovah, and the coffer that was with it, in which were the golden jewels, and put them on the great stone; and the men of Beth-shemesh offered up burnt-offerings and sacrificed sacrifices the same day to Jehovah”. That is to say, you have the service of God set up here. Will the Philistines join in? No. The five lords of the Philistines saw what had happened and went home. They saw what happened and so are under responsibility, but they are not having any part in the service of God as set up at Beth-shemesh, they “returned to Ekron the same day”.
Ques Is it like the disciples returning to their own homes as the Lord went to the mount of Olives?
JT Just so, but as He went up to heaven they did not go to their own homes, they returned from the mount of Olives and went to the upper room — corresponding with the stone here. That is where the service of God began; the stone is a foundational thought. God, through right instinct in those who [p. 66] served, has brought the ark back, and it is now on firm ground. The Philistines go home, they will not have anything to do with that. To apply it — they know well enough; they may have the books of the ministry in their libraries, but they do not move, they use these books in relation to their own Philistine settings. They are just the natural man outwardly on divine territory, having knowledge, but unmoved spiritually. Whereas christians characteristically want to move with the light that God gives.
Rem The truth as reached becomes a standard and we are not to go back from it.
JT That is the principle; the foundation of God stands, and that is the ground you are on. I believe that is what the stone here signifies.
Ques What is the thought in “they clave the wood of the cart”?
JT Well, the whole movement as reaching this point seems taken on by God. The Levites appearing would indicate that now the service can be resumed. The action of the Levites here is more than historical; it has spiritual significance. They so far represent the mind of God as taking charge of the ark. The care of the “golden jewels” sent with the ark as a trespass-offering is to be noted as fitting. The cart that David employed is not used in this way. God makes allowance for ignorance in a movement of this kind; whereas David’s use of a cart was inexcusable, hence the divine resentment expressed. Here, divine property is emerging from Philistine influence under mixed conditions, and God, represented in the Levites, takes it on.
Ques Are these instincts seen in Jacob from the beginning?
JT Yes. He took his brother by the heel. That is, he is a supplanter, meaning that he set aside the man after the flesh.
Ques Are not the kine and the subjective element [p. 67] one and the same thing? Do they not go with the spiritual instinct?
JT I think wherever you get the female in this way it means the subjective side, not necessarily the intelligent side, but the instinct that is true. There is something in Israel now; God began to work in Israel after the terrible disaster in chapter 4, and there is, so far, recovery. Hence chapter 7 is based on this. Samuel says, “Gather all Israel” — gather, that is what he proposes. There is no gathering at Beth-shemesh; it is just the culmination of a movement characterised by right instinct. It culminates in the Levites; they were ordained to take care of what was of God, and especially the ark, which they alone, as under the ordering of the priests, were to handle. The next thing is, the intelligent priest says in chapter 7: 5, “Gather all Israel to Mizpah, and I will pray Jehovah for you. And they gathered together to Mizpah, and drew water, and poured it out before Jehovah, and fasted on that day, and said there, We have sinned against Jehovah. And Samuel judged the children of Israel in Mizpah”. Now you have a gathering, there is a completely new start under an intelligent priest. So that the next thing, after a believer moves out of Philistine circumstances, is that God claims him. He says, You belong to Me, you are Mine. Then the “great stone” and the sacrifice offered up in chapter 6, form the basis for gathering. The foundation of God is there and thus, as on sure ground, we may proceed. In 2 Timothy 2: 19 the firm foundation of God is said to stand, and then “Let every one who names the name of the Lord withdraw from iniquity”. The principle of gathering follows on this.
You can see that we have the basis of gathering here, and priestly movement comes to light; it issues from Samuel, the man whom God had taken up and whose words were not falling to the ground.
[p. 68] He was recognised as a prophet from Dan to Beer-sheba; it is a universal matter.
Ques Would you say in that gathering together there is self-judgment?
JT Well, that is what comes out here. The movement begins with Samuel as the ark is restored, but it is irreverently handled at Beth-shemesh; and even at Kirjath-jearim it is with an individual, although cared for with some regard for its holy dignity. “And the men of Kirjath-jearim came, and fetched up the ark of Jehovah, and brought it into the house of Abinadab on the hill, and hallowed Eleazar his son to keep the ark of Jehovah”. Well, these are not suitable circumstances for the ark; it is not properly cared for, and how could it be till the people are brought round in self-judgment? It is said that “the time was long; for it was twenty years”, as if the writer had sorrow of heart that it was there.
“And Samuel spoke to all the house of Israel, saying, If ye return to Jehovah with all your heart, put away the strange gods and the Ashtoreths from among you, and apply your hearts unto Jehovah and serve him only; and he will deliver you out of the hand of the Philistines. And the children of Israel put away the Baals and the Ashtoreths and served Jehovah only”. A word of prophetic ministry that the Lord might give to any brother and which may be spread abroad amongst the saints corresponds. It is the voice of God, it may be spoken or printed, it is carried forward in the power of the Spirit and there is a general movement. And now Samuel says, “Gather all Israel to Mizpah”.
Rem It is noteworthy, it is to “all Israel”.
JT Yes, it is the full thought, which always marks faith, as seen in Moses as setting up twelve pillars, and in Elijah building an altar with [p. 69] twelve stones.
Rem Although things are broken, we keep all in mind.
JT Yes. It is the abstract idea; you get later, “all Israel that were present”. They did not all come, but this fact did not deprive those that did come of the advantage. What you get in Josiah’s day is “all ... Israel that were present” (2 Chronicles 35: 18). They were few, but they got the gain of what was there. They are answering to the divine call.
Rem If an assembly meeting is called, but all the members of the assembly in a locality are not present, those that are there are expressive of the whole.
JT That is right; so that the Lord brings it down in Matthew to “two or three”. First “two of you”, and then “two or three gathered together unto my name”. John mentions one, he makes provision for one person who is doing the will of God; that the Father and the Son come to him (John 14: 21 - 23).
Rem So that as spiritual instincts are developed and the principles of God are known, you begin to move in a way that is proper to all. Is that the idea?
JT Yes. There is only one order of things. The apostle said, “thus I ordain in all the assemblies”.
Now the people respond to the word of Samuel, who says, “Gather all Israel to Mizpah”. The next thing is to make confession, to acknowledge the state of things. They poured out water on the ground before Jehovah; it will not be lost water; it is not such as the wise woman spoke of; she took this up with less intelligence. She said, “which cannot be gathered up again” (2 Samuel 14: 14); but here it is poured out before Jehovah so that it can be gathered up, it can be taken up on new ground. The power of God can take it up.
[p. 70] Rem Whilst they did not have a definite word for that, is it the outcome of Samuel’s ministry?
JT Quite so. It belongs to this book. The woman of Tekoa took it up, but the words are put into her mouth, and you cannot get spiritual thoughts that way.
Ques I suppose the question of righteousness would be raised, would it not?
JT That is the thought, follow righteousness, faith, love, and peace, that is what Samuel has in mind here. He had already spoken to them about their state and enjoined them to put away their idolatry and apply their hearts to Jehovah and serve Him only. Then verse 6 says, “And they gathered together to Mizpah, and drew water, and poured it out before Jehovah, and fasted on that day, and said there, We have sinned against Jehovah”. Then it says, “Samuel judged the children of Israel in Mizpah”. You have authority there, you have judgment; the house of God, you might say, is re-set up.
Ques Is this a word of Samuel’s prophecy in that way?
JT Well, it is that sort of thing; it brings in conviction.
Ques Do the facts here suggest this path must be taken up in the face of all that may oppose, and God waited upon for the issue?
JT Quite so. The Philistines were not far away, they would attack at a moment like this. The Philistines heard that the children of Israel were gathered, and the lords of the Philistines went up against Israel; it is the leading persons who can act with authority. Samuel accepts Israel’s smallness and offers a sucking lamb, a beautiful tribute to the priestly intelligence that was suitable at a time like this. It was as if to say, I have no power to meet these learned men, no power to deal with them [p. 71] on their own ground. We have to learn another ground, the sucking lamb does not denote any military power, it denotes weakness and dependence on God; weakness that honours God. It is offered up “a whole burnt-offering to Jehovah”, and He accepts that. It is a type of Christ, but in a small way and in a dependent way, a sucking lamb.
Ques Does it speak of the beginning of things with us?
JT I think so, it is the smallness of things, but the apprehension of Christ expressed thus is of intrinsic value; as the sucking lamb is small but precious, it is according to the way Christ is presented in the book of Revelation. The Lamb there is a diminutive thought but precious. It represents the instrumentality through which, in the circumstances, God is operating.
Rem Here it was a whole burnt-offering, as you said.
JT That is important to notice, it is a whole idea. We are not congregationalists, there is only one assembly; “one body and one Spirit ... one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all” (Ephesians 4: 4 - 6). As delivered from Philistine influence we come back to that thought.
Rem Here it is “the things which are not, to bring to nought the things that are”.
JT Quite so, that is what is meant here. Samuel rightly gauges what was in keeping with the moment, and the sucking-lamb represents that. It is typical in a peculiar and touching way, so that God came in most signally. He thundered with a great thunder, we are told. It is refreshing to see that the people’s state was in accord with what Samuel did. Verse 8 says, “the children of Israel said to Samuel, Cease not to cry to Jehovah our God for us, that he will save us out of the hand of the Philistines. And Samuel took a sucking-lamb, and offered it as a [p. 72] whole burnt-offering to Jehovah; and Samuel cried to Jehovah for Israel, and Jehovah answered him. And as Samuel was offering up the burnt-offering, the Philistines advanced to battle against Israel. And Jehovah thundered with a great thunder on that day upon the Philistines, and discomfited them; and they were routed before Israel”. So that it is a complete victory.
It is the quality that is in view, and as you pursue the history here, you find that what marks Samuel throughout is prayer, and God answering prayer. This chapter is a sort of an epitome of Samuel’s whole life, and all that follows is the opening up of what was in that life. It all culminates in David; we see these features, the priesthood and prophecy, in David himself, and in the new system of things which he furnished.
Ques Was it Samuel’s offering? God honoured it.
JT Samuel was leading; it was his intelligence gauging what was suitable. Israel did not ask him to do this; he knew what was there; the character of the work of God, the extent and the quality of it, and his offering was in keeping with this.
Rem The quality of the offering is seen in that he gave God His place first, and God honoured that. It is the service of God, and if we give God His place He will answer.
JT That is the idea, the thought I think is discernment as to what was actually in the place, in this city for instance. What is there in the place? We ought to be able to estimate that, otherwise we shall be deceived. Priestliness involves discernment, ability to weigh things, to gauge conditions.
Ques Is it according to the understanding of that, the answer from God comes?
JT Yes, God expects us to know just what there is. In the Corinthian epistles we have constantly something to support what we may be saying; and [p. 73] corresponding to what is before us now, the apostle gauges what is there from the very start; he measures things — indeed he brings in the idea of the God of measure. We are not to be occupied with numbers only, but with the quality of the persons, weighing as well as measuring and counting.
Rem The movement of the enemy here shows how he would spoil what is most precious. I notice it was while Samuel was offering the sucking-lamb, while the burnt-offering was going up, that the Philistines moved.
JT He would rob God of what is most pleasing to Him. Leviticus gives us the thought of the burnt-offering. It is a whole idea, Christ devoting Himself entirely to God. It was offered up entirely to God; all that belonged to the priest out of it was the skin; that is, the thought of it would be reproduced in the priest. Here the offering is small, but it was, typically, Christ presented to God in a sense peculiarly precious to Him, hence the attack.
Rem Having reached God’s thought, the “men of Israel” (verse 11), come into view now.
JT Well, just so; quality, no doubt, is there. Paul says, “quit yourselves like men; be strong”.
Ques Would the sucking-lamb give the thought of entire dependence?
JT Yes. Now to come to David: of course there is a great deal that we are all conversant with in his history, but the point before us in this reading is priesthood, that we may see in David how this thought develops. In chapter 21 he goes to the house of God. The Lord, referring to this section in the New Testament, says it is the section of Abiathar the high priest, a section into which priesthood enters; the supreme thought of priesthood is there. He is not called high priest anywhere else, as far as I know. But then the priesthood is also shown in David here. I have no doubt that the Lord had in [p. 74] mind that what was current at the time was in keeping with the priesthood. There is ascension in the book in this sense until we reach the thought of high priesthood in Abiathar, and of course that is opened up to us in the epistle to the Hebrews. It is noted in our chapter that the hand of the Lord was against the Philistines all the time of Samuel. God’s hand is always with the true priesthood. I hope we may pursue this subject later, and see how it culminates and develops in David. This will run into the next book, and in this connection we do well to keep in mind the Lord’s remark as to this section. His comments on any section of the Old Testament throw light on it. I think the Lord’s remarks in Mark 2: 25 - 28 throw light on this chapter. He says, “Have ye never read what David did when he had need and hungered, he and those with him, how he entered into the house of God, in the section of Abiathar the high priest, and ate the shew-bread?” David was coming in here unofficially, but he was the real priest, for the system under Saul had broken down. David’s movements here are on a very high level.
David knew more about the shew-bread really than Ahimelech. Ahimelech questions whether he should have it; it was in measure common, but it was food all the same, just what David needed. Then Saul slays the priests by the medium of Doeg the Edomite, the false brother. He slays eighty-five priests of Jehovah wearing “the linen ephod”. Think of the temerity of a man called a brother slaying the priests! It may have been judicial, (1 Samuel 2: 27 - 36), but the malice of Satan is seen in it — in view of the place true priesthood was acquiring at this time. Priestly service in this section is really David’s service, not so much Abiathar’s. That is Christ typically coming in unofficially in the exercise of priesthood — as seen in the gospel of Luke.
Rem David said, “with me thou art in safe keeping”.
JT Quite so, Abiathar was under his protection, but the fact is stated that David was praying already, when Abiathar came to him to Keilah having an ephod with him. He had the full symbol of priesthood, which David used. Although the priests are slain, the priesthood remains in Abiathar, but it is really exercised in David. The Lord says, “what David did”. We should get our eye on what David did in this section.
Ques What did David mean when he said the bread was common?
JT I think the allusion would be to the system, the system that was being overthrown. I think that is what he meant, but for the moment there was what he needed, the bread and the sword. Really the whole system is wrong and left like a shell; the government of God overtakes it, but there is a remnant out of it. Paul says, referring to this same thought, “God has not cast away his people:” there was a remnant, of whom he was one, (Romans 11: 1 - 6).
Ques Would you say that exercising priesthood was a point of victory that David reached over the false system?
JT That is right, it is moral victory, and that is what the Lord means. He says, “Have ye never read what David did?” The Lord was showing Himself at that time as the true David. He had entered into the cornfields, and the disciples rubbed the corn and ate of it. He defends them in this. He is inaugurating the spirit of liberty, that belongs to christianity, in true priestly power; that is what He meant. It was moral victory, and we are to stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free. That is what I think it means, what David did involves priestly liberty. He knew better than the official priest what to do. If we bear in mind [p. 76] what God said early in the book of Samuel, that He is going to establish a priestly house. We shall see that it all points to Christ, and He refers in this point to what David did. The Lord is defending His disciples, and the new order of things, which morally was already there in Him and His disciples.
Ques Would that be instinct or intelligence on the part of the disciples?
JT Well, I think it followed an example; God operates on the principle of leadership. The Lord went into the cornfields, it does not say that He ate the corn. The disciples went further than He did; the acted in the liberty which He afforded, and He defended them.
Rem David was very much like the Lord in that; he did not belong to the official priesthood, but he acted as priest.
JT Well, exactly. Paul refers to certain brethren brought in unawares “to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ”. We do not want to surrender our liberty, to come again into the bondage of what is merely official.