JUDGES 1
The book of Judges corresponds more with the present moment than the book of Joshua. In the latter we see how the land was entered upon and possessed under Joshua, who would represent the leadership of Christ by the Spirit through the apostles, securing the possession of the inheritance by spiritual power; but now the question arises as to what will happen when that extraordinary leadership of spiritual power is no longer present. That is the day we are living in. We have not the apostles now to lead us with the power of Christ, and to secure the inheritance to us. That was not intended to be permanent. Joshua grows old and dies, for he represents the order of things that passes away, and the book opens with what takes place after the death of Joshua.
The introduction of the book of Judges is important. Down to verse 5 of chapter 2 it is a preface which stands by itself, and it would appear that in this opening section of the book God would show us how things can be maintained when we have no longer apostolic authority and leading amongst us. The first principle is that it is still possible to enquire of God. It is a striking feature which is suggested to us at the opening of the book; the children of Israel asked Jehovah saying, “Which of us shall go up against the Canaanites first, to fight against them?” They enquired of Jehovah; that is the first principle of security and of spiritual guidance — the first principle on which the inheritance can be secured. Paul is our Joshua, and in bidding farewell to the Ephesian elders he says, “I commit you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up and give to you an inheritance among all the sanctified”, Acts 20:32. It is a question of being directly cast on God; that is the first principle of security and blessing. In the Spirit of Christ things can be maintained, but it is a spirit of entire dependence. If apostles go, God remains.
The outlook of this chapter is that conflict is all before us. The enquiry is how the conflict is to be carried on. The enemies are all present, and it is a question now of how the war is to be carried on. With no Joshua to lead, they are [p. 114] directly cast on God. That is our position; we are directly cast on God, and that is our great security. It would preserve us from all defection. Before the history of failure is given, great principles are set forth that would preserve from failure; if we stand by them they will stand by us.
The result of that beautiful spirit of dependence in which they enquired is that God is with Judah. Divine principles can only be carried out in dependence. The more correct my principles are, the more I shall fail if I am not in dependence. There is often a great admixture of self-confidence when a person professes to be so sure of having the Lord’s mind. It is often divorced from the spirit of dependence and readiness to be guided and built up by the word of His grace.
They were directly enquiring of God; there is no priest mentioned here. That is our privilege. We cannot do as they did at Corinth; they wrote to the apostle, and had a long letter back, answering their questions authoritatively. We cannot do that; we have no apostles. We are directly cast on God, and I think it is expedient for us that we have not the apostles. The Lord has told us that it was expedient for Him to go away, and I think it is expedient that the apostles went, so that we might be cast on God directly. It is the rock principle, for possession of the inheritance — to be cast on God.
The second great preservative principle is that we recognise the brotherhood. A person might say, I go on with God, but are you going on with your brethren? We must not move without our brethren. While it remains true that we can get everything from God — in an abstract sense everything comes from God, even help from the brethren — but we not only get help from God, but from our brethren.
Judah needed help from Simeon his brother. Simeon had something Judah had not, but what Simeon had was necessary to Judah’s success in getting the inheritance. It is a great principle of safety for us to recognise what is in our brother. When the Lord was going away He gave us a preservative commandment. He had been the centre for holding them together by the power of His own love, so when He was going away He said that the essential thing for us is to love one another. He would have us recognise the essentiality of the brotherhood. That is the principle that comes, not only into conflict, but into service. Judah showed his affection for his brother under circumstances that added lustre to it, because [p. 115] he had to give up part of his inheritance to Simeon. He had such a big inheritance; but he is quite unjealous of Simeon, because he calls him in as a brother.
Judah derived pre-eminence from his prince — Caleb. Caleb is the first man in the wilderness who showed that his heart was wholly set on the inheritance. What was before Caleb was the way Jehovah was moving, and Caleb was wholly following Him in it. The presence of Caleb at the head of Judah gave Judah pre-eminence in regard to the acquisition of the inheritance. It is not here so much a question of faith but of love.
Here at the beginning we have these great principles which would safeguard the inheritance dependence on God, and the recognition of the brethren. I need my brethren, and then we have the Spirit as maintaining things in freshness. Historically this incident about Achsah took place before the death of Joshua, and that reminds us that Scripture was written by inspiration. Certain things are put together here morally. If we lose the leadership of the apostles we do not lose God, nor the brotherhood, nor the Spirit of God and what He can do for us; and all these things will enable us to overcome every hostile power. So the inheritance can be fully possessed, even though outwardly it is a day of weakness, and the apostles are gone. It is only through conflict that anything has been maintained; everything connected in any way with the inheritance has been fought for. If we personally have not fought for it, others have had to fight for us.
In the book of Judges God said He would leave some of the enemies in the land so that there would be the necessity for conflict. That applies in principle to the church. God will never suffer the inheritance to be possessed without conflict. If we give up conflict, we give place to the Canaanite. Many of our brethren have secured a good deal of immunity from conflict; they have declined conflict, but they have lost the inheritance. Peace at any price is not the way to get the inheritance.
When we cease to acquire fresh territory, the enemy will soon turn the tables on us. We see in this book how the enemy turned the tables on them. It first began by their not attacking the enemy, and it is not long before the Canaanite insists on dwelling there; he becomes aggressive. If we are not aggressive the enemy will be. But it is not fighting all the time; a time of conflict is followed by a time of rest. The land had [p. 116] rest for so many years. If there is conflict, then there is rest, for God delights to give rest to His people, so that what is acquired by conflict can be enjoyed, not only possessed.
For instance, many years ago, when there was a ministry which sought to call attention to the blessedness of eternal life, that it might not be a mere word to us, but a life of blessedness to be enjoyed, what a battle there was! The question now is, Have we taken possession of what the battle was about? Have we the good now after forty years of what was fought for then?
The seven nations represent the complete power of evil, hostile to the pleasure of God in His people. The enemies are not altogether external — the force of all these powers operates through the flesh. Whatever principle of evil there may be, there is that in my flesh that would join hands with it. I have to realise there is something in me that would be ready to join hands and tolerate any evil.
Everything goes on victoriously down to a certain point. In verse 19 we see the first sign of weakness: “He did not dispossess the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron”. It is the first sign of weakness — to be impressed by the strength and power of what is opposed to you. We ought to be impressed by the sense of the power of God.
Caleb was not in evidence then. He did not fail to take possession of his portion of the inheritance. Caleb is separated from the failure, and singled out as one who did not participate in it. It is good to know that Caleb does not die. Caleb is still alive. If Joshua dies, there is no mention in Scripture about the death of Caleb.
The upper and nether springs come in in connection with Caleb. His daughter, Achsah, represents the subjective state in the people of God that feels the need of the Spirit. She wanted springs of water. There is something positive about that; it is not exactly conflict, but springs of water are given for refreshment, that the land should be fertile; it is on the positive side. We should not be content to say we have the Spirit. As redeemed, and as believers on the Lord Jesus Christ, we have the Spirit, but we want springs, the flow of the upper and nether springs, and we shall not be preserved from the failure of the book of Judges if we have not the springs really flowing. The great fruit of the Spirit is eternal life;
[p. 117] it is the demonstration of what the Spirit can do for the saints. Scripture says that eternal life is of the Spirit. “He that sows to the Spirit, from the Spirit shall reap eternal life”, Galatians 6:9. Caleb suffers no defeat; he is an overcomer. I trust we are anxious to be overcomers, lest the conflict find us out. If we do not overcome, we shall go under. Caleb never went under, and there is no need for us to go under. The Lord had to point out the sad condition of the assemblies in the book of Revelation, and He faithfully pointed out every defect. We shall see all the features of departure in this book of Judges, but He never left one assembly without an overcomer, showing that a state of things will never be permitted that will swamp what is of God.
If I am wrong at one stage I shall not be able to go on to the next. We see here the extraordinary power that there was with the people to deal with an extraordinary power of evil, and they secured things of great importance. Jerusalem was taken, and Hebron secured. It is a great thing to clear away all pretenders and opposers, and to secure a place where the Lord’s Name alone is to be honoured. Jerusalem in Scripture is the city of the great King, the place where Jehovah would set His Name. Then Hebron, meaning Company, would answer to the truth of fellowship. If we have what is due to the Lord’s Name first, then we can have the truth of fellowship.
What one has proved in the past makes one tremble; and conflict is testing, because it is easy to get into a spirit in conflict which is not of God. We see here that what is of the flesh comes down — the pretentiousness of the flesh even in the region of what is of God. There are things which exalt themselves against the knowledge of God. Such a man as Adoni-bezek had seventy kings under his table. He represents the extraordinary ascendency of the man after the flesh in a sphere which belonged to God, but when he comes to Jerusalem he dies. When what is due to the Lord’s Name is recognised, all that kind of thing dies. There was no repentance, but he recognised the justice of his punishment, and all those who come under the government of God will have to own the justice of it. God is not mocked. We need not think anything will fail to produce its appropriate fruit.
I have been thinking of the epistle of John in connection with Judges. John warns us against the inroads of the enemy, who has to be dispossessed, but he shows that we can have anything we want by asking. “Whatsoever we ask we receive from him, because we keep his commandments, and practise the things which are pleasing in his sight”, 1 John 3: 22. The Lord says, “If ye shall ask anything in my name, I will do it”, John 14:14. He does not say, I will give it consideration, but “I will do it”. It shows how well we are set up if identified with that Name. Then John dwells on love for the brethren. “We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love the brethren”, 1 John 3: 14. It is because we love God that we love the brethren.
The fact that a few saints can walk together without human order is marvellous. We can understand people keeping together with conditions of rule or worldly principles — friends, plenty of amusement, social links, etc. — but for people of different characters and temperaments to keep together in the truth is a great marvel; it is the power of God. No power could keep them together but the power of God.
We have seen that the failure of the church came in after the apostles passed away; here it is after the death of Joshua. Evidently the first sign of weakness is that they could not drive out the enemy, “the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron”; but in the same verse we read that “Jehovah was with Judah”. The power of God was there, but they did not take account of it, and I believe that was the first defection in the assembly — failure to take account of the power of God by the Spirit. If Jehovah was with His people, what were chariots of iron! They might as well have been made of tissue paper.
Judah failed to recognise the power of God as present by the Spirit. That was the initial failure of the church. The Spirit was with the people of God, though dishonoured and ignored. In the earliest writings that followed the days of the apostles, we do not find the recognition of the presence and power of the Spirit. It is a great thing to recognise that the power of the chariots of iron is nothing if God is dwelling in His people by the Spirit. John speaks of it in relation to many antichrists; but then he says, “Greater is he that is in you than he that is in the world”, 1 John 4:4.
The recognition of the presence of the Spirit would produce suitable conditions. Does not Paul bring it before the Corinthians on that line? He calls them to recognise the presence of the Spirit as the means to bring about definite suitable [p. 119] conditions. How could anyone recognise the presence of the Spirit in himself or in the assembly, without being powerfully affected? To recognise the presence of God, and not be affected, would be impossible. Even an unbeliever falls on his face; what then about a believer?
“The children of Benjamin did not dispossess the Jebusites, the inhabitants of Jerusalem; but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Benjamin in Jerusalem to this day”, verse 21. Jerusalem is the city of the great King, and it is the place where Jehovah sets His Name, and it is the place from which the word of Jehovah went forth. So it represents the rights of Christ. The Jebusites represent those powers of evil which would hinder the rights of Christ from being in exercise. They were the old inhabitants. It is not impossible for anything that has come into christendom to come in with us. We are not exempt or immune from anything. We are as much in danger of ignoring the presence of the Spirit as the early church. We know they did, and we are in the same danger, and the rights of Christ as King, Lord, Head, and Son over God’s house, are all set forth in Jerusalem; it is the centre of rule and divine influence. The Spirit is not taken account of now in christendom, and there are influences present which would challenge the rights of Christ. That largely opened the door to evil when it first came in amongst us. The Holy Spirit was only thought of as an influence, and people have prayed that the Spirit may be poured out. He was not only an influence but an absent influence in their thoughts.
Think of the rights of Christ as Lord and Head! Christendom is baptised, but what is baptism if there is no recognition of the rights of Christ? See what John says about commandments; we are apt not to think of them, for the word has a legal sound, but it belongs to Jerusalem. “Commandment” is an important word with John; no writer speaks so much of them. If christendom has departed from them, we have to recognise them as the things that must not be surrendered at any cost. It is love that is in authority; that is why His commandments are not grievous. There is not a single commandment that has not come with the authority of love. The One who commands is the One who died for me. What could be more touching!
The first weakness in the assembly after the death of the apostles was a failing to take account of the power of the [p. 120] Spirit there, and the second, in figure, is that there was a failure to dispossess the influences that stood against the rights of Christ.
Then, in connection with Joseph, Bethel comes into view — the house of God. “They went up against Bethel; and Jehovah was with them”, verse 22. It is remarkable that the Spirit of God tells us that Jehovah was with them. It seems to me to accentuate their failure. If Jehovah was with them, why did they want to solicit the help of a citizen, one of the inhabitants of the city? They solicited help from that which they were set to overthrow, and the result was they perpetuated what God was set to destroy. God would have Luz to disappear, and Bethel to be there instead. But the result of their getting help from this source was that another Luz was set up. Would not Jehovah have shown them the way into the city? If we solicit help from the world, we have to repay them. One good turn deserves another. They said, If you show the way we will show you kindness. It was a bargain. This man’s affections were not identified with Bethel, but with Luz; he loved the old place, and calls the new city Luz. It was different from Rahab; Rahab’s heart had been captured. This man’s heart was still in Luz, and he carried it with him; he built a city and called it Luz. He had no affection for the house of God. The soliciting of this man’s help perpetuated “unto this day” what God would have destroyed utterly.
Luz means bent, what is not straight. In christendom all the truth of Scripture is bent — all twisted and made to suit man, but in the house of God all must be straight. It has typical allusion to the way the truth has been distorted. If the Spirit is not taken account of, influences militate against the rights of Christ; the next thing is that the truth is bent, and made unsuitable for the house of God, which is the pillar and base of the truth. Scripture speaks of cutting in a straight line the word of truth; the truth is never bent. The idea of what is bent is that you go round about to reach God, and nothing like that suits the house of God. Holiness is there, the truth is there, and it is always straight. The Lord says of Himself, “He that is holy, he that is true”. Truth is never twisted; it is always straight.
The next one we read of is Manasseh. “And Manasseh did not dispossess Beth-shean and its dependent villages, nor Taanach and its dependent villages, nor the inhabitants of [p. 121] Dor and its dependent villages, nor the inhabitants of Ibleam and its dependent villages, nor the inhabitants of Megiddo and its dependent villages; and the Canaanites would dwell in that land. And it came to pass when Israel became strong, that they made the Canaanites tributary; but they did not utterly dispossess them”, verses 27, 28. We seem to go down one step at a time. They “would dwell”, suggesting an exercise of will which is allowed to be in the ascendant, the principle of allowing things to be determined by the will of man rather than by the will of the Lord. What man wishes is accepted as contributory. Help is accepted from the world; that which should be destroyed mercilessly is condoned, and allowed to be contributory.
There is a further step in verses 29 and 30 as to Ephraim and Zebulun. It says of each that “the Canaanites dwelt among them and became tributaries”. If we admit the principles of the world, if we tolerate them, they will soon dwell with us.
Then in verse 32 the Asherites dwelt among the Canaanites, the inhabitants of the land, and Naphtali dwelt among the Canaanites too. In figure the people of God are seen right down at the level of the world; not only are the principles of the world seen in the people, but they are dwelling in the world; it is the decline and fall of the assembly.
In Dan the inhabitants have the upper hand, and Dan is driven to the hill country. It is the history of the downfall of the assembly. The power of what is contrary to God is able to drive out the people of God. The hill-country has always been available; all through the dark ages when the world had got into the church, and the church into the world, there were those who lived in the hill country. Zacharias and Elizabeth lived there, and many went to visit them there. How beautifully people can talk who live in the hill country!
I think that Luke 1 is one of the most cheering chapters in Scripture. It was at the time when Israel was apostate — everything publicly was in the hands of the enemy, and we find people dwelling in the hill-country, their hearts full of divine actings, and in lowly dependence. These humble people unknown in the religious world, or regarded with contempt if they had been known, have the light of God with them in the hill-country. What God looks for is a poor and [p. 122] afflicted people. Bochim represents the right spirit in a day when the Christian profession has utterly failed.
I am not suggesting that Dan should have yielded to the enemy as he did, but simply to indicate that, however great the power of the enemy may be, he will always have to leave the hill country to the people of God. In a day of decline there will always be a hill country. The church histories men have written are the public history; what I want to know, and am expecting to read by and by in the world to come, is God’s church history of the spiritual work carried on in saints, of His own blessed and personal work in the face of all the hostile power of the world, the flesh and the devil; how he kept them in the hill country even in the darkest days, when the power of the enemy was at its highest.