Ordering of the Camp
Ministry by G. R. Cowell
– Memorials: Volume 8

INTRODUCTION
ORDERING OF THE CAMP Memorials 8 Meetings with G. R. Cowell at Doncaster, April 22-24, 1960

Besides their intrinsic value – which will become quckly apparent to the discerning reader – these meetings – as those in Memorials 7 – are of particular interest because

• they took place after the fateful London meetings of July 1959
  • and before the unrighteous excommunication of Mr. Cowell on July 12, 1960.

• Mr. Cowell and others who advocated and practised the moderation of earlier years were still being invited to serve at special and fellowship meetings.
  • Outwardly, the brethren were still committed to the recovery of the truth wrought by the Spirit from 1827 onwards,
    • but the leaven of legality – which had been secretly working for some years – was inexorably spreading, and would shortly assert itself publicly.

• As an example, an account of ‘Hornchurch Assembly Meetings’ of July 8 and 12, 1960 – referring to these meetings – adds
  • “The brethren at Doncaster had an assembly meeting clearing themselves in self-judgment before the Lord in connection with having Mr. Cowell for three day meetings”.

• This is only one of the many instances of brethren in various localities quickly succumbing to the pervasive influence of the rapidly dominant legal sect.

The initials of other brothers taking part in readings do not appear in Volumes 1 – 8 of the 'Memorials'.

• There may have been a reluctance to show the initials of many who remained with the legal system.

• Happily, where applicable, other initials have been shown in the final Volumes 9 – 16.

G.A R.

Page Top

READING  1
Ordering of the Camp ( 1 ) Numbers 1: 1-4; 47-54; 2: 1-2; 3: 5-10 Memorials 8: 1-27

G.R.C. It is in mind to refer to other scriptures in Numbers in the later readings, but in this reading one feels

• the Holy Spirit would give us an impression of what is incumbent upon us in view of God having taken up His abode amongst His people.

• We might consider that point first, the wonder of it, of God having taken up His abode amongst His people in the wilderness.

• One thing that immediately comes into view is conscription for military service, the appointment of the Levites in verse 50 of chapter 1, and the appointment of the priests in chapter 3: 10.
  • “Thou shalt appoint them for the priest’s office”.

• But this follows God taking up His residence in the habitation which love had provided:
  • “they shall make me a sanctuary” was the proposal in Exodus 25, as some of us were considering last night.

  • “They shall make me a sanctuary” every one was to be in it “that I may dwell among them”.

• The willing hearted and the wise hearted operated, the sanctuary had been provided – that is the exercise of Exodus, that we should provide the sanctuary, sanctuary conditions for God.

• And God had taken up His residence in the last chapter of Exodus,
  • “on the first day of the first month of the second year”.

• Then a month had elapsed, during which what we have in Leviticus took place:
  • “And Jehovah called to Moses and spoke to him out of the tent of meeting”, Leviticus 1: 1.

• What a new departure it was! They had known what it was for God to speak from heaven; but now God was dwelling amongst them, and He calls to Moses and speaks to him out of the tent of meeting, supposing that His lovers would desire to draw near to Him.

• They had provided Him with a habitation and He had come down to dwell; how it speaks of Divine love, that God should desire to dwell with us at the present time!

• And then He speaks out of the tent of meeting relative to those who would desire to approach Him; and I suppose during this month
  • the priests had been consecrated, and hallowed, the altar had been dedicated, which you get later in this book, and with the dedication of the altar, the great offering of the princes.

• Wonderful things had gone on, and now on the first day of the second month Jehovah spoke to Moses in the wilderness of Sinai in the tent of meeting, He is speaking in the tent of meeting.
  • He would speak inside, as it were, of our responsibilities outside, because the more we know our inside place the more we shall be desirous of, and prepared for, the responsibilities outside.

• And so He spoke to Moses in the wilderness of Sinai in the tent of meeting. I wonder if that would help us
  • to get a present view of what is typified here, the wonder of it, God dwelling in His habitation in the Spirit down here, and the people encamped around Him!

• But now the encampment is to be regulated. We sing sometimes,
  • “Our God the Centre is, His presence fills that land”;

• but Numbers presents God as the Centre here in the scene of testimony.

Rem. I remember Mr. Robert Dunn saying during the first world war,

• “Make no mistake about it, brethren, conscription is a divine idea”.

• I think some of us were a little startled at the time, but we found out he was right.

G.R.C. So it is a basic thing in national life nowadays, and here we have the holy nation, and

• the first thing that regulation brought in nationally, as we may say, was conscription.

Rem. The trouble with conscription as men know it is that many are conscripted who are not sympathetic, but with divine conscription everyone is sympathetic.

G.R.C. Yes, because it is such an affectionate matter, a Christian soldier is a suffering man,

• he takes his share in suffering, not in making others suffer, but he takes his share in suffering himself.

• So the whole setting here is an affectionate one, after their families, according to their father’s houses.

• Their affections would be involved; God dwelling there being the supreme thing, but their affections were involved in every way, they were defending what they loved.

Ques. Would it help us to accept thankfully our place wherever God has set us in His ways, to see that it is God who has set the members in the body as it has pleased Him, we are set there for the divine pleasure are we?

G.R.C. We are, and so God’s ordering has in view the sovereign place in the body, and coupled with that, that

• He would order our actual circumstances, would He not, as to the locality we are placed in – it is no small matter to change your locality.

Ques. Do you think that is why the Spirit was at pains in Acts 18 to enlarge upon the company at Corinth – who they were, how they got there, where they lived, and what their work was?

• I am thinking along the lines on which you are speaking, that all that has its bearing on the testimony.

G.R.C. That is good. Aquila and Priscilla were there in the government of God, not of their own choice,

• their occupation had been ordered by God, God would order our secular occupation;

• God would order everything in the holy nation; everything is to be ordered by the God who is the Centre.

• That is the idea to keep in mind in the holy nation – “Our God the Centre is” now here in the scene of testimony,
  • and His residence is at the centre, and everything revolves round Him and His residence,

• and He would regulate the whole of our lives relative to that, where we live, what work we do, and everything else.

Rem. In that chapter – Acts 18 – you quoted that Paul was teaching among them the word of God.

• I was thinking of the adjustment of fairly recent years we have had as to the announcement of the Word of God in our rooms on the Lord’s Day.

• Would that bear on this matter of conscription, the number of interested persons largely comprising our own young people,
  • would it bear on the manner of the presentation of the Word of God, that they are conscripted for such service?

G.R.C. Yes, I think so, because you have in mind in the preaching of the Word, securing persons relative to the tabernacle, as material for it and as set in relation to it. Is that so?

Rem. Yes I had that exactly in mind, I thought the service was not complete unless that end was reached.

G.R.C. Where it is possible, one would think the Spirit would often lead us to make some reference to the assembly in our preachings, not only for the sake of those brought up amongst us,

• but for souls brought in from outside, that we should let it be clear as to what the true church is.

• I believe we ought to make that clear whenever we can, in individual contact and otherwise, to disabuse people’s minds of the idea that there could be such a thing as churches,
  • in the sense of different denominations, they are simply human organisations who have no right to the name whatever.

• And I think it might help souls if we were more insistent that there is only one church.

• I am using ‘church’ now, because we need to use that word in speaking to people outside.

• They may not understand the word assembly, but there is only one church, the church of the Bible, and tell them a little about it. What do you think?

Rem. I think that is very good but very searching.

G.R.C. It might lead to exercise as to their responsibilities, relative to it.

Ques. I was going to ask about the use of the word ‘calling’ in Corinthians 1. Would that bear on what you are saying, the thought of being conscripted, the call of God? It is an imperative call, is it not?

G.R.C. “Saints by calling”.

Rem. And then “called into the fellowship of His Son” and so on.

G.R.C. Oh yes. As saints by calling we are set apart by the divine call, and then as you say, called into the fellowship.

• Do you think that would have some link with the “20 years old” – speaking spiritually?

• I suppose if we take up the privilege, there should be in some measure the ability to take up the responsibility of defence.

Ques. Does not the work of God respond in a dignified way to the call? It speaks of the going forth to military service,

• “all that go forth to military service”.

G.R.C. It is a dignified idea, it suggests a measure of spiritual manhood, not the thirty years old of the Levites, but sufficient development in manhood to defend the testimony.

Ques. Joseph is referred to in Hebrews as calling to mind the going forth of the sons of Israel, and he gives commandment concerning his bones. Was he not a man who was under commandment in relation to the testimony?

G.R.C. He certainly was.

Rem. In keeping with the wonderful thought of God abiding with us, what you are saying about the testimony shows how broad that must be too.

• Sometimes the testimony has been confined to the preaching of the Word, but every meeting, as you are suggesting, has a testimonial side, as well as every part of a believer’s house and life.

• And then your reference to the comprehensive character of the preaching of the Word, too, would show how vast and wide is the testimony in keeping with the great thought of God dwelling with us.

G.R.C. That is very helpful, so that, as you say, every meeting, and every part of our lives stands related to the testimony of God.

Ques. Would you say something more about this second month and second year? It is not the first month and the first year.

G.R.C. It may be that would enter into our development as to “twenty years old”, they had had a year’s experience of the grace of God when He met them in their murmurings in Exodus, without rebuke,

• and then they had had the experience, the exhilaration of seeing the sanctuary, the offering of the people, and the setting of it together, and God taking up His residence,

• and then they had had all the unfoldings in Leviticus.

Ques. Might not the beginning of Romans 12 come into this matter, beseeching them by the compassions of God to present their bodies a living sacrifice? So that every person is completely surrendered to the will of God in this matter.

G.R.C. I think so, the good and perfect and acceptable will of God.

Ques. I would like to ask in regard to the setting in Numbers, is it not a fact that there were none feeble among their tribes?

• But amongst us now, there is very much feebleness, surely, and physical sickness too; there are some that would like to be at such occasions as this, and are hindered through sickness;

• and there is a great deal of feebleness, both spiritual and physical amongst us at the present time, which it appears was not among the people in Numbers. Can you help us as to that?

G.R.C. In the early part of Numbers we have things set out in perfection according to the mind of God.

• As you proceed in the book you find that weakness comes in, and failure, so that we have to face that kind of thing.

• We need first of all to get a view in the early chapters, from which we have read, of the mind of God, so that we get this clearly before us, the organisation, if I might use the word, of the “holy nation”.

Ques. Was that seen at Pentecost?

G.R.C. It was, in a beautiful way, and I suppose it was seen at Ephesus.

Ques. Some of the physically sick amongst us are the Lord’s best warriors, are they not?

G.R.C. Quite so. Timothy was not a strong man, was he? The scripture speaks of frequent illnesses in connection with him.

Ques. What would you say as to the person to whom Jehovah spoke? It says,

• “He spoke to Moses … And with you there shall be a man for every tribe”.

• Does God speak generally; and does He speak too, specifically, through specific servants today?

G.R.C. Yes He does, Moses primarily, and then Aaron as linked with him, the priestly side, the sympathetic side, and

• then a man for every tribe I suppose would suggest what is local, because leadership is also needed locally.

Rem. What is held universally to be held in every locality representatively you mean.

G.R.C. That is right.

Rem. I was wondering if, by way of the princes, the regulation that you spoke of is brought down to us in our localities?

G.R.C. That is good, and it is a very important matter. As we are saying, the military side involves our locality and households, and that our tents are pitched relative to the tabernacle;

• so it would cover every item of our lives. We are never off duty as soldiers.

• Now as to the thought of appointment, in verse 50 of chapter 1 it says
  • “But thou, appoint the Levites over the tabernacle of testimony”,

• and the word is used relative to the priests in chapter 3, verse 10,
  • “And Aaron and his sons shalt thou appoint that they may attend to their priest’s office”.

Ques. The question of movement is in mind here is it not,

• “When the tabernacle setteth forward”?

G.R.C. Yes, does it not cover both aspects? They were over all the vessels thereof, and all the things that belonged to it.

• Then there is the bearing of it, the encamping round about the tabernacle.

• So while a good deal is said here to cover the journeys, yet when it was stationary they were to encamp around it, in verses 52 and 53.

Rem. I was wondering whether, even in regard to the first passage as to the matter of conscription, the passage has in mind that the saints are to move together in relation to every movement of the testimony of God;

• and whether conscription would ensure that we move together in relation to all matters!

G.R.C. Yes, and there divine sovereignty operates. If we truly accept conscription we shall surely accept divine sovereignty as to where we are placed.

• Judah moved first; it was not in order of birth that they moved, the camp of Judah was to take the lead; so that in every way God orders things.

• You get a similar idea with the Levites; that although in the numbering in chapter 3, Gershon comes first, and then Kohath and Merari
  • – because Gershon was the eldest of the family –

• yet Kohath has the most exalted service. So we have to be prepared for divine sovereignty.

Ques. What is the thought of the Levites in verse 53 of chapter 1? They are to encamp round about the tabernacle of testimony,

• “that there come not wrath upon the assembly of the children of Israel; and the Levites shall keep the charge of the tabernacle of testimony”?

G.R.C. The military side is in the beginning of chapter 2,

• “round about the tent of meeting afar off, opposite to it, shall they encamp”.

• That is to say as military men, relative to our own houses and so on, we are not to intrude our own affairs; we stand in relation to the tabernacle, for its defence;
  • but we do not intrude our own affairs, our household stuff or anything of that sort into the service.

• Those immediately around the tabernacle are the Levites, to keep the charge; they are under charge to, in every way, guard – that word has been used – the habitation of God.

Ques. Having a more intimate position than the military. Is it interesting that in Exodus 6, the Spirit of God stops at the generation,

• “the sons of Levi according to their generations”?

• Reuben, Simeon, Levi, then nothing more. I wondered if God had reached His prime end in the Levite?

G.R.C. That is good. And in chapter 3, as no doubt you have noticed, it begins with

• “these are the generations of Aaron and Moses”,

• putting Aaron first, and does not enlarge on Moses.

• It goes on to develop the generations of Aaron, he was of the tribe of Levi of course, he was the head of the tribe.

• But when the whole tribe of Levi, in verse 6, are brought near and presented, Moses presents them before Aaron the priest,
  • showing that all levitical service is to be under priestly direction, primarily under the direction of Christ as Priest.

Ques. The passage in Romans 12 has been alluded to as bearing upon conscription.

• Would 1 Corinthians 12, especially the end of that chapter, bear on appointment, divine sovereignty entering into it?

G.R.C. Quite so. We have to extend it of course to all the saints, as it says earlier in that chapter, God has set the members in the body according as it has pleased Him.

• Then you have the special gifts at the end, set in the assembly, but then even in the body God has set the members there as it pleased Him.

Ques. Would you say what we are to understand by appointment? It seems to be here something rather compensatory to not being numbered.

G.R.C. They were numbered later from a month old and upward, but not numbered with the rest; this was a special appointment.

• But in our case we, as Christians, are not only all conscripted as soldiers, but we are all of the tribe of Levi.

• Yet the point is do we value the appointment? In secular callings, men are on the look-out for appointments.

Ques. In what way does Paul use the word, in both the first and the second epistles to Timothy, where he says,

• “I have been appointed” a herald, and so on?

G.R.C. I think that would bear on this. What an appointment Paul had! He was appointed a herald and an apostle and a teacher of the nations in faith and truth;

• what scope, a teacher of the nations, not simply believers!

• He would have in mind, of course, that the nations are to become believers, but I was thinking of the scope of it in both epistles.

Ques. What would you say as to persons being appointed, and our having confidence in persons who are appointed?

G.R.C. Do you mean that if it is the Lord’s appointment we should have confidence?

Rem. I was wondering how we could distinguish persons who have a sense, like Paul did, of being appointed, and then the question of confidence on our side in them.

G.R.C. Well, that is an important point, because Paul could speak of his appointment, he was quite sure of it; and every spiritual person would be sure of it,

• but some at Corinth did not seem so sure of it. We too, ought to know our appointments.

• But then there is a sense in which the appointment applies to all of us.

• I bring that in because one has a desire that all of us, especially the young people, should value this idea of appointment.

• It is something special; to be a Levite is something special, and yet we are all Levites according to the divine thought; and we have been numbered from a month old and upward in view of it.

Ques. In referring to the household of Stephanus, Paul speaks of them as devoted, which means appointed, does it not, as the note says, ‘an officer to a regiment’.

G.R.C. That is good.

Ques. Would the idea of appointment go along with the blessing of Levi?

• “They shall teach Jacob thine ordinances, and Israel, thy law: they shall put incense before thy nostrils, and whole burnt offerings upon thine altar”.

G.R.C. That includes the priest as well, the whole tribe of Levi is in mind there.

• There are the two appointments relative to the tribe, the tribe as a whole appointed, according to what we have here,
  • over all the tabernacle, and over all the vessels thereof and over all the things that belong to it; they were to bear it, and serve it, and encamp around it.

• But then there was the special appointment to the office of priest, which, I suppose, is an exceedingly high office that we have been appointed to.

• What one is concerned about is that we should value these appointments.

• You see the holy nation as organised according to this book, with God as the Centre.

• Our concern should be divine appointments, not appointments down here, not appointments to high positions in this world.

• God may order it that way, Daniel was appointed to a high position which he did not seek at all, God can do that kind of thing if it is needful for the testimony.

• In Corinth, a man had been appointed as steward of the city, Erastus; that was in God’s ordering, Erastus was steward of the city.

• But if you see where his name comes in in the list in Romans 16 it would leave you with the idea that while he would use his position for God, he was not making any boast of that at all.

• That was not the appointment that he valued in the full sense, for at the end of Romans 16, which we might regard to some extent as a levitical chapter, in verse 22, we get Tertius, who I suppose was a slave –
  • “I Tertius, who have written this epistle, salute you in the Lord. Gaius, my host and of the whole assembly, salutes you”.

• I would assume Gaius was a man of property, for he had room for the whole assembly, he salutes you, and
  • “Erastus, the steward of the city, salutes you, and the brother Quartus” – that is another slave.

• So that a slave comes in first, and then two men who have some distinction in this life, and then another slave, the brother Quartus,
  • and they were very happily together in the fellowship, they were all soldiers, all conscripted, and all appointed, appointed as Levites.

• That would be the appointment they valued, Erastus would value his appointment as a Levite; it would have no comparison in his mind with his appointment as steward of the city, no comparison at all;
  • the great appointment from this standpoint was the divine appointment – that in the holy nation he, a Levite, had been appointed with this special charge over the tabernacle and over its vessels.

Ques. When the apostle says to Timothy

• “Take thy share in suffering as a good soldier of Jesus Christ”,

• is that the military side? But then he says also
  • “This charge my child Timotheus I commit to thee according to the prophecies as to thee preceeding”, 1 Timothy 1: 18,

• would that be the levitical rather?

G.R.C. I would say that. I think that is very helpful.

• “This charge I commit to thee”

• I believe is the whole charge of the tabernacle of testimony and would include the Levite and the priest, the whole charge.

Ques. Is it of note that in 1 Chronicles chapter 9 the matter is carried forward by Ezra in the day of recovery,

• so that he refers to those who had been appointed in trust, or on account of their faithfulness, and the levitical section there is full of the idea of appointment?

G.R.C. I am glad you have mentioned that, we will have to look into that in our private time, because this idea of appointment impresses me greatly.

Rem. I referred to it because faithfulness is added to the matter.

Rem. And following on what Mr. H. has said, by the last words of David, the age limit was reduced for the Levites.

• Did not J.T. say that that would greatly increase the number available. Might that bear on our time, the valuing of the appointment that is available?

G.R.C. I think so. And I think in that way we have to distinguish between the military

• – as a soldier I am there to defend, I am there to defend the testimony against all attack –

• and the Levites who have a positive charge, and a most marvellous charge.

• They are over the tabernacle of testimony and all its utensils, they are responsible to keep it all unsullied, and intact, to take it down to a new encamping place and to put it up again,
  • in order that the priestly service might not be hindered in any way.

• They were given to the priests, they move under the priest’s direction, and their whole outlook would be to keep the tabernacle of testimony so pure and unsullied
  • that as soon as the encampment took place the priests could function, and God would have His portion.

• Now that is the charge committed to us. Do we value the appointment? One would like to raise the question with all of us, especially the young people, that this far surpasses any appointment you could get down here.

• God may give you something down here in His government, or he may not; that is a secondary matter;

• but this great charge is open to everyone in their measure, to serve as a Levite, and to take up the charge as appointed by God, and then
  • over and above that, what is greater still, Aaron and his sons were appointed to the priest’s office.

• That is the greatest office you could imagine, greater than any Prime Minister’s office.

Ques. The apostle says in 1 Corinthians 4: 9,

• “For I think that God has set us the apostles last as appointed unto death”.

• Is that not striking, coming in the Corinthian epistle?

G.R.C. It is very affecting, because evidently the testimony required that divine appointment, the testimony required that the apostle should be appointed unto death. And of course we do not know what the appointment might be for us.

Ques. Would it help if you would say a word as to the distinction between the levitical and the priestly side of the service?

G.R.C. Perhaps we ought to begin by speaking about the priests, because that word in chapter 3, verse 10, is striking.

• “And Aaron and his sons shalt thou appoint that they may attend to their priest’s office”.

• That is a great thing to attend to; I am not belittling the Levites, but the priest is the greatest thought. Now how far are we attending to the priest’s office?

• We are all of the priestly family, but are we attending to the priest’s office; that is the first thing, because if we are not attending to the priest’s office we shall not be able to serve effectively as Levites.

• They serve under the direction of the priests, and with the priestly service in view; nor shall we value sufficiently what we are to defend as soldiers.

• So it is of the utmost importance that we should realise that we have been appointed to the highest office, the priest’s office, and we are to attend to it.

Rem. And the scripture makes no division between the priests, the sons of Aaron, and the office. It says

• “they may attend to their priest’s office”.

G.R.C. You mean the close link with Christ?

Rem. Yes, priest’s office would suggest the dignity conferred upon them, and that they cannot be separated from it.

• We may elect ourselves out of this, but scripture says “their priest’s office”.

G.R.C. Very good.

Ques. Had John that in mind in Revelation chapter 1, when he speaks of

• Him “that loves us and has washed us from our sins, and has made us a kingdom, priests unto His God and Father”.

G.R.C. I think the idea of a kingdom is set out in these early chapters of Numbers.

• It helped me many years ago, when J.T. referred to these early chapters of Numbers as the present view of the kingdom of God,
  • God dwelling amongst His people, and having absolute rights to regulate the whole of their lives like a king regulates the nation.

• So we are a kingdom, but then the highest office in the kingdom from this standpoint is priesthood.

Ques. Does a priest always think as God thinks, or is exercised to do it at any rate, always thinking from God’s point of view?

G.R.C. Yes, and he has to maintain the service; it says in chapter 3, verse 38

• “And those who encamped before the tabernacle eastward, before the tent of meeting toward the sunrising, were Moses and Aaron and his sons, who kept the charge of the sanctuary”.

• They kept the charge of the sanctuary, not simply the tabernacle of testimony as a whole, but specially the sanctuary, because the Levites were not allowed to touch anything in the sanctuary,
  • the priests had to go in and cover everything before the Levites could come in, but they had charge of the sanctuary, and

• it has often struck me, as to their encampment, that they were immediately at the east of the tabernacle, so that as a priest began the day, he would look out;
  • on the one side there was the sunrising – the Lord’s coming would be in his mind – and on the other the tabernacle of testimony.

• And how happily the priest would immediately, as his first duty, as it were, take up the priestly service, put the incense on the golden altar, and offer the oblation on the brazen altar!

Ques. So would the local brethren be the priestly family? Is the sanctuary worked out in our localities?

G.R.C. It is. We should all pitch our tents as priests, on the east side of the tabernacle, all our tents should be pitched there.

• In a secondary way we pitch our tents as Levites, we have got that responsibility too.

• Thirdly we pitch our tents relative to the defence of the testimony. We are in all these positions.

Ques. Does the term “attend to it” involve that things are done effectively in the Spirit?

• The service of God is not approached in a perfunctory manner.

G.R.C. I am sure that is right. We need to do it in the Spirit as you say, and to do it with application,

• apply ourselves to it, to attend to the priest’s office, to see that the priestly service is maintained,

• the continual burnt offering, the continual incense, and all that is requisite is maintained every day.

Rem. Samuel was called into this matter very early in life – I was thinking of your reference to those who are younger. Would it not be an encouragement to all to see that they can have a part in this matter?

G.R.C. I am sure it would. And it is encouraging that saints who are physically disabled are not disqualified from the priest’s office, the highest service remains open to them; they can attend to the priest’s office, in fact they have more time for intercession.

Ques. You spoke earlier of the kingly priesthood in 1 Peter chapter 2. Would the holy priesthood to offer up spiritual sacrifices be the highest character, and more what you have in mind now?

G.R.C. Yes, and then there is the other side, because, as it says, the priest’s lips should keep knowledge, they seek the law.

Rem. Yes, I was thinking of that passage. He is the messenger of Jehovah of hosts.

G.R.C. And we would like Mr. B’s remarks on priests and Levites.

Rem. One was only thinking of the immediate access to God that the priests have, and the force of anointing as specially bearing on the priests.

G.R.C. Yes, Exodus chapter 40 makes that clear, that the anointing shall be to you an everlasting priesthood; it is a beautiful thought, that we are priests in virtue of the anointing.

Ques. Would the priests always be on the alert for the approach of the stranger?

G.R.C. You mean it says

• “the stranger that cometh near shall be put to death”.

Ques. Is it remarkable that in days of recovery we get the thought of a teaching priest, as bearing upon the Levites?

• I was thinking of what you were speaking of the priestly office as being the greater; would not all levitical service be done in a priestly way, having the thoughts of God for His people in mind?

G.R.C. I am sure. I feel it is very important to see that all priestly service is under the direction of the priest – Aaron himself primarily. But Christ Himself is the priest.

• Then Aaron’s sons; so that what is priestly in us takes precedence, that is, in all that we do levitically we are thinking of God, and what is suitable to God,

• and that the praise of God should ever increase in volume and quality.

Ques. Would it help to be reminded that true priestly service really flows from the liberty and intelligence of a son? Does that help, and would it not encourage the youngest to come forward in it?

G.R.C. That is of the utmost importance; sonship is a relationship, priesthood is an office.

• God has been pleased to appoint His first born sons to the highest office, the office of priests. J.T. said as to
  • “Israel is my son, my firstborn, let my son go that he may serve me” –

• how does he serve? As a priest. Where does he serve? In the tabernacle. Sonship lies behind it all.

Rem. So that we really see the pattern in the beauty and fulness of it in the Lord Jesus Himself as the Son, do we not?

G.R.C. We do. That is a very important thing, that Hebrews brings out, that the Lord Jesus Himself is the Son.

Ques. Is it not important that in relation to Christ as great High Priest, the whole tabernacle system was anointed with oil without the application of blood?

G.R.C. Yes it was, it gives Him His unique position; but later, after the consecration, then the oil and the blood is sprinkled on Aaron and his sons.

• It is wonderful grace that He has gone in on a basis on which He can link us with Him.

Rem. I wondered if the military side, and the Levitical side, and the priestly side are not beautifully blended in Paul and Silas in Acts 16.

• I was thinking of the military side as dealing with the woman,
  • “I enjoin thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her”,

• that is military, and then they were engaged in levitical service, but they ended on a priestly note.

G.R.C. Very good indeed, and then the priestly note having been effective, praying and praising God with singing,

• they go back to levitical service in all the freshness of priesthood, speaking the word of the Lord to the jailor.

Ques. By way of contrast, in relation to this question of appointment which one feels very, very important,

• is it not remarkable that in Luke chapter 22 the disciples wanted to do the appointing, whom they held to be the greatest, is there not something instructive for us in that?

G.R.C. Yes, that would be an ever present danger I suppose, but in the way we are speaking of it, this appointment in its measure is open to us all;

• but then, as you say, sovereignty enters into the actual work allotted, because in chapter 4, verse 19, as to the Kohathites, it says
  • “Aaron and his sons shall go in and appoint them everyone to his service and to his burden”.

  • And then again in verse 27 “ye shall appoint unto them in charge all their carrying”.

• So that in the detailed working out of it all is divine sovereignty; while we are all favoured in this appointment, yet we cannot choose our work, it is all
  • in divine sovereignty that the work is given; we cannot choose other people’s work for them.

Ques. Should we all covet to have a sense of commission for anything we put our hand to?

G.R.C. I am sure we should. It speaks in chapter 4, verse 3

• of “all that enter into the service, to do the work in the tent of meeting”;

• it is a work, and we should have the sense as to what we are appointed to do.

• But then first of all we need to value the idea of appointment, that is what one would like to leave upon our spirits, what is really governing our outlook in life?

• What are we seeking after? Is it some great appointment in our secular life down here?

• Have we really grasped the fact that the greatest possible appointments have been made by God, and He has appointed us as Levites, in charge over the tabernacle of testimony?

• What are we doing about that? We may waste our lives seeking an appointment down here, and never take up the charge that we have been appointed to by God.

• And then we have been appointed to the priest’s office. These are the greatest favours conferred upon man in the sphere of testimony.

Ques. Is the principle seen in Mark 3, where it says of the Lord that He went up into the mountain and called whom He Himself would, and they went to Him, and

• He appointed twelve that they might be with him, and that He might send them to preach and have power to heal diseases, and to cast out demons.

• Would the principle extend to us?

G.R.C. The general principle. The twelve were special of course, and what is special is allowed for in what our brother referred to at the end of 1 Corinthians 12.

• There is what is special, but the principle of it extends, as these chapters show, the tribe of Levi were all appointed, and their various work and burdens were appointed to them.

Page Top   Reading Top

READING  2
Ordering of the Camp ( 2 ) The Passover in the Wilderness Numbers 9: 1-17; 10: 11-13 Memorials 8: 28-50

G.R.C. We were occupied this afternoon with the ordering of the camp, God having come down to dwell among His people,

• and ordering every detail of their lives relative to Himself and His habitation,

• and we finished in considering specially the appointments, the honour of being appointed as Levites over the tabernacle and over all its utensils, and having the charge of it,
  • and then, what is higher still, the honour of being appointed to the priest’s office, to which Aaron and his sons were to attend.

• They were to attend upon their priest’s office, and how an understanding of those appointments would eclipse in our thoughts and affections anything that the world could offer.

• The world may offer its appointments, but God has given us the highest possible appointments, and they are the things to apply ourselves to from our earliest days; for the Levites were numbered from a month old and upwards.

• As to the priests, it does not give any age; they were simply numbered as of the priestly family; they are the great appointments to keep in mind.

• And what follows, one would think, is what is necessary if we are to be preserved in priestly and levitical energy.

• That is, in chapter 5 we are to be ready continually to submit to the trial of jealousy, as to the purity of our affections, whether we are in any way being led astray by what is worldly and earthly.

• In other words, whether in any way the scene around is becoming anything other than a wilderness to us.

• The book opens with God speaking in the tent of meeting in the wilderness.

• The moment the world becomes anything but a wilderness we are in very great danger; if the world is a wilderness to us it will be because our affections are held for God and His things.

• And if the world is simply a wilderness we cannot have ambitions connected with it.
  • Mr. Darby said, “This world is a wilderness wide, I have nothing to seek or to choose”, Hymn 139.

Ques. What kind of leaven are we particularly expected to meet in this wilderness setting? You helped us in London as to getting free of Egypt,

• and the danger of the leaven creeping in, the old leaven, and the leaven of malice and wickedness;

• I wondered if you could help us as to what we may expect particularly in the wilderness from which the passover feast and the unleavened bread would set us free.

G.R.C. I think it would be those items that you have mentioned, that Paul refers to in 1 Corinthians 5;

• that is, there is the old leaven, and the leaven of malice and wickedness. You will find the thing working in the book of Numbers.

• Take the rising of the band of Korah; there was the old leaven working, they would aspire to the priesthood, although Korah was a Levite, and the others were not even Levites.

Ques. Is it in your mind that in this passage there is no thought of any shelter from judgment involved,

• but it is an advance in the people appreciating what the passover was to God as claiming a people for His service?

G.R.C. That is just what I had in mind.

Ques. Is it remarkable that in the case of the men who keep it the second month you have the word in verse 12,

• “nor break a bone thereof”?

• Is not that one of the highest references to the body of Christ,
  • “not a bone of him shall be broken” – John’s gospel?

• It has often impressed me that even in a gospel like John, which really belongs to recovery days, the blessedness of the One who is the passover comes before us.

• There is a good deal about the passover setting in John’s gospel, and that is where we get the expression “not a bone of him shall be broken”.

G.R.C. How are you applying that?

Rem. I thought that there was a certain advance in this second month.

Ques. Is not that quotation from the Psalm?

Rem. Very probably, but I wondered if it all set out the grace of the present moment, and the way things are made more precious to the saints in days of recovery!

G.R.C. Yes, but does not that expression occur in Exodus 12 as well?

Rem. Yes, verse 46.

G.R.C. I would like to get more clearly what is in your mind as to not a bone broken.

Rem. I thought it brought before us a sense of the blessedness and even deity of the Person Who is our passover.

• In the first instance it is just
  • “according to all the rites of it, and according to all the ordinances thereof shall ye hold it”.

• That is the first month, but when it comes to the question of the second month there is this verse included.

G.R.C. Yes.

Rem. I want to get this clear. There was only one passover, was there? But is not Numbers 9 a memorial? The Lord Jesus only died once.

G.R.C. Yes, this was the memorial of the passover, although it says the children of Israel shall hold the passover at its set time.

• It does not use the word memorial here, but in Exodus 12 it does, that it was to be held as a memorial;
  • and I think it is in the memorial that there is the leisure to take in the meaning of it in a way that could not be done in Egypt.

• What has been said is the point that whereas in Egypt the people would be thinking of their need and the benefit they were going to get, here we are thinking of God’s side, what God is getting from the passover, He is putting in His claims now;
  • He has come down to dwell, and He is about to put in His total claims over the people relative to Himself as dwelling amongst them.

• Well, what an effect it would have upon them that they have just partaken of the passover before these claims are put in, on the first day of the second month, and not only so, but that the atmosphere of the passover was continuing.

• They would not forget that there were still those who, through uncleanness, had not partaken of it, and that they were going to partake of it in the second month.

• So that between these two partakings of the passover there is the ordering of the camp; but, it seems to me, that the influence of the passover covers the whole situation.

Rem. All one had in mind was the scripture in Hebrews:

• “By one offering he has perfected for ever the sanctified”;

• because Christendom has taken up the idea of a repetition of the sacrifice, whereas all we can have now is a memorial.

G.R.C. Quite so, but it does not alter the fact of the spiritual appropriation involved.

Ques. Are you thinking than an outcome of God dwelling among His people consciously, is that those people would have a deepening appreciation, as years went by, of the value of the sacrifice of Christ?

G.R.C. Yes; therefore as the years go by there should be a deepening appreciation with us, and a deepening response in affections of firstborn sons to God.

• That was God’s thought in the passover with the people in Egypt; they would be thankful of escaping from judgment;
  • but God’s point in the passover was that He was paying the price to secure the firstborn.

• And He was going to rely on the affections of the firstborn, relative to all the claims He was going to put in, as coming to dwell among them.

• He would rely on the affections of the firstborn to value all that has been before us this afternoon, and to readily respond to love’s requirements.

Rem. So that the real gain of the passover is positive not negative – what there is supremely for God.

G.R.C. That is the real thing.

• “Israel is my son, my firstborn”.

Ques. Is the presentation of the offering of our God the recognition on the part of the firstborn of God’s claims? God is before their souls, not their initial benefit from the passover.

G.R.C. That is just the thing. They are not thinking here of their benefit, as you say, it is the offering of Jehovah at its set time;

• it is what God is getting from it, and it really involves in the antitype the complete surrender of ourselves to God in the energy of firstborn affection.

Ques. In 1 Corinthians 10, after the exhortation to flee from idolatry, the apostle brings in the communion of the blood of the Christ, and the communion of the body of the Christ. Is that to be a lever in our souls in connection with this matter?

G.R.C. I am sure it is, and yet of course there is a distinction because that is relating to the altar; the altar had been set up and dedicated, that is the communion, they were committed to that, the fellowship.

• But God was about to put in His claims that were total; the thing is have we recognised that God’s claims over us are total, one hundred per cent?

• That if God comes down to dwell among His people He can ask for nothing less than a hundred per cent,
  • a total claim over our spirits, souls and bodies and circumstances, everything as to our interests being secondary to His.

• That is what the ordering of the camp involved earlier; and what would give the lever for that I believe is
  • the ever increasing appreciation of the passover, as bringing about in us what God had in mind for Himself from it – the energy of firstborn affections.

• The other side that you speak of would flow out of this.

• The order had been dedicated but this now, the passover, and then God’s claims following would mean that we are irrevocably committed to all that God has set up;
  • we are committed to the tabernacle, we are committed to the altar, and to the fellowship; and we submit to God’s ordering in everything.

Rem. God had said to Abraham at the outset that His people would leave Egypt with great property; that was not to be a personal property was it, but property to serve Him well with in all His interests.

G.R.C. That is it, so that He lays claim really to all that we have and all that we are.

Ques. Would you connect it with Paul’s reference to being purchased with the blood of His own, the assembly? It is God’s own property at such a cost.

• I wondered if our brother’s reference to the Person would enter into that –
  • “not a bone of him shall be broken”.

G.R.C. Yes, the blood of His own. The thought of purchase is very affecting.

• In the song of Exodus 15 you have redemption and purchase, both are by the blood.

• But in one case I suppose the redeemer has to think of the liabilities, and the cost of meeting the liabilities,
  • but when you think of purchase, it is the value that the purchaser puts on that which he is acquiring, for Himself;

• and that is the touching side, the assembly of God which He purchased; it is the value God put on the assembly.

Ques. Following the word as to the passover, and the exhortation

• “let us keep the feast”, in 1 Corinthians 5,

• is it of interest that when we come to the close of the next chapter we have this word:
  • “and ye are not your own for ye have been bought with a price, glorify now then God in your body”?

G.R.C. Yes, you are thinking of the price.

Rem. Yes, and I am thinking of this coming in following the sacrifice,

• “Christ our passover has been sacrificed”.

• What a price we may say!

G.R.C. Yes, so that we are not only redeemed but purchased. We are not our own. We have been bought with a price, we belong to God, and we are to glorify God in our bodies, and that involves His total claims upon us.

Rem. The question of the keeping of the passover seems to be a most essential one,

• and it seems that there is a fuller provision made in divine grace for those who are unclean and who are exercised concerning the matter

• than those who are outwardly clean and have no concern in regard to the keeping of the passover.
  • In that case it says “that that soul shall be cut off from among the people”.

• What would you say about that?

G.R.C. I am glad you have taken us on to those two sides. Those who were unclean here were rightly exercised, and I suppose in that sense God valued the exercise,

• they realised they were unclean, and yet they say “Why are we kept back?” They were longing to be in the matter,
  • “Why are we kept back, that we may not present the offering of Jehovah at its set time among the children of Israel?”

• They were not thinking of themselves – what they were missing – but the offering of Jehovah. And therefore you have the consideration and forbearance of God in connection with them.

Ques. Is it particularly encouraging that they not only are exercised about their uncleanness, but they own it?

G.R.C. Yes it is,

• “They said to him we are unclean by reason of the dead body of a man”;

• they knew it. We do not know how many other people did know it, but these owned it.

Rem. The wonderful grace of the dispensation comes out as we own matters.

G.R.C. Quite so. There is divine provision if we own matters.

Ques. Would you suggest in that way that there is a possibility of us being outwardly clean and yet not being self judged inwardly?

G.R.C. Yes; that is a very solemn thing. Here God says,

• “that soul shall be cut off from among his people”.

• A person who is not inwardly moved at the idea of presenting –
  • “because he presented not the offering of Jehovah at the set time”

• – a person who has no regard for God’s claims over him, draws upon himself divine displeasure.

Rem. We would have to bear in mind that they were kept from eating.

• In current matters things have gone on, the brethren are still in fellowship who are unclean through a dead body; so we would have to make some distinction, would we not?

G.R.C. Yes we may come to that, in our later readings in this book.

Ques. What would you say about a dead body. Is it not a very illuminating expression? There is moral death in remaining in touch with it, is there not?

• And defiling of the camp would mean committing of the brethren to that, if one remains linked up with it.

G.R.C. I would not think these persons did.

Rem. I would judge that. I was only speaking of the seriousness of being linked up with a dead body, and the incumbency upon us all, if that is the state of affairs, to get clear as quickly as possible.

G.R.C. I would say these persons were unclean by reason of a dead body of a man, but it does not mean that they were still touching the dead body,

• they had come to a judgment of that; but there was a process of cleansing required.

Ques. Is not the point here that these persons were disqualified from eating the passover until they were clean?

G.R.C. Yes, that is the point.

Ques. Why is it that we have not the provision yet, for their becoming clean, until chapter 19?

G.R.C. Well there you get the statute relative to it; it comes later in the wilderness journey, the definite statute is in chapter 19, and perhaps bears specially on our day.

Ques. Why do you think that Moses felt a special enquiry of Jehovah was needed?

G.R.C. Would it be because no such situation had arisen before? What do you say about it?

Rem. I thought it showed the importance Moses attached to this matter of uncleanness.

G.R.C. Yes.

Rem. In the matter of the daughters of Zelophehad Moses had to look into the matter.

G.R.C. Yes, a very different exercise of course, but there again enquiry had to be made.

Ques. Would not the genuineness of the exercise of these men be seen at the end of verse 6,

• “they could not hold the passover”?

• It does not say they were debarred by anyone, but their own sensitiveness would give them to understand they were not fitted for the passover:
  • “and they came before Moses and before Aaron on that day”.

• I think it would show, as you have been saying, that there is genuineness of exercise and desire to do what is right, and I think you made some allusion to the fact that that is how the grace of the day of recovery operates.

G.R.C. If we apply it in that way as to the dispensation we have all come in as second month men, because the case in Hezekiah’s day bears on that, 2 Chronicles 30, where

• they kept the passover in the second month in a day of recovery, and at that time some of them even then were not purified.

• Not that we could make that as a reason for treating things lightly at all, but it is just the facts of the history.

Rem. But there was not any delay here, was there?

G.R.C. No, but in 2 Chronicles 30: 2, it says

• “and the king took counsel and his princes, and the whole congregation in Jerusalem to hold the passover in the second month”

• – they had not held it in the first month –
  • “for they could not keep it at that time because the priests had not hallowed themselves in sufficient number, neither had the people been gathered together to Jerusalem”.

• So that both of the disqualifications were in force, that is the lack of hallowing, and also that they were afar off, which it mentions in Numbers 9: 10
  • “anyone on a journey afar off”.

• And that is where believers were found in the opening of this recovery, they were not only linked with what was unclean – the dead bodies – but they were afar off from God’s centre.

Rem. I think if we understood that it would magnify grace to us.

G.R.C. Quite so. And then in Hezekiah’s day they keep the passover on the second month, a very great congregation, in verse 13. And then in what follows it says,

“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”, verse 18.

• And so God hearkened to Hezekiah and healed the people, and then they held the feast of unleavened bread seven days with gladness;
  • “and the Levites and the priests praised Jehovah day by day, with instruments of praise to Jehovah”.

• I only refer to that as bearing particularly on the general position of this day of recovery.

Ques. And would not the delay between the first and second month result in a deeper exercise and greater yield?

G.R.C. I would think that is how it worked out through the goodness of God.

• The matter of the passover was kept before the people throughout this period of numbering and ordering; and then, as has been noted,
  • on the twentieth day of the second month –chapter 10: 11 – the cloud was taken up.

• It is wonderful that God should move first on that day, all by that time had partaken of the passover, all were ready for movement.

Ques. Is there a test different in movement from dwelling? I know that the dwelling does not cease, but would the goings of God be reflected in the cloud?

G.R.C. Yes, it is God Himself moving. God Himself initiates the movement. And if we are in the gain of the passover we shall be ready for movement.

• As you say, movement tests us. In nature we would all like to settle down.

Ques. Do you connect it with the expression in 2 Corinthians

• “I will dwell among them and walk among them”?

• Is the walking among them a further exercise?

G.R.C. I thought so. We would like to move with God. God is moving, God is walking, and He would walk among His people. It is not His thought to leave His people behind.

Ques. You said earlier that when the cloud moved the priests and the Levites sprang into action and a good deal of energy and activity was taking place. Would you mind helping us as to how that would operate today?

G.R.C. To begin with, the priests would sound the alarm, or rather it says the silver trumpets were for the calling together of the assembly and for the journeyings of the camps. And then in verse 5:

• “When ye blow an alarm, the camps that lie eastward shall set forward”;

• so that the priests needed to be on the alert all the time, and to sound the trumpets.

• But then at the sound of the trumpets it would mean the Levites all spring into activity, because the tabernacle had to be taken down, and had to be carried and re-erected.

Rem. That would involve very close working would it not? Does not Levi’s name mean ‘united’?

G.R.C. Yes. United in the sense of united to one another as Levites, and united to the priests.

Rem. I wondered in that way if it could be said that the passover was the basis of the relationships between God and the people;

• but not only so, it was the basis of their relationships with one another. Would you go as far as that?

• I was thinking it is a remarkable thing that in Egypt the people were all feeding upon the same food at the same time; would that not build up a constitutional unity amongst the saints?

G.R.C. It would, and the neighbourly element comes in relative to it, as to the feeding.

Ques. Does there seem to be some definite link between the eating of the passover and movement? In Exodus 12 they ate it with their loins girded; it was a move out of Egypt,

• but would it be like God to move when all the saints were ready – having eaten of the passover in the second month?

G.R.C. It seems like that. The timing was the twentieth day of the second month; so that the second month passover had been partaken of, and the days of unleavened bread were almost completed.

Ques. So that whilst in one sense God’s movements are entirely sovereign, and no one could anticipate them, does He take account of conditions amongst the saints in regard to His movements?

G.R.C. I am sure He does; because, after all, God moved with them for 40 years; what patience there was in that, when it should have been eleven days journey!

Ques. Would there be a special glory about this initial movement, because everything was in perfection, at least, as regulated by the presence of God.

• Moses says in Deuteronomy, He shone forth. Would this not be one of the times of Him shining forth, so that there is something very glorious in the movement?

G.R.C. Do you think that normally each movement would bring a shining forth?

Rem. Some fresh, added glory, especially as the land was approached, for all these movements are credited with being eastward are they not?

G.R.C. Yes.

Rem. It says “so it was continually”.

• Is not that so at the present time? God was going on continuously.

G.R.C. Yes, the cloud was there continuously even when the camp was stationary. But then in chapter 10: 11 the cloud was taken up from off the tabernacle of testimony.

• Then they set forward, and the note on the word ‘journeys’ there seems interesting – ‘according to their marching order’.

• Everything now being in order according to chapter 2. They were moving according to divine order. The numbering had taken place, and they were all in divine order.

Ques. John’s ministry has been referred to earlier, is it not significant that he ends his ministry with warnings?

• I was thinking about this question of uncleanness and the basis of getting things right; he speaks about inaccurate statements going amongst the brethren, and then he says
  • “little children keep yourselves from idols”.

• And at the end of the Revelation he brings in the feature of adding to and taking away. I wondered if it had some link with this matter that we are on as to what is unsuitable coming in.

G.R.C. That is interesting, that John should warn us like that; we need warning.

Ques. Would the passover sharpen the spiritual vision and spiritual hearing of the saints, so that as the cloud moved the saints were alert and moved with God?

G.R.C. Yes, really the firstborn affections are there energetically. That is God’s portion from the passover, the affections of the firstborn.

Ques. Would there be any moral link at all between the appearance of fire here, and the lamb roast with fire, in the passover?

• I wondered whether there was an abiding testimony to what was suitable to the presence of God,
  • the fire reminding us of the severity of judgment seen in the death of Christ,

• and that the character of God is permanently before the people in the appearance of it by night?

G.R.C. So that our God is a consuming fire.

Page Top   Reading Top   Next Reading