Jottings

by J. Miller | Category: Jottings | Mar 1944

The Lord in His teaching on the subject of the Kingdom of Heaven says, "The Kingdom of Heaven is like unto a treasure hidden in the field; which a man found, and bid; and in his joy he goeth and selleth all that he hath, and buyeth that field" (Matthew t3. 44). The last chapter of the book of Ruth gives a very beautiful illustration of what the Lord says in this verse. The family of Elimelech had lost all by their departure from the land and from the Lord. Their turning their back on the land was but the outward evidence of the fact that they had turned back from following the Lord.

Boaz was a kinsman-redeemer. "Kinsman" (Hebrew Gaal), frequently used to describe Boaz, is the same word as" redeemer," often used in the Old Testament. It means to free, to redeem. But Boaz was not the nearest kinsman-redeemer, there was one nearer than he.

The matter of redemption must be legally settled, in truth and righteousness, so the near kinsman is called before the elders of Bethlehem, and Boaz says, "Naomi, that is come again out of the country of Moab selleth the parcel of land, which was our brother Elimelech's and I thought to disclose it unto thee saying, Buy it before them that sit here and before the elders of my people. If thou wilt redeem it, redeem it but if thou wilt not redeem it then tell me that I may know: for there is none to redeem it beside thee and I am after thee. And he said, I will redeem it. The near kinsman was prepared to buy the land.

But the land carried certain burdens It was not simply a matter of the buying of a field. So Boaz went on "What day thou buyest the field of the hand of Naomi, thou must buy it also of Ruth the Moabitess the wife of the dead, to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance". Here was the test. Would the near kinsman buy the field and the woman as well? Would be raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance that his name perish not from the gate of his place? No, he would not? His own inheritance was too important in his eyes to think of the things of others. How contrary to the words, "Not looking each of you to his own things, but each of you also to the things of others. Have this mind in you which was also in Christ Jesus who being in the form of God counted it not a prize to he on an equality with God, but emptied Himself taking the form of a (bond) servant, being made in the likeness of men" (Philippians 2. 4.7)! Had the Lord thought of His own things and of His inheritance, He who is the appointed Heir of all things, He would not have considered our low estate and our poverty. But He looked upon the things of others. This principle lies at the very foundation of Christianity. Self and my own inheritance form the interests of the natural mind; but that is the opposite of the teaching of Christ.

Remember that the man in the parable sold all to obtain the treasure which he found in the field. He judged that the treasure was greater than all that he had. He had set his heart upon the acquiring of the treasure So also did Christ The field, we are told in Matthew 13 , is the world, and there was in the world a treasure which brought the Lord from heaven He emptied Himself How vast and inscrutable is this act of self emptying on the Lord" part? Again what poverty is involved in the fact that He became a bondservant! He was originally in the form of God, which tells of His full Deity but He took the form of a bond servant, which describes His true humanity. Though He became Man He ceased not to be God. He became Man to be a Kinsman Redeemer. He must become Man to have the right of redemption. The first man failed, and failed as he ever does in all his posterity, by sin and self-interest, but, thanks he to God for the second Man; there was no self-interest n Him. He looked on the things of others. He gave up all and lost all, even life itself, but He has gained all. By strange yet sound principles, he who gains all loses all, but he who loses all gains all. This the Lord was continually emphasizing, that he that lost his life saved it, but he who saved his life lost it. This the Lord fully demonstrated, for He Himself is the true exposition of His own doctrine.

The Tent of Meeting was not only the place of assembly for the people of Israel, as for instance will be seen in the public act of the consecration of Aaron and his sons, "Assemble thou all the congregation at the door of the tent of meeting" (Leviticus 8.8), it was the meeting place between the LORD and His people, "It shall he a continual burnt offering throughout your generations at the door of the tent of meeting before the LORD where I will meet with you, to speak there unto thee" (Exodus 29.42).

Moses had still a nearer place of approach, for to him God said, "And thou shalt put the mercy seat above upon the ark; and in the ark thou shalt put the testimony that I shall give thee. And there I will meet with thee, and I will commune with thee from above the mercy-seat, from between the two cherubim which are upon the ark of the testimony" (Exodus 25.21, 22).

Though the people met with God at the door, Moses was more highly privileged to enter the tent of meeting to commune with God. For "when Moses went into the tent of meeting to speak with Him, then he heard the Voice speaking unto him from above the mercy seat that was upon the ark of the testimony, from between the two cherubim; and He spake unto him" (Numbers 7.39). It may he difficult to say exactly what the words, "he-spake unto him " signify, whether they mean God speaking to Moses or Moses speaking to God, but we have, as quoted above, taken the view that it was God speaking to Moses; that however is not important to our present lesson. In the tent of meeting was the meeting place for Moses, the mediator and leader of God's people; at the door the people met with their God. The greater the public responsibility any servant of God carries, the higher he stands, the deeper must he be rooted in Divine favour.

It may be of more than passing interest to notice the wording of Exodus 29.42, "where I will meet with you, to speak there unto thee." "You " and " thee" what is the import of the change of pronoun? Apparently it is intended to teach us that whilst God met with all His people who assembled at His door, His message was to each severally, for each had a need peculiar to himself. "I will meet with you, to speak there unto thee." How sweet is the thought of this personal communion!

Prior to the tent of meeting being built and erected in the midst of the people of Israel, Moses used to take a tent and pitch it without the camp. This tent, we are told, he called "the tent of meeting" (Exodus 33.7-11). This was the place of communion at that time. When any sought the Lo they went out to this tent of meeting, outside the camp. God did not well in it. It is said, "when Moses entered into the Tent, the pillar of cloud descended, and stood at the door of the Tent and the LORD spake with Moses" (verse 9). In this case Moses was inside, but the LORD was at the door, a very remarkable fact, but quite in keeping with what was happening then, for God as yet had no house, no dwelling place on earth, but communed with men then, as He has ever done with men who sought Him when no house was in existence. There "the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend" (verse 11). How near, how sweet, how intimate, was this holy converse between God and man I Does our heart long for it, yearn after it?

Then we are told of Joshua, about whom more was to be heard later. "But his minister Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the Tent."

what is this, "Joshua ... departed not out of the Tent"? Earlier we read of this young man taking the men of Israel and fighting and defeating Amalek, but he only won the victory because of the uplifted hands of Moses. Moses' prayer was vital to Joshua's warfare. Is this in the tent of meeting the reverse of what took place earlier in Rephidim? Then Moses prayed when Joshua fought; now Joshua prays as Moses works. Moses went into the camp, but Joshua remained in the tent. What mighty lessons have we here! Where are the men who pray when the warriors fight? and where are the workers who work while others are bringing the power down upon them through prayer? where are the Joshuas, the young men, and the old Annas who depart not from the place of prayer and communion? Yes, indeed, where are they? Do we wonder that this young man Joshua became the victorious leader of the people of Israel?

J. Miller | Mar 1944
Jottings