DEUTERONOMY 2 AND 3
DEUTERONOMY 2 AND 3
We are told in chapter 2: 14 that the days from Kadesh-barnea to the crossing of the torrent Zered were thirty-eight years, and that during that period “the whole generation of the men of war was consumed from the midst of the camp, as Jehovah had sworn unto them”. The end of the generation of flesh and unbelief is thus briefly intimated, and then, in chapters 2 and 3, Moses review takes account of the unfailing goodness and blessing of Jehovah for forty years, and also of the victories and acquisition which had been secured by His power and favour on the eastward side of Jordan.
It is our privilege, in what answers to “the land of Moab”, to review under the instruction of Christ, not only manifestations of flesh and unbelief, which may have marked our past, but also the unfailing goodness of our God, and the victories which His grace has vouchsafed in the Spirit. “For Jehovah thy God hath blessed thee in all the work of thy hand. He hath known thy walking through this great wilderness: these forty years hath Jehovah thy God been with thee; thou hast lacked nothing” (chapter 2: 7). How blessed to review the wilderness as a place where the blessing and bounty of God have never failed, where His presence has been the sure pledge of the supply of every needed thing! Such an experience of God is surely the greatest possible encouragement to move boldly forward to the land of His purpose. Our Moses would lead us to [p. 18] take account, not only of the naughtiness and unbelief of our flesh, but of an infinite number of encouragements and blessings which have come to us through the faithfulness of our God, and which have evidenced His presence with us, and His care over us. Christ would remind us that we have not taken a step, or passed through a day of our wilderness history, that has not been marked by the care, bounty, and blessing of our God.
Then there were certain “brethren” who were not to be attacked — the children of Esau. They were not in the line of God’s testimony, they had not known deliverance from Egypt as Israel had, nor what it was to have the tabernacle in their midst, nor the exercises of a people and priesthood identified with the movements of the tabernacle of testimony in the wilderness. But they were to be regarded as “brethren” who had a portion assigned to them by God, and which they had occupied as a result of former conflicts in which Jehovah had destroyed certain enemies before them. This is deeply interesting and instructive, for there are those today who occupy precisely such a position. They are truly in family relationship with the people of God, and have promises of blessing — for “By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come” (Hebrews 11: 20) — and they hold territory which has been given to them by God, and gained through former conflicts and victories. But they have never really known deliverance from the world system, nor what it was to be identified with that divine system which was set forth typically in “the tabernacle of the testimony”. The reformation was a great battle, and it resulted in certain territory being possessed. No spiritual person can doubt that the victory in that conflict was given by God, and the ground won from the enemy was an assigned portion given by God. We have to recognise this, and not to “attack” our brethren who hold that ground. “They will be afraid of you; and ye shall be very guarded: attack them not”.
This is very instructive as shewing the kind of spirit God would have in His people whom He is preparing to enter into the full thought which is in the purpose of His love for them. He teaches us to regard as “brethren” many who have a portion which comes very far short of what is in His heart for His people. But they have something, and what they have is to be recognised as a God-given portion; they are not to be attacked or distressed. Some of the sects no doubt arose in the first place from a genuine desire to resist the enemy, and to hold something that was felt to be of God. There was conflict, and in result something was held, though it was far short of what was in God’s mind concerning the inheritance of His people. Whatever can be recognised as God-given is to be respected; there is to be no attempt to dispossess those who hold it. We are to regard them as “brethren” though they may be afraid of us; our great desire, indeed, should be that they might possess and enjoy the full wealth of all that is in God’s purpose for His people. It is very striking that such an instruction should come in at this point, just when the conflict for the possession of the land is to be entered on. It shews the kind of spirit God would have to be in His people towards “brethren” who are not walking with them, and who are not really in the line of the heavenly calling or of the divine testimony.
We may recall, however, that these very people who were to be regarded as “brethren”, and not to be attacked, shewed a very naughty and hostile spirit towards Israel — see Numbers 20: 14 - 21. And later in the history they became active adversaries (2 Chronicles 20: 10, 11). When God brings His testimony into view,
[p. 20] or causes His land to be possessed in any measure by His Israel, it becomes a test for the brethren who hold a portion which may have been God-given, but which is not the true or full thought of God for His people. And what comes out in the subsequent history shews that neither the children of Esau nor the children of Lot were sympathetic with what Jehovah was doing in and for Israel. Further movements of God, and especially the bringing out of His “whole counsel”, test the “brethren”, and, alas! they often awaken positive hostility. But if the “brethren” become hostile to what is of God they no longer have His support in holding what He may have given them in time past. Hence we find that the reformed Churches and the sects who, through past conflicts, did secure and hold something that was God-given, having now become hostile to the further spiritual movements of God, have lost their power to hold what was assigned to them by God in time past. They are being dispossessed by the enemy of all that they did hold from God, and in many cases hardly “so much as a foot-breadth” remains to them of what their fathers gained through conflict. Superstition and tradition on the one hand, and infidelity on the other, are rapidly stealing away from them all that they once had from God. It is the sad result, in the government of God, of an attitude of hostility to His truth and testimony as more fully developed by His Holy Spirit.
But we have to be “very guarded” not to “attack” any who are in possession of what is God-given, even though it may not be the full truth of the divine calling. God would not have us in a spirit of enmity against anything that is of Himself, wherever it may be. We do not want to forbid, or to minimize, anything that is of God. It is a comfort to know that our affections and prayers can go out to everything that is of God, even [p. 21] though it be not His full thought for His people. So that we regard as “brethren” the whole company of God’s children; they are our spiritual kindred. But the consciousness that we can regard affectionately and sympathetically all that is of God, wherever it may be, only intensifies the purpose of spiritual persons to stand wholly apart from what is of man.
God would have a spirit in His people which would tend to disarm the hostility of their “brethren”, and to make His Israel an attractive people. Our brethren may be afraid of us, but we are to manifest a brotherly spirit towards them. Christians generally are feeling that the brotherly spirit is greatly lacking; family affections and spiritual fellowship are fast dying out of the decadent Christian profession. In the midst of such conditions God would maintain the truth and the brotherly spirit as an attractive rallying point for all the “brethren”.
“Ye shall buy of them food for money, that ye may eat; and water shall ye also buy of them for money, that ye may drink; for Jehovah thy God hath blessed thee in all the work of thy hand” (chapter 2: 6, 7). God’s people are so wealthy through His blessing that they stand in no need of favours from any. They can move at their own charges; they come under no obligation either to the world, or to “brethren” who do not walk with them. It is sometimes thought that the “box” has not a spiritual character, and that it is an inferior item in the privilege and service of the saints. But if it speaks, as it surely does, of the love of the Lord’s people, and of their practical care for His interests, it is not an inferior item to Him. And even on the side of meeting necessary expenses for rent, light, etc., it speaks of the dignity, and independence of the world, which marks the assembly of God. That assembly moves through the present scene as a heavenly stranger, coming under no obligation to anyone, but providing for its own needs [p. 22] at its own cost, out of resources which are the fruit of the blessing of God. It is a sad thing when Christians give the impression, as they often do, that they need the contributions or charity of those around them. It is a poor testimony to the wealth of a people who profess to be blessed by God.
In what answers, spiritually, to “the land of Moab” the true Moses can recall past victories which have been gained by the people of God through His power and grace. Sihon the king of Heshbon and Og the king of Bashan had been overcome, and their land possessed. This was the beginning of the war of conquest; and it was the pledge of what Jehovah would do for His people (see chapter 2: 25; 3: 21,22). The “words of peace” sent to Sihon only brought out deep rooted hostility on his part; he would hold his land against Jehovah who alone had right to it. The flesh would hold territory which really belongs to God so that it shall not be divinely occupied. Sihon would seem to represent that energy of the flesh which would hold natural things and natural relationships for one’s own honour and renown. Og would represent, I think, the tendency in the flesh to hold these things in self indulgence; “his bedstead” is the only thing about him specially mentioned; he represents the holding of what we are and have in an easy-going way for our own pleasure.
Our bodies, and all natural relationships — whether that of wives and husbands, children or parents, servants or masters — are really territory which belongs to God, and can only rightly be held for Him. It is territory which has to be taken out of the power of the flesh, and held in the power of the Spirit for God. Indeed all that we possess here is to be held for God. The cattle and the spoil of the cities would speak, perhaps, of material things, or that which in itself is “the mammon of unrighteousness”, but which is now to be held under stewardship [p. 23] to God for our own future advantage. These things belong to the eastward side of Jordan; they are not in Canaan, but they indicate territory that has to be taken out of the power of the flesh and held for God. Such victories are a great and divine encouragement to move forward into that spiritual territory which lies on the other side of Jordan — the sphere which God’s love and purpose have ever in view as the proper inheritance of His people. The power of the flesh would hold our bodies and all natural and material things in some way for self, but we have had to get the victory over that power so that they might be held by the Spirit for God. Sihon would represent energetic flesh; the poets celebrated his exploits (Numbers 21: 26 - 30); Og typifies self indulgent flesh. All the cities and towns would speak of the kingdoms of those two giants in detail. But Moses, reviewing the past, could say, “There was not one city too strong for us: Jehovah our God delivered all before us” (chapter 2: 36). It corresponds with Romans 8 where we see a people characterised by the indwelling of the Spirit of God, and who have divine power to overcome and set aside the flesh.
In what answers to “the land of Moab” the Lord can review victories which have been gained over the flesh by His people. He loves to remind us of them, for they are the pledge of victory in conflicts which are yet to come. Have we really proved that “there was not one city too strong for us”? There is not one bit of the power of the flesh that is too strong to be overcome by the Christian walking in the Spirit. But how far have we proved it; so that our Moses can remind us of former triumphs as indicating how God has been with us and for us? There are times when the flesh seems to be specially active in its opposition, and this is often [p. 24] when there is a real desire to be pleasing to God. But it is encouraging to know that God intends to give us the victory in the power of His Spirit. “That he might give him into thy hand, as it is this day” (verse 30). Melanchthon had to learn that “old Adam was too strong for young Melanchthon”, and I suppose most of us can understand his experience, but we could not say that “old Adam” was too strong to be overcome by one walking in the Spirit.
As these cities “fortified with high walls, gates, and bars”, fell one after another, how the people would be encouraged to find that Jehovah was really for them. And as one form of the power of the flesh after another is overcome through the Spirit there is great encouragement with regard to conflicts that are still before us. Everything that has proved to us that God has been with us in the wilderness, and every victory that has enabled us to hold any ground for Him is so much encouragement to pass on into the spiritual sphere of purposed blessing in Christ. Surely there are some spiritual victories and conquests in our past history which the Lord can remind us of, and which He would have us to review with Him! The result of giving place to the Spirit is that the flesh is practically set aside, and the saints come out as sons and children of God. The responsible life is, so to speak, wrested out of the power of the flesh, and held by the Spirit for God. That is territory possessed on the eastward side of Jordan.
We learn from chapter 3: 12 - 22 that Jehovah gave that land to be possessed by the Reubenites, the Gadites, and half the tribe of Manasseh. There is no suggestion here that Reuben and Gad were wrong in desiring to have their possession in that land; we are not told here that they said, “Bring us not over the Jordan” (Numbers 32: 5). It is seen here as typical of territory [p. 25] which God would have to be possessed by His people, though not the resurrection or heavenly side. It is the region of natural things and relationships, the sphere of responsible life, and it is the will of God that it should be possessed and held by His people as from Him, and for Him.
The failure of Reuben and Gad did not lie in taking possession “on this side the Jordan eastward”, but in being content to have their inheritance on that side only. They did not value that which it was the delight of God to give; they thought of what, suited them to receive rather than of what suited Him to give. God would have His people to occupy the ground covered by the epistle to the Romans, but not to be content with that only, but also to pass on to the ground covered by the epistles to the Colossians and Ephesians. How many are content to know the justifying grace of God, and to prove the favour and mercy of God in their circumstances here — in their families, in their businesses, in the whole sphere of natural relationships and things on the earth! God would, indeed, have us to occupy that ground as divinely given territory to be held for Him. He would have us to piously recognise His goodness and favour in that region. But He would have us, above all things, to desire to enter upon the present possession of that wondrous region of spiritual blessing in Christ Jesus which is typified by the land over Jordan. It is the purpose of His love to give us that land for our possession and enjoyment, and it is a very serious matter to stop short of it. We have often been told that those who said, “Bring us not over the Jordan” were the first to be carried into captivity.
At the end of chapter 3 Moses brings before the people how intensely his own desires were set on the “good land”. “Let me go over, I pray thee, and see [p. 26] the good land that is beyond the Jordan, that goodly mountain, and Lebanon”. Christ would impress us, as we come under His instruction, with what the “good land” was to Him. How He cherished every precious thought of the love of God! It is written that “they despised the pleasant land” (Psalm 106: 24), and this is true still of many of the people of God. But to Christ “the pleasant land” was ever in view. Coming into the world what He had before Him was the will of God, and God’s precious thoughts man-ward. As Psalm 40 tells us prophetically, His language was, “Behold I come, in the volume of the book it, is written of me — To do thy good pleasure, my God, is my delight”. He had before Him the innumerable thoughts of God manward, including all that was typically set forth in “the pleasant land”. All that would be secured in Himself as risen and glorified was ever before His heart, but His own sufferings and death intervened as a divine necessity. The “good land” was “beyond Jordan”. He must pass through “the suffering of death” in order to reach “the joy lying before him”, and to secure those who should be joint-heirs with Him. And this is intimated in Moses saying, “But Jehovah was wroth with me on your account, and did not hear me” (Chapter 3: 26). Moses does not speak here as one suffering the governmental consequences of his own failure, though we get that later in the book. It is here “on your account” . That is, it is a typical reference to what, Christ suffered vicariously when as the holy Sin-bearer He was not heard (Psalm 22: 1, 2). Moses, as a type of Christ according to flesh, could not enter the land; He must come under wrath on account of the people. Oh! how much has our perversity cost Christ! He would remind us of it to deeply affect, and subdue our hearts.
[p. 27] But if Christ according to flesh has had to undergo “the suffering of death” on our account, He has come forth as the risen, living One to go over before His people, and to put them in possession of the “good land”, and Joshua is a type of Him in this blessed character. (See chapter 3: 28.)
Moses being permitted to see the land from “the top of Pisgah” would intimate how the whole range of purposed blessing for man was in the view of Christ before His death. But His own death was a necessity ever present to His thoughts — the Jordan was between Him and the fruition of all the precious and holy purposes of divine love. We cannot read the Gospels without being made conscious of this, or without seeing how little His disciples entered into it. They thought that Christ according to flesh could introduce the kingdom and all its blessedness. But this ignored the whole moral state of Israel — their own state according to flesh. On their account, and on ours, His death was a necessity.
Hence in the Gospels all is prospective, and thus they answer in a remarkable way to Deuteronomy, where the “good land” is not actually possessed, but is immediately in prospect. The farthest point reached in Deuteronomy, except prophetically at the end of the book, is Moses’ view from the top of Pisgah. In the Gospels we see the whole of the “good land” as in the view of Christ — the kingdom of the heavens, the kingdom of God, the presence of the Holy Spirit the Comforter, eternal life, the assembly, the full blessing of men according to the thought and purpose of divine love — but for it to be entered upon by the people of God Moses must be succeeded by Joshua. Christ according to flesh — the holy One of God — must come under what was due to man as in sinful flesh, that as the risen, and even the ascended One, He might “go over” and put His people “in possession of the land”. The presence of the Son of God on earth brought the whole purposed blessing of God for men immediately into view, just as the whole good land came under view when Moses stood on Pisgah, but that blessing required the death and resurrection of Christ, and His glorification at God’s right hand, to be accomplished that the Holy Spirit might be given. The death of Christ on man’s account was a divine necessity if men were to enter into that blessing as led by Him the risen One.
According to flesh the Shepherd was smitten, and the sheep of the flock scattered abroad (Matthew 26: 31). Messiah was cut off and had nothing (Daniel 9: 26). The things concerning Him had an end (Luke 22: 37). But His surrender of everything here had its answer in all being secured by Him on the resurrection side as the true Joshua. The apprehension of this is of the utmost importance in view of a right understanding of God’s ways, and of all that is set forth in “the good land that is beyond the Jordan”.