WALKING (2)
WALKING (2)
JT There was some inquiry made at the end of our last reading.
EGMcA I was wondering how you would bring in the prophetic statement, “I drew them with bands of a man”, Hosea 11:4. Has it a prophetic touch to it in regard to Christ or does it refer to the influence amongst the brethren in bringing in the love of God?
JT I should think antitypically the Man would be Christ.
EGMcA The apostle says, “Be my imitators, even as I also am of Christ”, 1 Corinthians 11:1. I was wondering whether you could use it in a practical sense amongst the brethren today?
JT I would think the Spirit of Christ would enter into it. We remember that Christ is in heaven, and the antitype is really the assembly here, which implies that Christ is in heaven and His Spirit down here, the Spirit of Christ. We read of “the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ” Philippians 1:19 which Paul had in a large measure; so the idea of the man would doubtless be reflected peculiarly in him. The reflection of Christ must be the supreme thought in the economy. The man immediately in mind would be Moses or perhaps more particularly Aaron. He was a man of affection, and we learn in Exodus 16 that Moses directed Aaron to speak in connection with the manna. It is said in verse 9 of that chapter, “And Moses spoke to Aaron, Say to all the assembly of the children of Israel, Come near into the presence of Jehovah; for he has heard your murmurings. And it came to pass, when Aaron spoke to the whole assembly of the children of Israel, that they turned toward the wilderness, and behold, the glory of Jehovah appeared in the cloud”, Exodus 16:9,10. The speaking of Aaron at this crisis was such that it affected the [p. 192] people. I think that involves the character of Aaron and, of course, it requires both Aaron and Moses to set out the one Man — Christ, “the Apostle and High Priest of our confession” Hebrews 3:1; it is the attractiveness of Christ which comes out rather in Aaron’s speaking to us, His voice rather than His authority. Therefore, authority is to be kept in the background as much as possible. Paul put it to the Corinthians whether he should come to them with a rod or in meekness and, as we said this morning, he sent Timothy who was his child, a man like himself, who, he says, “shall put you in mind of my ways as they are in Christ”, 1 Corinthians 4:17. The sequence shows that these ways were evidently attractive. And so here it was not authority at this time, it was Aaron’s voice and the people turned toward the wilderness. They had thought of going back to Egypt, and their turn showed that now they were changed; there was something attractive in Aaron. The word in Hosea is ‘bands’, “with bands of a man”, Hosea 11:4 as if they were not hard to bear. So the Lord says, “Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am meek and lowly in heart; and ye shall find rest to your souls; for my yoke is easy, and my burden is light”, Matthew 11:29,30. That is, there would be the holding back of power and authority in such circumstances and the unfolding before their eyes of Christ Himself. So He challenges them: “Will ye also go away? Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast words of life eternal; and we have believed and known that thou art the holy one of God”, John 6:67 - 69. I think that would be something like what is referred to here and it should touch us, those of us who are in any way prominent in leadership locally or generally, that as much as possible the man should be seen more than the apostle.
EGMcA I think that is a very helpful statement for those who seek to take up cases that are difficult.
[p. 193] As you say, what a man is comes before his authority.
RRT Rehoboam would be an example of one who failed through moving on the opposite line. “My little finger is thicker than my father’s loins”, 1 Kings 12:10. He was moving on just the opposite line and, indeed, caused the people to depart from him.
JT Very often the humility and meekness which marks the servant is more effective than the authority he may wield.
EGMcA So that you can really be severe in love in dealing with the situation. You have to present the severity and seriousness of the case, but there is the impression of love that comes out first. Is that right?
JT Quite so. No doubt Hosea has it throughout, hence the result in the last chapter, as we had this morning.
Now what is in mind at this time is not childhood or babehood, but manhood, hence Israel is counted from twenty years old in Numbers 1. “Take the sum of the whole assembly of the children of Israel, after their families, according to their fathers’ houses, by the number of the names, every male, according to their polls; from twenty years and upward, all that go forth to military service in Israel: ye shall number them according to their hosts, thou and Aaron”, Numbers 1:2,3. So that we are now in the presence of another line of things which involves manhood, whereas we had this morning just babehood or childhood, the learning time, the impressionable time, not finality but that which leads up to what is final, which is manhood. The full thought of manhood is found in the Levites in the same chapter. We are now dealing with the children of Israel viewed in their tribes, and they are to understand that they are men, which would be a further stage of the believer’s history involving more than new birth, because one may be born [p. 194] anew and yet not have the Spirit or be in full manhood. The Spirit is in mind and it is a suggestion of Pentecost when the saints were seen as indwelt by the Spirit. The Spirit came down and the Lord Jesus was in heaven, the full divine thought thus being worked out, the Man in heaven set out down here.
EGMcA Is the expression in 1 Corinthians 16:13: “Quit yourselves like men” 1 Corinthians 16:13 more in your mind than the thought of men in John 17?
JT Just so. John 17 would be, as I suppose you have in mind, a question of the kind of being, humanity, of course, but humanity in a certain stage of development. “I have manifested thy name to the men whom thou gavest me out of the world”, John 17:6. “Quit yourselves like men” 1 Corinthians 16:13 would be men in contrast to children. Paul says, “When I became a man, I had done with what belonged to the child”; 1 Corinthians 13:11 he emerged from childhood.
CCT How do you connect this thought of manhood with a man who is head of his father’s house as in Numbers 1:4? “And with you there shall be a man for every tribe, a man who is the head of his father’s house”, Numbers 1:4.
JT And then their names are given. They would be what might be called head men and therefore such as should exercise moral influence over the house and over all, which is important. There are only a few such, about twelve, and of course Moses and Aaron represent them particularly, Moses in authority, and Aaron in affection, the priesthood. The idea of rule would be vested in these, tapering down to lesser men, because referring back to Exodus again we read, “And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses sat to judge the people; and the people stood by Moses from the morning to the evening. And Moses’ father-in-law saw all that he did with the people, and said, What is this thing which thou art doing with the people? why dost thou sit alone, and all the people are standing by thee from morning to evening? And Moses said to his father-in-law, Because the people come to me to enquire of God. When they have a matter, they come to me, and I judge between one and another; and I make known to them the statutes of God, and his laws. And Moses’ father-in-law said to him, The thing that thou art doing is not good. Thou wilt be quite exhausted, both thou and this people that is with thee; for the thing is too heavy for thee: thou canst not perform it alone. Hearken now to my voice: I will give thee counsel, and God shall be with thee. Be thou for the people with God, and bring the matters before God; and teach them the statutes and the laws, and make known to them the way in which they must walk, and the work that they must do. But do thou provide among all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place them over them, chiefs of thousands, chiefs of hundreds, chiefs of fifties, and chiefs of tens, that they may judge the people at all times; and it shall be that they shall bring to thee every great matter, and that they shall judge every small matter, and they shall lighten the task on thee, and they shall bear it with thee. If thou do this thing, and God command thee so, thou wilt be able to endure, and all this people shall also go to their place in peace. And Moses hearkened to the voice of his father-in-law, and did all that he had said. And Moses chose able men out of all Israel, and made them heads over the people, chiefs of thousands, chiefs of hundreds, chiefs of fifties, and chiefs of tens. And they judged the people at all times: the hard matters they brought to Moses, but every small matter they judged. And Moses sent away his father- in-law, and he departed into his land”, Exodus 18:13 - 27.
[p. 195] Well, now, I think the brethren will see how the economy stands with respect to the idea of manhood, twenty years old and upward. ‘Upward’ would include those men who were heads of the different groups; so that in Israel there would be a great number of persons who were distinguished and who in their places would exercise influence for good, leading on to manhood in the younger ones. I believe that is just what obtains at the present time, and what ought to obtain in every local gathering. A man is what he is, and his influence ought to be according to what he is. The younger ought to be ready to learn from the elder although they themselves might not have the Spirit and be men in that sense; experience in the elders must be recognised.
LES Is the military idea a matter of manhood? Would the idea of endurance as seen in the shittim wood be the idea in manhood?
JT That works out in the tabernacle, for the tabernacle unfolds the greatest pattern, I would think, and that is where the shittim wood is particularly seen, there is no other wood in the tabernacle. The power is another view of the thing and the building is another view to bring out the latent strength that would be manifested in all these men according to their experience. This is a very important piece of instruction although given by a foreigner, Moses’ father-in-law; yet it shows how God acts and uses such men as that for a purpose.
RRT It would fit in with a remark you made earlier that God makes His own disposition according to what is available, the valuation of the material under His hand.
JT Just so. And so at the beginning in Moses’ own case and that of Jethro, Moses fled to Midian when he was forty years old. That is, he was come to years; he had become great, but not in the sense of spiritual manhood. He sat by the well in Midian, which is the Spirit typically, where a man would develop and maintain his manhood; and the [p. 197] daughters of the priest of Midian came out to feed the flock and the shepherds drove them away. A greater power is needed and Moses is ready, but he did not slay them as he had slain the Egyptian, he watered the flock. When his daughters came back so soon Jethro said, Where is the man? They had not brought him with them. That is the idea: Where is the man? We must keep our eye on the Man.
HB Is there a lack of that at Corinth? Paul says, “There is not a wise person among you”, 1 Corinthians 6:5.
JT That is good. Where there are difficulties amongst us we do not need to go before the courts to settle them. It is a question of the least in the assembly, but he must be an assembly man, a man that is in the assembly and has to do with it — an intelligent person.
HB Is it not a sign of weakness in local problems when there has to be much correspondence with the outside as to local difficulties? Does not the Lord raise up those locally who can help in these matters?
JT Well, He does; only that there are other elements that sometimes interfere with that. Brothers who are older perhaps do not have as much experience as the younger ones, and such things have to be searched out. A man is what he is, what his influence is, and we must make room for him according to this.
CCT We were speaking of Ananias this morning in regard to Saul. Would he fit in here as showing the full thought of manhood?
JT We never hear of him afterwards; he is only mentioned in relation to the service he rendered to Paul. He was not a man of great distinction in a general way, but he served Paul and that was a good point. And so Barnabas served Paul too, but in a greater way; he brought Paul to the apostles, putting [p. 198] him before the right men, whom God had set up to guide him and help him.
GMacP What would be the idea in setting up a prince in the house of Judah: “The prince of the sons of Judah”, Numbers 2:3?
JT You are coming back to our chapter. It says, “And the prince of the sons of Judah shall be Nahshon the son of Amminadab”. Now let us see what that means. The word ‘prince’ has come to mean more or less what is right at all times, but I think here it would also mean a person of great personality. There are such men, as, for instance, Barnabas, a man of great personality; a man with peculiar influence, not only serving as an apostle but as an influential man.
Rem He was a man having moral qualifications, would you say?
JT He would have. Otherwise he would not be a prince. The word ‘princely’ involves moral qualifications in view of personality. So we see in the book of Ezekiel that in the millennium there will be “the prince”. It is a designation according to the king, and would mean not simply that he was a royal personage, although no doubt he would be that and would rule, but that he would be a man of great personality, a man of beauty and attractiveness.
CCT Is your thought that personality comes into the service?
JT It does. If you have not personality you have not much influence for good. I may have the ability to preach, be a good platform man, but not be a good mixing man, or a mutual man amongst the brethren as a brother.
RRT The matter of being a man among his brethren and his influence among them is emphasised in that it says of each one of these men, “and his host”, intimating that he had influence with the [p. 199] brethren.
JT Quite so. It is a very testing matter. I think Numbers takes character from personality among the brethren, that is, a man who is morally a prince and yet just a brother, sitting with his brethren as one of them. The Lord says, “I am in the midst of you as the one that serves”, Luke 22:27, and He was the Lord! As He says, “Ye call me the Teacher and the Lord, and ye say well, for I am so. If I therefore, the Lord and the Teacher, have washed your feet, ye also ought to wash one another’s feet”, John 13:13,14.
RRT Paul, too, is a princely man. It is said of him, “Paul and his company”, Acts 13:13.
JT You will notice there, as we have often remarked, that there is a turn-over. Barnabas is mentioned first as setting out but it is “Paul and his company” immediately, showing that the leadership was in Paul.
Ques Is leadership seen in Peter standing up with the eleven resulting in three thousand souls being brought in?
JT Just so. The ability was there.
EGMcA Is there a double qualification in this kind of man? In chapter 1:4 these men are heads of their fathers’ houses and in chapter 2 they are to be heads of the hosts. Does that link on with the universal thought of the tabernacle?
JT I think so. There were four particular men of the whole number, and four groups of threes. Nahshon was not only prince of Judah; he was not only head of his own tribe, but he was in a way head of them all, showing how great the position was.
LES Would the principle of overseership and elderhood as set out in Timothy come into this?
JT I would say so; but what I have observed is that eldership is not much sought after by the brethren, preaching and teaching are preferred. That [p. 200] is to say, the platform is rather desired, whereas the elder is needed to look after the saints and also the shepherd. There are two words: ‘presbyter’ (the Presbyterians take their cue from that) and ‘overseer’ or ‘bishop’, but they both have the same force. Paul and Barnabas chose such: “And having chosen them elders in each assembly”, Acts 14:23. This was when they went out to secure the material for the assembly; they saw to it that in every assembly there were elders, not ‘an elder’, but ‘elders’, showing that the saints need them for growth and building.
CCT That is the reason Paul called out the elders from Ephesus and brought before them the thought of shepherding the saints.
JT Quite so.
HAG The thought of eldership does not exclude preaching, does it?
JT Not at all. The elder is supposed to preach if he has gift. That is provided for in Timothy: “Let the elders who take the lead among the saints well be esteemed worthy of double honour, specially those labouring in word and teaching”, 1 Timothy 5:17. But notice that is a secondary thought; eldership is first, and then it goes on to include gift. Then again we find them recognised in the epistle to the Philippians, where it says, “Paul and Timotheus, bondmen of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, with the overseers and ministers”, Philippians 1:1. These latter would be deacons, overseers and deacons being particularly noted in the letter, as if the apostle Paul would convey the idea that he is thinking of them particularly under those circumstances, thinking not so much of gift as of men who are officers.
EGMcA 1 Timothy 3 gives more detail as to the characteristics of the overseers. “The word is faithful: if anyone aspires to exercise oversight, he desires a good work. The overseer then must be irreproachable, husband of one wife, sober, discreet, decorous, hospitable, apt to teach; not given to excesses from wine, not a striker, but mild, not addicted to contention, not fond of money, conducting his own house well, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (but if one does not know how to conduct his own house, how shall he take care of the assembly of God?)”, 1 Timothy 3:1 - [p. 201] 5.
That is rather wide, is it not?
JT It is, indeed. I consider that the charter for all eldership because it is very fully given. The idea of gift hardly enters into it, although it is there.
CCT Would that be on the line of the standard that we find in Numbers 2? There is a standard for each tribe.
JT If the elder in the town was what was in mind when he was selected I would say he would be the leading man in the town, because the elders are appointed for cities as well as for the assembly. They are always found in the plural; that is to save us from the clerical idea current today. The clerical man would say ‘my flock’ or ‘my charge’, and think of himself as the leading man in the place, but he is ordained, as we call it, by man and his position is supposed to include all the gifts, whereas eldership does not necessarily include gift at all; it does not need gift.
EGMcA Is your thought in your opening remarks that there should be found a man of this kind in every local meeting; if not, then something must be wrong with the meeting?
JT It certainly is needed; and as I was saying a moment ago brethren with ability to preach and teach may lay themselves open for these services and be ready to accept invitations to other places, no matter how far away, but the matter of eldership be left somewhat uncared for, and I believe the brethren are suffering from this.
[p. 202] EGMcA I think you said that to develop eldership we have to be in the local company most of the time.
JT Well, we have.
Ques Is eldership then a local matter?
JT It is a purely local matter. There is no such idea as an elder of the whole church. The Pope claims supreme overseership and so does the Archbishop, but it is false. Eldership is always local whereas gift is universal. Where the gifts are enumerated it says, “And God has set certain in the assembly” 1 Corinthians 12:28, that is in the whole assembly. There are no elders mentioned at Corinth at all.
GMacP Does Timothy set forward the qualities of an elder. when Paul says of him, “For I have no one like-minded who will care with genuine feeling”? Philippians 2:20.
JT “How ye get on”. Quite so.
HB In Psalm 78 it says God took David from the sheepfolds. Is that the principle? We have to have this background.
JT So when he comes into the camp he is challenged by his brother, Where are those few sheep? Did you leave them in the wilderness? No, he had left them with a keeper. That is the idea. Eliab would rebuke him because he supposed he had left the sheep without a keeper, but David says, There is a cause involved and I am here for that, but I have not neglected the other charge.
JMcK I was wondering if what Paul brings in would help in that way. Speaking of Israel he says, “And then they asked for a king, and God gave to them Saul, son of Kis, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, during forty years. And having removed him he raised up to them David for king, of whom also bearing witness he said, I have found David, the son of Jesse, a man after my heart, who shall do all my will”, Acts 13:21,22. That would be divine discernment in the choice of manhood amongst [p. 203] the brethren, for Israel chose Saul but God chose David.
JT Saul was a man head and shoulders above his brethren; David was not that, but ruddy and of a beautiful countenance and goodly to look to. His father never thought him a man of great distinction but the Spirit of God said, “Arise, anoint him; for this is he”, 1 Samuel 16:12.
LES In a locality where these two thoughts are expressed in a person, eldership and gift, how would it work out? Should a brother be necessarily pretty much limited to his locality?
JT He might. One has often thought lately that the brethren are ready to go any distance to give an address or to take a meeting for the weekend or even to take such an occasion as this, but the home front is not taken care of. We must not forget the home front. It is a common expression; but if the home front is to be taken care of, eldership must be there. No doubt that is why there is more than one elder provided for each locality. What have you observed?
LES I think what you say is most important.
RRT I was wondering whether what Pharaoh said to Joseph would bear on it? Joseph took five men of his brethren and set them before Pharaoh, and the effect upon Pharaoh was that “Pharaoh spoke to Joseph, saying, Thy father and thy brethren are come to thee. The land of Egypt is before thee; in the best of the land settle thy father and thy brethren: let them dwell in the land of Goshen. And if thou knowest men of activity among them, then set them as overseers of cattle over what I have”, Genesis 47:5,6. Would that link on with what is before us here, overseers in the sense of elderhood?
JT I think that is good. The idea of cattle was abominable to the Egyptians, but not to Pharaoh.
LES In a meeting where there are a fairly good number of brethren things should not fall upon the [p. 204] shoulders of just one brother; the element of elderhood should be in the locality.
JT I think the instruction that we have in Exodus 18 is a full answer to that. There are chiefs of thousands, chiefs of hundreds, chiefs of fifties and chiefs of tens, providing a full answer to all that is necessary, so that the saints are taken care of. The man who was over ten would know every one of them, and the man who was over one hundred would know every one of them.
CCT Peter’s exhortation to the elders is, “Shepherd the flock of God which is among you, exercising oversight” 1 Peter 5:2, showing the idea is really local.
JT ‘Oversight’ is the word.
CJ The idea of the elders being in the plural is very helpful and the illustration you have given us in regard to David. The sheep were in good hands even though David was gone.
JT I have often thought of that. Eliab in his pride would scorn his younger brother but the younger brother is morally equal to the test, more than equal to him morally.
AD In relation to the home front, would Titus come in there? “For the overseer must be free from all charge against him as God’s steward ... clinging to the faithful word according to the doctrine taught, that he may be able both to encourage with sound teaching and refute gainsayers”, Titus 1:7,9. Would that be the qualification necessary for the elders in order to protect the home front?
JT There is an allusion to the stopping of mouths there. There is so much talk that springs up amongst the brethren in localities, sisters especially being prone to talk, that we need to note this verse, “Who must have their mouths stopped”, Titus 1:11. The stopping of mouths is not a violent thing but a question of moral [p. 205] power in the elders. It might necessitate a word to the sisters which is final and has a warning in it. God is sure to come in where there is talk springing up or anything like that.
Ques What is the thought in everyone encamping by his own standard?
JT That is a good point to bring up. The idea of walking is not first here but the idea of encamping, because we are not to be walking as much as encamping. It is similar to an occasion like this; we are in camp now, or in assembly as on Lord’s day morning. The idea in encampment is to be free in view of doing something for God in the way of His service. That is what is in mind here: “And Jehovah spoke to Moses and to Aaron, saying, The children of Israel shall encamp every one by his standard, with the ensign of their father’s house; round about the tent of meeting, afar off, opposite to it shall they encamp”, Numbers 2:1. That alludes to the tribes encamped in their tents and Jehovah in the centre of them. He dwelt there, He was in the centre of them, He dwelt in the holiest between the cherubim, ruling in love, too, night and day looking out on His beloved people as they were around Him, encamped like sheep around a shepherd. He would look out, as it were, on the tribes. Indeed Balaam commented on the beautiful appearance of the tribes and what they must have been to God! He saw that they were securely resting around Himself, and that He was protecting them. Beautiful picture! Inside they were on the breastplate of the high priest; there were the precious stones representing their names, meaning that they were precious in the sight of God. How precious in the sight of God is the encamping of the saints in His service on the Lord’s day morning all over the world! The saints are precious in His sight and their names are on the breastplate of the High Priest, four rows of stones, four standards raised,
[p. 206] four sets of three, three names in every group for Jehovah to look out upon, and He is their Protector.
FRA What is the force of the words, “afar off”?
JT They would suggest a reverential attitude in us, not sitting around as if we were in a waiting room waiting for a train, but reverential. We respect God for He is the living God. It says, “For also our God is a consuming fire”, Hebrews 12:29. He is a God that loves us and that we love, but He is a consuming fire nevertheless. Therefore let anyone beware of lightness, carelessness or neglect.
CCT Is it your thought that when I come to the meeting I should be very careful as to how I sit and act and dress?
JT What it says about the Corinthians is that they were eating and drinking in parties or coteries amongst the brethren; so to speak, sitting with those they liked best and leaving the Lord out altogether.
GMacP Would it refer to an actual state as we come together?
JT It is bringing the world into the meeting, or perhaps giving evidence of a loose household, but leaving out the Spirit.
EGMcA The same principle of “afar off” is seen with the ark; the people followed at two thousand cubits distance.
JT It is the same thought, I am sure.
EGMcA I think your remarks are most helpful. We take up these divine truths too lightly at times.
JT I am sure we do, especially children and young people, laughing and talking with one another, overlooking that God is there. It is a question of Zion and the solemnities of Zion.
LES Would not “the ensign of their father’s house” impress upon the children what the position of their father was?
JT [p. 207] Quite so.
RRT Although afar off they are opposite the tent of meeting and set in relation to it. They are facing that way.
JT Quite so. When they went up at special times of the year you would see the relation peculiarly. On the way up there would be families but when they came to Jerusalem they would have to learn how to encamp around the city. The picture here, though, is the wilderness, not the land; it is a hostile scene and we need to be on our guard for the enemy is all around.
EGMcA Going back to the line of walking we had this morning, the tabernacle in the midst and the twelve tribes surrounding it would have a tremendous influence on their walk. Is that not the idea? Each Israelite is not identified with his own tribe only, the tribes were not each a separate fellowship; but the fellowship is for every christian. We understand the dignity and preciousness of it by what is in the midst of it.
JT So that when you come to the actual setting out of the camp in chapter 10 it says, “And Jehovah spoke to Moses, saying, Make thee two trumpets of silver; of beaten work shalt thou make them; and they shall serve for the calling together of the assembly, and for the journeying of the camps. And when they shall blow with them, the whole assembly shall gather to thee at the entrance of the tent of meeting. And if they blow with one, then the princes, the heads of the thousands of Israel, shall gather unto thee. And when ye blow an alarm, the camps that lie eastward shall set forward” Numbers 10:1 - 5. Now this is what we are aiming at: “And when ye blow an alarm the second time, the camps that lie southward shall set forward; they shall blow an alarm on their setting forward”. Numbers 10:6. The other camps are not exactly specified but these two set out what is in mind, the east and the south; and they are to march according [p. 208] to this word in the order given. So the silver trumpets would mean that we are not only to march but we are to march on the blast of the trumpet, and that would mean that the Lord has rights over us. The silver refers to the rights of redemption; He has bought us, He has died for us. We are, therefore, under His orders and are to be sober, as we said, and reverential, and walk as directed to do according to the standard of our father’s house, each tribe in its place and each man and woman in his or her place.
FRA The trumpet sound is like a prophetic word.
JT Yes; something like that.
CCT When we are together the trumpets will blow too, but not with the thought of alarm. Why is the trumpet spoken of in connection with alarm?
JT Well, first of all, “They shall serve for the calling together of the assembly, and for the journeying of the camps”, Numbers 10:2. And then it says, “And when they shall blow with them, the whole assembly shall gather to thee at the entrance of the tent of meeting”, Numbers 10:3. That is the coming together in assembly. “And if they blow with one, then the princes”, Numbers 10:4 not the elders but the princes, “the heads of the thousands of Israel, shall gather unto thee. And when ye blow an alarm, the camps that lie eastward shall set forward”, Numbers 10:4,5. That is, those under Judah and those under Reuben move. They are not to move without the blast of the trumpet. As has been remarked just now, it is a question of ministry, the divine voice heard in the assembly.
CCT I was referring to verse 7, “And when the congregation is to be gathered together, ye shall blow, but ye shall not blow an alarm”, Numbers 10:7. How does that come in?
JT That is an additional thought. The whole assembly is provided for in the third verse and then the princes and then [p. 209] the marching.
TS Would there be something similar in the recurrence of the word ‘Lord’ in Corinthians? — the Lord’s supper, the Lord’s table, the Lord’s death?
JT It is a question of the assertion of the Lord’s rights over us and the word ‘Lord’ is used. The very day is the Lord’s; it is the dominical day, the day of the Lord’s authority, and that should enter into all our external movements.
Ques Would the ensign of the father’s house indicate that this authority is being held in each locality and our walk governed by it?
JT That is rather a family thought and involves the thought of the father’s house. That is a precious thing too.
LES In 1 Corinthians 14 the trumpet was giving a certain sound, not an uncertain sound. Then we have the whole assembly coming together in one place.
FRA Would trumpets of silver suggest that we belong to the Lord?
JT Yes; telling us that He has rights over us, the rights of love: “My yoke is easy, and my burden is light”, Matthew 11:30 but at the same time there is no tolerance of carelessness.
Ques Why is the camp of Judah set forward first?
JT It is a question of the sovereignty of God. It is not Reuben but Judah first, and then sovereignly we have Joseph in the lead. That is all a question of the sovereignty of God. “And for those encamping eastward toward the sun-rising there shall be the standard of the camp of Judah according to their hosts”. Let us look at the three tribes. It is said, “And the prince of the sons of Judah shall be Nahshon the son of Amminadab”, and then Issachar is next and then Zebulun. These three tribes are the first set and the arrangement shows that nothing is promiscuous, it is all in order and there is a reason for it. There is a reason for everything with God.
[p. 210] And so, one might say, What is the reason for the sign of Judah being put first, because Reuben is the older brother? This is determined in the book of Genesis, where Jacob their father calls them together and says, “Gather yourselves together, and I will tell you what will befall you at the end of days” Genesis 49:1. When he comes to Judah he says, “The sceptre will not depart from Judah, nor the lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come”, Genesis 49:10. That is the reason: the king is there. The king arose from Judah. It is a question of David really that is in mind because he is the first one of God’s choice. It is a question of ability but of sovereignty too, because David was in God’s mind sovereignly before He found him. I found him, God says; a man after My own heart.
LES “And he rejected the tent of Joseph, and chose not the tribe of Ephraim, but chose the tribe of Judah, the mount Zion which he loved; and he built his sanctuary like the heights, like the earth which he hath founded for ever. And he chose David his servant, and took him from the sheepfolds”, Psalm 78:67 - 70.
JT That is a good scripture. There is no question about it that the idea of sovereignty was there, because he was in God’s mind. He was pleased to allow the selection of Saul, but only to bring out that he was not fit for the position and to show what was in David in kingly qualifications for the position.
FRA The fact that the tabernacle faces east links with Malachi: “And unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings” Malachi 4:2.
JT Just so. The position can be determined from the first chapter of Genesis. It is a question of the sunrise. So the Lord is presented in the prophets as the Sun arising as also on the mount of transfiguration in Matthew, which is what we are at now.
[p. 211] It is a question of David: in Matthew He is “Son of David, Son of Abraham”, Matthew 1:1. He is also Son of man for Matthew speaks of the kingdom of the Son of man, suggesting the Son of man coming in His glory, arising in the east; so that the magi say, “We have seen his star in the east”, Matthew 2:2.
RRT Is there not a moral order about this matter we are speaking of? Judah sets forward, and after him another camp and another in proper order. In verse 5 it says, “And those that encamp next unto him shall be the tribe of Issachar”. Do we have to learn how to encamp next to one another if we are to have the moral and spiritual ability to move forward in proper order?
JT Just so. The idea of the neighbour comes in there, whether we love him.
RRT I was thinking it would link on with what you were saying this morning, “Shall two walk together except they be agreed?” Amos 3:3. We must learn to encamp together if we are to move forward in the testimony together.
JT Just so, and when it comes to eating as in Exodus 12 there is need to share together. “And if the household be too small for a Iamb, let him and his neighbour next unto his house take it according to the number of the souls; each according to the measure of his eating shall ye count for the lamb” Exodus 12:4. If the households are small they need to love one another; they need to be able to be next to one another and to eat the precious Iamb together, share it together. In the Lord’s supper we share together.
RRT Would this principle extend to cities in proximity to one another, that we might learn how to move together and learn to be together in assembly exercises; experiencing what it is to encamp together and how to move on together in relation to the testimony and the interests of [p. 212] Christ?
JT That consideration has come up in recent years. We hardly had it fifty years ago as it has now developed especially in the very large cities that have grown up in christendom. It imposes an exercise on the brethren as to how they are to walk together in these large centres. London had the first problem. At one time they had even more meetings there than now — a larger circle, and they found it was not workable. For example, Croydon was twelve miles from London; it was hard to make the principle of the neighbour apply there, and therefore it became evident that they had to reduce the circle, which they did. Now they have a circle embracing about four millions whereas greater London is probably eight millions; it has proved to be a wise change. This exercise has extended all over the world; in the last ten or fifteen years it has been greatly accentuated and has now come to this country. How are we to move together in large centres? Let us consider San Francisco for instance. I call it San Francisco because it is the great centre which influences that large area. The question is whether the saints there should walk together as one local company or as three companies. That is for them to determine by the good judgment that God would give them.
CCT Does the metropolitan thought come in there?
JT There is no time to go into it now. I would not like to inject that subject into this meeting. I am only bringing to our attention the importance of love governing us and influencing us as with these princes; they work things out together. They are great personalities, they are not little people; they are great people morally, and they can work together. Well now, there are three tribes in the first encampment and they are going to move. The nine others will have to wait until they move, because the first blast is for them, and the second camp is under the same [p. 213] blast; so you have six tribes moving together. We have been dealing with the question of walk: how do they move? Do they behave properly or are they a discredit to the testimony in their walk?
EGMcA According to chapter 10 God had given them two years to become accustomed to this requirement. “And it came to pass in the second year, in the second month, on the twentieth of the month, that the cloud was taken up from off the tabernacle of the testimony. And the children of Israel set forward according to their journeys out of the wilderness of Sinai” Numbers 11:12. Does God give us time to digest all these truths?
JT That is a good thought. It is worthy of note that the original thought in the book of Numbers is ‘in the wilderness’, as if that were a title. That phrase would be your title, the title to your position, we will say, in San Francisco. We have to consider what San Francisco is, the characteristics of the city or the place. So ‘in the wilderness’ meant that they were in those circumstances, and they were there for two years, so that they would learn how to be together with affection one for another. And that is what the book of Numbers means, that we are in the wilderness in a hostile scene and we need to love one another, for the enemy is all around us.
Ques Why was the camp of the Levites in the midst of the camps?
JT Their place was in relation to the tabernacle. It says, “And these are the generations of Aaron and Moses in the day that Jehovah spoke with Moses on mount Sinai. And these are the names of the sons of Aaron: Nadab the firstborn, and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar. These are the names of the sons of Aaron, the anointed priests, who were consecrated to exercise the priesthood” Numbers 3:1 - 3. And then it speaks of the death of Nadab and Abihu which we do not need to look at for the moment,
[p. 214] but it does say it happened in the wilderness of Sinai, an intensified idea of the wilderness. And then verses 5 - 12 say, “And Jehovah spoke to Moses, saying, Bring the tribe of Levi near, and present them before Aaron the priest, that they may minister unto him; and they shall keep his charge, and the charge of the whole assembly, before the tent of meeting, to do the service of the tabernacle. And they shall keep all the utensils of the tent of meeting, and the charge of the children of Israel, to do the service of the tabernacle. And thou shalt give the Levites to Aaron and to his sons: they are wholly given to him out of the children of Israel. And Aaron and his sons shalt thou appoint that they may attend to their priest’s office; and the stranger that cometh near shall be put to death. And Jehovah spoke to Moses, saying, And I, behold, I have taken the Levites from among the children of Israel ... and the Levites shall be mine; for every firstborn is mine”, Numbers 3:5 - 12. Now if the brethren will look down the chapter they will find the position of the Levites was in relation to the tabernacle. They were not afar off from it, they were in it, as it were, keeping the charge. I am referring to that to show that they do not come into the same category as the four threes, they are occupied in the service of God in relation to the tabernacle, as near to it. That is important, because those of us who are serving in any way in regard to it have a nearer place, a more responsible place than the ordinary saints.
HB Would that be the ‘us’ that Paul speaks of? “So that death works in us, but life in you”, 2 Corinthians 4:12.
JT Paul says, The Lord appointed us for the last. He says too, “For we who live are always delivered unto death on account of Jesus”, 2 Corinthians 4:11. That applies to all those in the levitical position. We are bearers of burdens; the burden of the testimony [p. 215] rests with us. If we had time to go into it in Numbers we should see that each of the families of the Levites had certain burdens to carry, and there was the prince of the princes of the Levites — a greater personage than anybody else — Eleazar, the son of Aaron.
LES I suppose the levitical idea is suggestive of the assembly according to Hebrews 12:23: “the assembly of the firstborn who are registered in heaven”. Hebrews 12:23.
JT That is the idea, it takes us to heaven. Indeed the levitical position throughout is the heavenly thought because they are assigned cities in the land. They had no cities in the wilderness, except three cities of refuge (Numbers 35:14), but abode in the tabernacle or near to it.
EGMcA Would you say there is a distinction between an elder and a levite? An elder works in a locality whereas a levite is in a local meeting but he works in regard to all that is of God.
JT We shall see it worked out in Deuteronomy 21 as to measurement. In any question that has to be solved the Levite is involved and the thought is identified with the priesthood in Deuteronomy, though there is a certain distinction between them.
RRT Is that involved in what is said of the Levites, that they keep the charge of the sanctuary?
JT A similar thing is said of the priests earlier.
Ques What would mark a levite today?
JT We have to follow the line of thought, because if we go to the beginning of the subject we see that they are the sons of Levi. The priests are the sons of Aaron, but the Levites are greater in number. Priesthood is a more precious thought than that of Levites. There were about eight thousand Levites actually serving, though there were twenty-two thousand Levites altogether. The ones actually serving were from thirty years up to fifty. They [p. 216] were to keep the charge of the sanctuary, in the sense of carrying things, the precious things of the tabernacle. So their identity is determined easily, because they represent the men that God is using to bring out the truth, doctrine and principles and that sort of thing.
Ques Would you say that we should see the influence of the princes in the things that you have mentioned, but should we also see the influence of the Levites?
JT Oh yes, they have an influence too. They are Jehovah’s possession, and are given to Aaron. All that points to the relative value of the Levites, and it works out in connection with what the Lord said when the disciples told Him that the devils were subject to them, which was not ordinary levitical work. The Lord said, Glory not in that, but glory rather that your names are written in heaven. It does not mean that that was not their work. Our work is down here but in heaven is our glory, our family place. Every Levite is a firstborn, which is most remarkable! You could not find another family of which that could be said, that they are all firstborn ones. Every Levite is a firstborn because he represents the firstborn of the tribes. Therefore when we think of heaven, it says, “But ye have come ... to the assembly of the firstborn who are registered in heaven”, Hebrews 12:22,23. We have a place in heaven.
GMacP Is there any difference in the camp of the levites today?
JT No, it works out the same way. It is a question of working it out historically, as is seen in the wilderness. When they came into the land they had cities, forty-eight of them, suggesting the heavenly thought, an administrative position. The cities of refuge belonged to the Levites, so that cities have a great place in all judicial matters.
[p. 217] LES In such personnel as the house of Chloe and Lydia and Phoebe levitical features are found. This is not a matter that is confined to the brothers; sisters come into the levitical idea.
JT That is good. I hope the sisters all hear, because the Lord has, I think, laid it on our hearts to speak to them at this time, because they must function. They must have exercises. They cannot speak openly, but they must be able to think, and they treasure up things for the time when they have opportunity to speak. Then they have the things to speak of.
CCT So every levite has his own place and a service of his own.
JT Exactly; every man is valuable and, of course, that includes the sisters as much as the brothers.