REVIVAL (2)
REVIVAL (2)
JT We read chapter 29 this morning in order to bring out the idea of revival as instanced in the reign of Hezekiah. It was pointed out that he began at the mature age of twenty-five, and immediately, we are told, he “opened the doors of the house of Jehovah, and repaired them”. I thought that the opening of the doors corresponded to Philadelphia where the Lord Jesus speaks of Himself as “the holy, the true; he that has the key of David, he who opens”, Revelation 3: 7. He has moved in our times in the way of revival in the past century and opened the doors of the house of God to us. It says, “he who opens and no one shall shut”. It would mean the entrance into the divine thought, the whole scope of the Lord’s mind opened up. Then the cleansing of the house engaged us, how Hezekiah brought the priests and Levites into the open place eastward and spoke to them authoritatively as to their service and the need of cleansing, confessing the guilt of those that preceded him. Then he spoke to them as his sons in a fatherly way, in their dignity as ministers of Jehovah. Then we had the actual account of the cleansing, and the provision made by the king and his princes for the service of God to be resumed; four creatures, seven of each, for the burnt-offering and the sin-offering, so that the service of God was resumed. The burnt-offering began and the song of the Lord began and proceeded. We ended with the joy: “Hezekiah rejoiced”, it says in the last verse, “and all the people, that God had prepared the people; for the thing was done suddenly”. It was a divine movement, it was not any effort on man’s part to work up a revival. It was God’s work and His people were ready, He prepared them indeed.
[p. 28] Hence we have in chapter 29: 10 the great fundamental position of revival, things are being done according to order, the saints are being stirred up to give so that there is wealth and joy; in fact it is brought out that “God had prepared the people”, a very great matter.
Now what we have to look at next in the revival is the ordered feasts, what characterises the dispensation in the way of stated feasts, beginning with the passover. If there be a revival, God would have things in some sense in keeping with the whole dispensation. There is that which distinguishes our dispensation from the past one and from the future one. I suggested reading chapter 30 to show that we have now arrived at the features which characterise the whole dispensation in the sense of appointed feasts.
AB It says at the close of chapter 29, “And the service of the house of Jehovah was set in order”; not exactly the house but the service.
JT Very good, preparing for what we are saying. I think God is concerned now with the features of the dispensation. Each dispensation has its own features, and ours has its features. This chapter would provide for that.
JWD What is meant by the expression, “all Israel and Judah” (verse 1)?
JT It is a universal thought. There is only one assembly; the revival is not a partisan matter. It took place of course in a very small way in certain countries, but it spread out to all Israel, to the whole assembly. God has nothing less than that in His mind. It would show us that no movement of God is partisan, but the whole assembly must be in mind. The assembly gives character to the dispensation; we must have the whole thought.
SMcC That would be in mind in the thought of rallying to Jerusalem. It says in the end of verse 3,
“[p. 29] Neither had the people been gathered together to Jerusalem”.
JT In the end of verse 5 it says, “because they had not held it for a long time as it was written”. They may have held it but it was not held “as it was written”. The idea of Jerusalem would be taken up from Exodus 20: 24: “In all places where I shall make my name to be remembered, I will come unto thee, and bless thee”. That was where the holy convocations were to be held three times in the year. There were seven of them, but three of them were selected according to Deuteronomy 16 as representing the spiritual side of the feasts that were all to be held as appointed. So the position is maintained, the dispensation is maintained in the recognition of these feasts.
GAT Would you say cleansing must take place before this chapter could come in, as we had this morning? Evil must be judged and put away.
JT That is the teaching of chapter 29, and is encouraging to look at. There are healthy conditions in the way of wealth, spiritual wealth, so that God is served in chapter 29. Now He would have recourse to His special appointments in the way of public convocations, what is in keeping with the dispensation, and on that account I think the Spirit of God has greatly stressed the Lord’s supper for us. It has a greater place now perhaps than it had in the revival.
JB Why are Ephraim and Manasseh not mentioned in Israel? It says that he “wrote letters also to Ephraim and Manasseh”. Why is that?
JT Ephraim and Manasseh were representing the tribe of Joseph. Joseph had the birthright, given to him on account of Reuben’s failure (1 Chronicles 5: 1); that is, they came into a leading place in the dispensation of old, and there was evidently rivalry between them and Judah. Ephraim and Manasseh [p. 30] stand for one thought, that is leadership. But God had recourse to Judah, and Judah got the first place, that is through David. I think the allusion is to any rival elements; they are to be met and if possible to be won over in a righteous way. I think that is why these two are mentioned specially. The general thought is that “Hezekiah sent to all Israel and Judah, and wrote letters also to Ephraim and Manasseh”; they were specially singled out for the letters, as if God would say to any rival element. You are wanted, if you can come on God’s terms.
JWD In Luke 22 following the inauguration of the Supper there was also strife amongst them as to who should be the greatest. Is that a similar thought?
JT That is good. It shows the readiness of the flesh to show itself in rivalry, “Be not overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good”, Romans 12: 21. That is what comes out here.
JRH Would you say Hezekiah had a great spiritual unity in view in which Ephraim was not to envy Judah?
JT It is anticipative of that, the final restoration of Israel. Ezekiel brings that out. They are to be brought together as one to Christ, one stick, “Ephraim will not envy Judah, and Judah will not trouble Ephraim”, Isaiah 11: 13. Hezekiah would show he is in keeping with that; he would have them on divine terms. So it says that “they established a decree to make proclamation throughout Israel from Beer-sheba even to Dan, that they should come to hold the passover to Jehovah the God of Israel, at Jerusalem; because they had not held it for a long time as it was written. And the couriers went with the letters from the king and his princes throughout Israel and Judah, and according to the commandment of the king, saying, Ye children of Israel, return to Jehovah the God of Abraham, Isaac, and [p. 31] Israel, and he will return to the remnant of you that are escaped out of the hand of the kings of Assyria. And be not like your fathers and like your brethren, who transgressed against Jehovah the God of their fathers, so that he gave them up to desolation, as ye see. Now, harden not your necks, as your fathers; yield yourselves to Jehovah, and come to his sanctuary, which he has [p. 43] sanctified for ever; and serve Jehovah your God, that the fierceness of his anger may turn away from you. For if ye return to Jehovah, your brethren and your children shall find compassion with those that have carried them captive, so that they shall come again unto this land; for Jehovah your God is gracious and merciful, and will not turn away his face from you, if ye return to him” (verses 5 - 9), a very remarkable appeal from Hezekiah in the grace and in the Spirit of Christ, overcoming rivalry in these words conveyed. There is no compromising the truth. We love our brethren and we want them on divine terms and only on divine terms. There is every encouragement to return; the Lord is ready to help.
JW Is this a city matter? The posts passed through from city to city in conveyance of the message. What bearing has that on what you say?
JT I suppose cities are representative of local responsibility. A city is not like a nation, a city is local. It may be metropolitan but it has local responsibility I think. What do you think yourself?
JW I thought so. The message would come to the local position.
JT The Lord said, “Ye shall not have completed the cities of Israel until the Son of man be come” (Matthew 10: 23), meaning that the cities as visited would represent the whole country. He sent the seventy out “two and two before his face into every city and place where he himself was about to come”, Luke 10: 1.
[p. 32] Rem The Lord would adjust all the saints. Each Lord’s day morning is a fresh occasion for adjustment in the locality.
JT That is a right feeling with which to sit down at the Lord’s supper, to remember our brethren, those who are not present. But we can go on because of those who are present. “all Israel that were present”, 2 Chronicles 31: 1. But you miss those who are absent, as the Lord Himself said, “But the nine, where are they?”. But you never want them on the ground of compromise, of accommodation, always on divine terms.
Rem At Corinth matters had to be judged. They were saying, “I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, and I of Christ”, 1 Corinthians 1: 12. Until that had been dealt with the Supper could not be properly taken as he describes in chapter 11.
JT That is a fact, the divisions were there, they came together in divisions and they carried the divisions into the meeting. It brings out the discipline of God. Moreover Paul said, “it is not to eat the Lord’s supper”. Hence we are clear about that side, no party can have the Lord’s supper; it is a universal thought and belongs to the whole assembly seen in any locality. But “there exist divisions among you”, he says. “When ye come therefore together into one place, it is not to eat the Lord’s supper”.
CHH I was wondering if this would correspond in any way to Paul’s final invitation to Israel in the Acts, inviting the whole nation into what was to characterise christianity, to come into the new dispensation. They rejected it, but some received it. When he was in his own hired house he sent for them and gave them a final word.
JT “The Jews went away, having great reasoning among themselves”, Acts 28: 29. He had quoted Isaiah 6: 9, 10 to them. It is a judicial pronouncement.
[p. 33] People may go on in their position to a point in which the matter is fixed and there is no hope for them. So that they went away, “Paul having spoken one word” to them from Isaiah. This is a judicial pronouncement as to Israel being shut out from their privileges now because of their hardness. So he says, “Lo, we turn to the nations”, (Acts 13: 46); and “This salvation of God has been sent to the nations; they also will hear it”, Acts 28: 28. That is the position now, a fixed state of things. Since Paul said that, the Jews as such have been left under the governmental dealings with limitations of God. It is a very solemn matter. It fits in here with Hezekiah; it implies that if Ephraim and Manasseh are to have part in the passover it must be on the divine terms.
SP Would these letters in going out to all these cities throughout the land carry the moral influence of Jerusalem as connected with this revival?
JT God had not yet rejected Jerusalem, He was still owning it. It was the place where He had placed His name according to Exodus 20: 24. So that the door was open: “He that has the key of David, he who opens and no one shall shut, and shuts and no one shall open”, Revelation 3: 7. This is an open door to them still. And so in Laodicea, “Behold, I stand at the door and am knocking; if any one hear my voice and open the door, I will come in unto him and sup with him, and he with me”, Revelation 3: 20. He is knocking at the door of Ephraim and Manasseh. Who will open to him? Some of them do, that is a comfort.
EGMcA Is the reference to gathering to Jerusalem the principle that overcomes any independent local features? We are together on the Lord’s day morning in the light of the whole assembly, shutting out any local independence.
JT That is important here because Jerusalem is the appointed place. It goes back to Exodus 20: 24,
[p. 34] where the service of God is formally set up: “Where I shall make my name to be remembered”; and there is a description there of the altar of earth and the altar of stone. God is insisting on what He will have now. Any local party might say, We will have the Lord’s supper, and of course they could in the outward form; but according to what is just remarked we can say definitely that it is not the Lord’s supper. It is on party lines. Jerusalem meets the divine thought as to where it stands, anything else is spurious.
JWD Do you think Jerusalem stands for Paul’s ministry?
JT I think so. David went to Jerusalem “against the Jebusites, the inhabitants of the land”, and took the city. It had a great place in the mind of God. In Melchizedek we have the thought of Jerusalem; we have it in Joshua, in Judges, and we have it in 1 Samuel. David took the head of the giant there. It is the divine position in the mind of God that He never gives up, and spiritual understanding lays hold of it so that anything else is spurious. Samaria was a rival to Jerusalem. The woman said to the Lord, “Ye say that in Jerusalem is the place where one must worship”. The Lord said, We say right, that is the divine mind. But then that went just so far, and we understand now what it means when He says, “The hour is coming when ye shall neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem worship the Father”, John 4: 21. That is, the geographical thought is not reckoned any more, but the spiritual thought is, and Jerusalem is Jerusalem still. It represents the place where God causes His name to be remembered. Divine ‘cause’ is not what any man undertakes to do; as in the end of chapter 29, it is the people that “God had prepared”. God must be the great cause of all these matters: “where I shall make my name to be remembered, I will come unto thee, and bless thee”. I might say, I am going to start a meeting. That does not count at all, that is spurious.
EGMcA “And they rose up and took away the altars that were in Jerusalem; and they took away all the incense-altars, and cast them into the torrent Kidron”. Is that the effect of it?
JT “The torrent Kidron” is, I think, the moral side of the matter, how all these evils are dealt with. It is not simply Christ, but the death of Christ, everything must conform to that. So that our fellowship is the fellowship, the true fellowship, it is the fellowship of God’s Son, the fellowship of His death, and the fellowship of the Spirit.
Ques “We, being many, are one loaf”, 1 Corinthians 10: 17. Is that the universal thought?
JT Yes, ‘we’ not ‘ye’; it is the universal thought.
JWD “This is my body, which is for you”, 1 Corinthians 11: 24. Is “you” the local thought?
JT It is more the gentiles there. In the way it is put in Corinthians it is for the gentiles, for such as they, I think. It is not ‘given’ there, but “for you”; it is our portion as well as that of those that were at Jerusalem with the twelve.
Ques Are you suggesting that the Lord’s supper is not optional with me?
JT Oh no, divine things are never optional. All divine requirements are imperative.
GAT In verse 10 there is one class of people who “mocked them”, and in verse 11 another class who humbled themselves. Would they be the class who can partake of the Supper rightly?
JT In verse 11 they open their doors, “Behold, I stand at the door and am knocking; if any one hear my voice and open the door, I will come in unto him”, Revelation 3: 20. In verse 10 the couriers “passed from city to city through the country of [p. 36] Ephraim and Manasseh, even to Zebulun; but they laughed them to scorn and mocked them”. That was the general attitude. But then verse 11 says, “Nevertheless certain of Asher and Manasseh and of Zebulun humbled themselves and came to Jerusalem”. That is a comfort and I think should stimulate us to keep on, to put the truth before our brethren who are turned aside. Some “humbled themselves”; even if it is only one it is worth while.
JW In view of being brought into “the unity of the faith”, Ephesians 4: 13. God gave them “one heart” (verse 12).
JT Quite so, that is very good. “The hand of God was also upon Judah to give them one heart to do the commandment of the king and of the princes, by the word of Jehovah. And there assembled at Jerusalem much people to hold the feast of unleavened bread in the second month, a very great congregation”. So that we need not be discouraged.
EGMcA What bearing has this feast of unleavened bread in this chapter on the inside clearance of what is evil in the house of God in the previous chapter? Is this more the external side of the truth?
JT I think it is the external position, as in 1 Corinthians. Galatians and Ephesians are more the inside position. I think God is concerned about having the dispensation restored in its orderliness; that is to characterise the dispensation publicly.
Rem We need some more help on that matter as to whether the Supper is optional or whether it should be regular with those breaking bread.
JT It is not optional; and those who think it is and sometimes refrain from taking it, those who are nominally in fellowship, may think that they are immune from judgment because they are not doing anything wrong in a positive way. But chapter 9 of [p. 37] Numbers would show that one who fails to keep the passover — one who can do it and does not — shall, after allowing him full grace to come in the second month instead of the first month, be cut off; cut off not because of what he is doing but because of what he is not doing.
GAT Is it your thought that if I wilfully stay away from the Supper, maybe for a few Lord’s days and then go back again, I should be dealt with on that account?
JT Well, of course it is a question of what is underneath an attitude like that. No chapters suggest more grace than the chapters we are reading. Numbers 9 is a drastic description as to delinquents, those who are delinquent in regard to what marks the dispensation. The passover was the outstanding convocation, the first one; anyone who was delinquent there was cut off most drastically. He is simply cut off. But if it was a case of one Lord’s day or two or three, that would need to be inquired into. Each case has to be dealt with separately as it comes up, according to the facts governing it. The Lord looks to the local brethren for discernment in connection with such; it would be a question of judging the attitude.
Ques Is local administration carried on on the basis of precedent?
JT Precedent has something to do with it. The word ‘precedent’ has a great place in legal administration in the world. What one judge allows is for another to act upon and what one court holds is held by another to act upon. But when we come to divine things the only precedent we can go by is what we have recorded in Scripture. The book of the Acts is peculiarly a book of precedents rather than injunctions, not what we are enjoined to do, but what was done. It is what was done by the apostles and early brethren. It is for us to discern and compare [p. 38] what may exist now with what is written; the whole position reverts to priestly discernment. Is this the precedent we can go by? Therefore precedent can only apply up to a point; what goes with it is the discernment of the priests locally and their judgment. “Why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right?” Luke 12: 57. Whatever others think, do ye what is right, that is a charge put on the local company. Therefore we have to consider the facts as well as the precedent and the injunctions governing it. I think it is important in assembly administration as to what we are governed by. It may be that London has done this or that, but that will not do in itself. We first have to determine the facts of the case. The types show that these facts have to be weighed in a priestly way; priests are to do things; that is the spiritual element. There must always be a spiritual lead in a local meeting; we are not to be communistic. A local lead is always contemplated. We are told in Acts 14 that Paul and Barnabas went away “having chosen them elders in each assembly”, meaning, We are going back to Antioch and we shall not be here to help the brethren, but we will elect these elders, persons who are qualified to rule, that is to give a spiritual lead in the locality. So that in Derbe or Lystra if anything came up amongst them they would not necessarily have to write to Paul about it, although he would be glad to answer their questions. The first epistle to the Corinthians was an answer to inquiry largely. He is ready to answer their questions, but then the idea is that they are able to deal with matters. The Lord would be with them. These elders are definitely selected by the apostles to keep things going according to God. Therefore when a matter comes up it is for them to determine the facts and weigh them and then apply the principle, the divine instruction given covering this particular matter. And I think it is of [p. 39] vast importance that we should know how to deal with matters in each local company.
CHH That necessitates spirituality more than gift.
JT Well, it does; eldership is no question of gift, it is divine choice. God puts a man forward because by his qualifications he is manifestly suited for the service.
Rem In John 8 the case brought before the Lord indicates that the priestly element was lacking in connection with the woman. They were not able to settle the case themselves.
JT Quite so.
SMcC If there are unsettled issues in our localities it would be a great exercise to those who are supposed to give a lead in the matter.
JT The Lord would encourage us in our localities to settle matters. For instance, if it was a question of ordinary practical righteousness, set the least esteemed in the assembly to handle that. Remember we are to judge angels; we are to judge the world. Why cannot we learn to judge now? The Lord would put that upon us; we ought to be able to look after matters. Not that the apostle would not answer their inquiries, but still the assemblies were set up with elders. I believe the Lord would help us to determine the facts and then to apply divine principles.
CHH Something too difficult might occur amongst the tribes for the local judge to determine. In that case they were to send for the judge who would be “in those days”.
JT That is good. There are not only elders, they being local, but there are persons who are gifted and available universally. There is the gift of government, for instance, and persons with the word of wisdom ought to be used, if available, whether local or otherwise.
JWD [p. 40] The elders are more connected with discipline, not with matters connected with the public framework of the truth.
JT Quite so; so they chose elders in each assembly. Titus was to “establish elders in each city”, Titus 1: 5. The elder in a city was to have jurisdiction in his own city. In Acts 14 they chose elders, as if to say, We want local companies able to stand on their own feet and look after matters. God said “I ... taught Ephraim to walk” (Hosea 11: 3); and we want local meetings to walk. Not that they cannot write and ask questions, they can; but the responsibility attaches to local persons.
CHH Do you make a distinction between the elders in Titus and the elders in each assembly?
JT In Acts 14 it is just elders in each assembly, but in Titus we have a further thought of ordaining elders in every city. So that if there is a subdivision in the city all the elders in the city would have rule there; the elder in the city has rule in the city.
Ques Is not the thought of an elder that he takes care of matters so as not to burden the assembly with too many unnecessary details?
JT Quite so. Confidence enables us to settle a great many things without going to the assembly at all. The assembly is the last resource; that is what Matthew 18 would teach us. Still, we must not be settling things in the care meeting, or have leading brothers settling matters among themselves; we must always have the assembly before us.
Ques Peter tells the elders to “Shepherd the flock of God”, 1 Peter 5: 2.
JT They were to be examples to the flock. Our brother here wants to know more about why the Lord said in His message to Paul, “This is my body, which is for you”. The word ‘given’ is not there in 1 Corinthians 11, it is just “for you”. I think the Lord would convey to the gentiles at that time that [p. 41] He was thinking of them as well as of the Jewish christians.
JW Would it be the truth of Paul’s ministry finding expression in that way, in the “you”, Paul being the apostle of the gentiles?
JT I think the Lord had that in mind. Paul says, “For I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you”, 1 Corinthians 11: 23. The Lord would have in mind that the gentiles had an equal place in His affections with the Jewish christians, because the primary introduction of the Lord’s supper was in connection with the Jewish remnant.
CHH Why does the passover set forth here in chapter 30 exceed anything which Moses ever wrote? Would it be something similar to 1 Corinthians 5 extending to the Lord’s supper? Here they had peace-offerings, heave-offerings and burnt-offerings.
JT I think Deuteronomy would furnish some instruction for this, there were other offerings besides the passover lamb itself. It seems that there is increase in the passover, and the Lord partook of it at the last passover supper with all that entered into it. It would include all that entered into it in the way of spiritual addition, because we have things added later that are not mentioned in Exodus. As to the Lord’s supper, we know that features are added to it in the Lord’s message to Paul that we do not get at the beginning. For instance, he would decry the Lord’s supper being held house-wise; not that a brother’s house could not be the meeting room, but he would decry the thought of a christian adding the Lord’s supper to one of his own meals, which I think was a custom at the beginning, according to 1 Corinthians 11. Paul dissociates the Lord’s supper from their houses; he says, “Have ye not then houses for eating and drinking?” (verse 22). It is remarkable how he connects the assembly with the Lord’s body in a peculiar way.
[p. 42] Ques Would you help us a little more about the houses?
JT They were partaking of the Lord’s supper in relation to ordinary meals, and they were putting those who had no houses to shame and despising the assembly of God, “Have ye not then houses for eating and drinking?”, he says. Ordinary household matters should not come into the assembly at all. He dissociates the assembly from all household influences; the Lord’s supper belongs properly to the assembly and cannot be taken in any private way.
CHH The additional thought is in 1 Corinthians 10, “We, being many, are one loaf, one body”. That is not given in the gospels.
SMcC Supposing there was a brother living in a certain locality isolated from the brethren; would it be right to visit him and take the Supper with him?
JT That would need to be inquired into; it is a question of the history of the place. Supposing the assembly had been there and had dwindled down, and perhaps there were only one or two: you would have to consider whether the Lord would still recognise them; and if there are any there, why is there not the Lord’s supper? I am only saying these matters need careful consideration. You cannot lay down what should happen, it is a question of the conditions there.
CHH “Come and let us return unto Jehovah, for he hath torn, and he will heal us; he hath smitten, and he will bind us up. After two days will he revive us; on the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live before his face”, Hosea 6: 1, 2. Might revival be on this line?
JT Quite so, “Return to Jehovah”, that is the word here. They wrote letters that they should come to Jerusalem, as we read it already, “Harden not your necks, as your fathers; yield yourselves to Jehovah, and come to his sanctuary, which he has sanctified for ever; and serve Jehovah your God, that the fierceness of his anger may turn away from you. For if ye return to Jehovah, your brethren and your children shall find compassion with those that have carried them captive, so that they shall come again unto this land”. According to the state of our souls God will act in a remarkable way with the very “powers that be” to help us. The point is, “if ye return”; there is needed a state of soul to come back to God, to His sanctuary, a most touching appeal to any one who has turned his back on the truth.
EP Would it fit in with the thought of Psalm 122: 5: “For there are set thrones for judgment, the thrones of the house of David”?
JT Just so.
AHP I was wondering whether what is being said would tend to help us as to the dignity of the local assembly, and then as to the local assembly recognising the dignity of the assembly in its universal setting.
JT What we are at here is the importance of returning, and the ministry of the Lord would help us in our attitude toward persons who are turned away. I think Hezekiah’s letters here are very beautiful and helpful and they are touching. We want you all back, he is saying, Jerusalem is Jerusalem still; God has not changed His mind about it, that is where He has recorded His name, where Israel’s males came up three times in a year. The first convocation is the passover. Here it is! Why should you not have part in this? Why should you be exempt? He encourages them all, saying, “If ye return to Jehovah, your brethren and your children shall find compassion with those that have carried them captive, so that they shall come again unto this land; for Jehovah your God is gracious and merciful, and will not turn away his face from you, if ye return to him”. It is a most appealing word,
[p. 44] and if we regard it God will act in our circumstances. If I move in this way toward God others will be helped; they will take account of what I am doing and it will help others to do the same thing.
GAT What you say is very encouraging, as to what we find when we return. I have to go to my brethren in this day and what should I expect there?
JT The thing is that the saints reflect what is in the mind of God. The assembly is intended to reflect the grace of heaven, so a returning one finds the grace of heaven amongst the saints. I think that is what the Lord meant in John 20: 23, “whose soever sins ye remit”; grace is in the assembly.
EP In his second epistle Paul is concerned that that spirit should be amongst the saints at Corinth. I was thinking of the personal appeal of Paul, “I ... entreat you by the meekness and gentleness of the Christ”, 2 Corinthians 10: 1.
JT Quite so.
SP Would you suggest that in Ezra there was a movement in the hearts of the people in captivity before there was a movement in the heart of Cyrus sovereignly?
JT Exactly. God moves with us and then with the rulers; the issue is in the state of the people. If the state is right with us God will move. I have thought a great deal of that in connection with our brethren on the Continent now. The question arises — Is the state of the people right? If the people are right God works with the rulers.
HB Would you say those who have been turned aside may be reached with this message?
JT Yes. The post here is rather an official courier, it would not be just any messenger at all. You may be sure Hezekiah selected the right people, spiritual men, to go with this message. I believe it would refer today to the ministry that is current amongst us. The work of those who have the truth [p. 45] is largely amongst our brethren who have turned aside, to get them back. The Lord is ready to receive them: “Behold, I stand at the door and am knocking; if any one hear my voice and open the door, I will come in”, Revelation 3: 20. There are not only knocks; many have the knocks, that is, bereavements, sickness, financial troubles and what not; those are the knocks but the voice is not heard in them. Then, “if any one hear my voice” — it is not the knock, it is the voice of Christ that appeals to me — “and open the door, I will come in unto him and sup with him, and he with me”. That “he with me” would mean that He would bring me into the assembly.
CHH Would it be similar to a tree cut down, yet its roots are in the ground? The ministry is capable of restoring one if the roots are in the ground.
JT That is worth considering. The actual word is, “There is hope for a tree, if it be cut down it will sprout again”, Job 14: 7. There are other references which bear on it, as in Ecclesiastes 11: 3, “in the place where the tree falleth, there it shall be”. That is, it would finally be found there. But Job says there is hope for a tree if it is cut down, that is, some hand has acted on it. A fall does not mean that any hand has acted on it, it falls because of decay or rottenness. Wherever it falls its position is fixed, “there it shall be”. But if a divine hand is operating on it, there is hope of it even if it lies there. It is worth looking at Job 14: 7 - 9: “it will sprout again, and its tender branch will not cease; though its root grow old in the earth, and its stock die in the ground, yet through the scent of water it will bud, and put forth boughs like a young plant”. It is a very remarkable thing, I think; it is the difference between a person who falls through moral decay, so that there is nothing to support it — it goes and there it is — and one who is cut down. There is hope for that [p. 46] one; God is cutting down a live tree; there is something there that God is dealing with. It is in the ground. It says, “Though its root grow old in the earth, and its stock die in the ground”, yet there is something in it. Why did any hand cut it down if not for a purpose? If you apply it to God, there is hope for it; if you see God is dealing with a man governmentally, judicially, there is hope for him. He has the sense of scent, he desires the word of God and springs up and brings forth “boughs like a young plant”. That I think is worth while going over; it is very remarkable how God deals with His people.
Ques Does not verse 18 confirm that? “For a multitude of the people, many of Ephraim and Manasseh, Issachar and Zebulun, had not cleansed themselves, and they ate the passover otherwise than it was written. But Hezekiah prayed for them saying, Jehovah, who is good, forgive every one that has directed his heart to seek God”. It would bring out whether there are any roots there, any work of God. It is the dispensational right of God to pardon according to the work of God in them.
JT There are new names here. When the recovery takes place it spreads out wide, not only Ephraim and Manasseh but others as well, Issachar and Zebulun. They had not cleansed themselves, and they ate the passover otherwise than it was written. They are exposed in what they are doing, but then there is priestly grace available when people are on these lines. They are coming back with wrong thoughts, but they are coming back. They are partaking of the thing, not rightly, but still there is a priestly touch here. Hezekiah prays for them and he says to God, “Forgive every one that has directed his heart to seek God, Jehovah the God of his fathers, although not according to the purification of the sanctuary. And Jehovah hearkened to Hezekiah, and healed the people”. That is a beautiful reference to the Lord’s priestly intercession for us. The point is, are you going at all? Is your heart with the brethren? Have you got it in your heart to be with your brethren in a right way?
EGMcA Would Hezekiah see there what you referred to in regard to the tree cut down? It budded and put forth boughs. Would they return in that way?
JT I think it represents the scent of water. Hezekiah’s message would be water, the word of God, and there is sensitiveness as to it. “Jehovah, who is good”, very beautiful; of course Hezekiah’s beseeching should be with us, the spirit of intercession for our brethren so that Jehovah might help them.
EGMcA In any one turning his face toward the brethren again you would expect to see some evidence of divine work as in this passage in Job.
JT Talk to him and see what he says; then you get at the root. If he says, ‘I liked that word last night’, he has the scent of water. He sees God in it, in the word of God; he has the scent of water, and you say there is certainly hope of that man.
Rem In Acts 2: 37 they say, “What shall we do, brethren?”. The scent of water had its effect.
JT Exactly, at Peter’s address they repented. It was the word of God to them.
JRH Would the scent of water be in Paul’s mind when he said, “What will ye? that I come to you with a rod; or in love, and in a spirit of meekness?” 1 Corinthians 4: 21.
JT He was counting on it and he counted on it rightly because Titus came back with great joy in his heart. One has often thought of the meeting between Paul and Titus. What joy it afforded Paul and what joy it afforded Titus because the Corinthians were affected by the word [p. 48] of God!
GAT You would say the scent of water is like enjoying the ministry?
JT You can tell by the way people speak of the ministry; not simply that they enjoy it, but how it affects them.
EGMcA I got help from your reference to the scent of water. There is something in them that will respond. We are not to cast them off, saying, They never were any good; but you would find in speaking to them that there is still something of God.
JT Like the trunk of a tree, we must never give them up, because one day something may happen and they will respond.
JW Would there be a connection with Eutychus falling from the window in Acts 20 and Paul coming down?
JT That is more than the word of God; Paul’s embrace is a great thing. “His life is in him”, he says. He knew the thing was there, his life was in him.
SP You say, You must never give them up. Would you amplify that?
JT I mean such as Job describes; but if it is a tree that has fallen as Ecclesiastes says, “toward the south, or toward the north, in the place where the tree falleth, there it shall be”, Ecclesiastes 11: 3. But if it be cut down — if you think of a brother who has sinned seriously, but God is dealing with him, and when you talk to him about the Lord Jesus, about the word of God, there is response in him and he is not argumentative — that man has got the sense of scent. The word ‘scent’ is important. There are five senses. The writer in the Hebrews refers to those who have their senses exercised. As soon as a man exercises his sense of scent you must keep on with him; presently he becomes like a young plant, not the trunk of a tree any more. Maybe he was a brother who had some distinction; he has forfeited [p. 49] it now, he has got to begin over again, like a young plant.
EP Do you think Job himself is the tree he is speaking of? Elihu had words for God and then God heals him at the close.
JT Quite so. I think Job said a great deal that he did not understand, but the book is a valuable account of what he said. What he said was right, only in the wrong position; he spoke “words ... without knowledge” (Job 35: 16); he did not know what he was talking about. The things are right; as a matter of fact he is using the figure of the tree in this chapter, not knowing that he is describing a man whom God is disciplining, and that he himself was that man.
GW Nebuchadnezzar was a tree cut down. His understanding returned to him and he “blessed the Most High”, Daniel 4: 34.
JT The stump was there.
JB You get in Hosea 14: 8, “Ephraim shall say, What have I to do any more with idols? ... I am like a green fir-tree — From me is thy fruit found”.
JT Quite so, very good.
CHH Would the prophecy of Hosea as quoted correspond with Hezekiah? It is so coloured with the knowledge of God.
JT I think Hezekiah represents the Spirit of Christ vested in benign authority. Throughout these two chapters he speaks with remarkable authority, but he is very gracious; for instance, he has the right to speak to the priests and Levites but the second time he calls them “my sons”, a gracious way of dealing with souls. So I think he reflects beautifully the Spirit of Christ in all this revival. How successful he is as we move on in these chapters! Success marks every verse. It is encouraging for us to go on. God has been working and is working and let us go on in [p. 50] that light.
GAT If a brother returns to us who has been away, how should we receive him? Should we shake hands with him?
JT It is a question of each case being dealt with according to its own facts. You are not holding anything against him. Things have to be dealt with but you are not enlarging on his guilt, “Whose soever sins ye remit” (John 20: 23), as if the Lord were saying, I leave the matter with you. It is for the local brethren to decide as to this man; the Lord has confidence in the brethren. Matthew would say, “Whatsoever ye shall bind on the earth shall be bound in heaven” (chapter 18: 18). Matthew is severe and we are entitled to use severity if the case requires it. The local brethren are the ones who should know. You may be sure that Hezekiah was the principal person with whom God wrought; you may be sure God had taken him in hand well before he brought him into this public position to represent His mind. If He is going to work He will prepare men, discipline them beforehand. Take a man like Elijah, we have not a single word about his previous history, but he has had a previous history. He said to Ahab, “There shall not be dew nor rain these years, except by my word”, 1 Kings 17: 1. He had been with God.
Ques So Paul says, “Not a novice”; is that the thought?
JT God chooses his man for the work, you may be sure of that. But we must go on if we are to finish our chapter. It says in verse 21, “And the children of Israel, that were present at Jerusalem, held the feast of unleavened bread seven days with great gladness”. You may be sure if the thing is right and rightly entered upon, God is with us; He loves to be with us and make it a success. It goes on to say, “And the Levites and the priests praised Jehovah day by day, with the instruments of praise [p. 51] to Jehovah. And Hezekiah spoke consolingly to all the Levites that had understanding in the good knowledge of Jehovah”. This calls attention to the brethren who are serving, who have understanding of the mind of God. “And they ate the feast-offerings the seven days, sacrificing peace-offerings, and extolling Jehovah the God of their fathers”. You can see how successful all this is, how Hezekiah is exercising the Spirit of Christ in it. He spoke consolingly to persons who had a good knowledge of God. Then they were “sacrificing peace-offerings”, which is a new thought here referring to a general state of felicity, a happy state of things amongst the brethren. They are not occupied with this, and saying, How well we are getting on! They are making much of God, “extolling Jehovah the God of their fathers”. The answer to all this is that “the whole congregation took counsel to observe other seven days; and they observed the seven days with gladness. For Hezekiah king of Judah gave to the congregation as heave-offering: a thousand bullocks and seven thousand sheep; and the princes gave to the congregation a thousand bullocks and ten thousand sheep; and a great number of priests hallowed themselves. And the whole congregation of Judah, with the priests and the Levites, and all the congregation that came out of Israel, and the strangers that came out of the land of Israel, and that dwelt in Judah, rejoiced. And there was great joy in Jerusalem; for since the time of Solomon the son of David, king of Israel, there had not been the like in Jerusalem”. I think what is to be observed in these closing verses is the great increase. Having entered upon a course of revival brethren are brought into it and continue in it. There is increase, there is great increase so that they are able to carry on seven days more. It shows the sustained wealth of the people. And then we have the thought that there had not been anything [p. 52] like this since the time of Solomon, a tribute to what was there, double seven days, alluding to the ability to carry on for fourteen days.
Rem It is spontaneous.
JT Quite so.
JH What is the thought in the priests merging with the Levites as in the last verse?
JT “And the priests the Levites arose and blessed the people”; we already alluded to that this morning. In Deuteronomy and Joshua there is hardly any distinction made between priests and Levites; those who are serving are in a state of priesthood. It alludes to the great spiritual wealth that accrued here in this revival. You can hardly distinguish between the priests and the Levites, they are the same in truth; in antitype they are the same person only they are becoming more spiritual, “And their voice was heard, and their prayer came up to his holy habitation, to the heavens”. What a wonderful result that the whole thing goes up to heaven! How much accrues to God out of all this! I think the Lord is helping the brethren into what develops for God, the highest conception.
Ques “The priests the sons of Levi shall come near; for them Jehovah thy God hath chosen to do service unto him, and to bless in the name of Jehovah”, Deuteronomy 21: 5. Is that the thought?
JT They have reached the full thought; that is a good point. These two chapters show that this revival leads us up to what is for God.
JRH The climax is in full accord with Solomon’s greatest day, in connection with God’s holy habitation in heaven. Does this final verse show that?
JT I think so; a double time, to observe other seven days. That is, there is enough spiritual power to proceed with other seven days. That same thing had happened in Solomon’s dedication of the house, that is what is alluded to here. Not that this exceeded Solomon’s day, but rather that there had been nothing like it since Solomon: “There had not been the like in Jerusalem”.
GAT Who do the princes stand for, and the strangers in Israel?
JT I think the princes would allude to those of spiritual wealth who could do things for others. Strangers would be those who came by invitation from the other tribes; they too had part in this joy.
CHH Would verse 23 indicate that Hezekiah and the princes taking the spiritual lead had secured the whole congregation?
JT It is a remarkable thing, “the whole congregation”; we are ready to go home from meetings like this after two or three days. It is right enough in a way but the point is, Am I equal to a prolonged spiritual occasion, or are fleshly instincts predominant with me so that I can only stand two or three days? The point here is the state, and that all comes about through a process. These are good times and we want to go on with them, they “took counsel to observe other seven days”.