Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing (epiphany) of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Titus 2:13
THE OFFERINGS OF THE GOSPEL-AGE
Num. 7: 1-29.
THEIR JOINT OFFERINGS. THE OFFERINGS OF ANTITYPICAL NAHSHON. OF ANTITYPICAL NETHANEEL. OF ANTITYPICAL ELIAB BEREAN QUESTIONS.
ONE OF the most lengthy chapters of the Bible is Num. 7, which we desire to expound in this and in the following two chapters. We have already pointed out in a general way whom the twelve princes of Israel type—those who turned the twelve Little Flock movements into the twelve denominations of Christendom. The sectarian leaders are, therefore, in a general way, the antitypes of the twelve princes of Numbers 1 and 7. But further study, blessed by the Lord's enlightening grace, has enabled us to see more precisely just what kind of persons these antitypical princes were. From what Numbers 7 says of them from the standpoint of each one of them bringing a kid of the goats for a sin offering (vs. 16, 22, 28, etc.), we conclude (1) that they were of such as were of the Christ class, and (2) that they were of such as had lost their crowns, and thus in Num. 1, etc., are distinguished from Aaron, the type of the Christ class.
(2) But one may ask, If they were of those who had lost their crowns, how could they be represented at all as sharing in the Gospel-Age sin-offering? To this very natural question we give the following answer: All New Creatures whether crown-retainers or crown-losers, up to the time of dealing with the Great Company as a class, i.e., up to 1917, when the New Creatures of crown-losers began to be put out of the antitypical Holy, were in the antitypical Holy as a part of the priesthood, and are so represented in the
tabernacle picture, when there is no reason for distinguishing them from the crown-retainers. It is only when there is some special reason for distinguishing them from the priesthood as crown-retainers that they are represented as out of the antitypical Holy and by others than the priesthood, as is done in this chapter with the twelve princes. We all recall how our Pastor repeatedly called our attention to the fact that there was in his days no Great Company as such, and that all New Creatures were in the Holy as a part of antitypical Aaron. The antitypical teachings of this chapter on the twelve Gospel-Age princes' bringing the antitypical kid of the goats for a sin-offering prove our Pastor's thought on this point to be correct. Why? Because during the Gospel-Age the Lord's Goat and what later became Azazel's Goat are typically called kids of the goats for sin-offerings (Lev. 16: 5); while from the standpoint of the finished picture only the Lord's Goat actually has been fully offered as a sin-offering. Hence before 1917 all crown-losers shared in sacrificing it, and hence as New Creatures were a part of antitypical Aaron, who alone sacrifices the Lord's Goat. Therefore we see that crown-losers were a part of antitypical Aaron, until from 1917 onward, when they began to be cast out of the antitypical Holy as New Creatures into the antitypical Court; while their humanity was being led out of the Court and delivered to the fit man. Accordingly, from the standpoint of the Gospel-Age picture, we see that the twelve princes, in bringing the kids of the goats for a sin-offering, represent (1) Gospel-Age persons, (2) who share in the Sin-offering, (3) who are viewed as distinct from the Christ class, and (4) who must be New Creatures, as such only bring the sin-offering. In other words, the twelve princes for Gospel-Age purposes represent twelve sets of individuals who lost their crowns, who actually are, therefore, certain ones
of the Great Company, i.e., those who perverted Little Flock movements into sectarian denominations.
(3) Several typical and antitypical illustrations will help us better to understand this thought. We have already pointed out the fact that when Abraham and Lot acted together in any Scriptural transaction, the former represents the Little Flock and the latter, the Great Company. We recall that Abraham's and Lot's herdsmen quarreled until a separation between their masters was necessary (Gen. 13: 5-12). Abraham's herdsmen represent Little Flock teachers and Lot's herdsmen represent Great Company teachers. The quarrel represents the controversies on the Truth between Little Flock and Great Company teachers. Similarly, Isaac represents the Little Flock and the Philistines represent sectarians (Gen. 26: 14-21). Isaac's herdsmen and the Philistine herdsmen also quarreled. This represents that the Little Flock teachers and the sectarian leaders, who were mainly Great Company members, would have controversies over the Truth. These controversies resulted in perverting Little Flock movements into sects; even as Abraham's and Isaac's herdsmen left the field to Lot's and the Philistine herdsmen respectively. Very many facts of Church history show the antitypical fulfillment. This we will show from some noted examples. Arius, a Little Flock teacher, with his colaborers, and Athanasius, a Great Company teacher, with his colaborers, strove together on the doctrine of Christ's person and relation to the Father, and as a result Greek Catholic sectarianism took immense strides forward on the trinity. Berengar of Tours, a Little Flock teacher, and his colaborers, and Lanfranc, a Great Company teacher, and his colaborers, strove together on the Lord's supper, and as a result Roman Catholic sectarianism leaped forward on transubstantiation. A little later Abelard, a Little Flock teacher, and his colaborers, and Bernard, a Great Company teacher, and his colaborers,
strove on the relation of faith and knowledge, and as a result Roman Catholicism became the advocate of deeper sectarianism in a superstitious faith as distinct from an intelligent faith. In each case the Little Flock herdsmen were driven back, and the Great Company herdsmen retained what seemed to them the prize of battle: Abraham and his herdsmen had the rocky high lands, Lot and his herdsmen had the green plains—but they pitched toward Sodom; and Isaac's herdsmen left the wells Esek [strife] and Sitnah [hatred] in the hands of the Philistine herdsmen. In these pictures, as in Num. 1 and 7, those who represent the Great Company teachers are not included among Abraham's and Isaac's herdsmen, but in certain ones foreign to them. This is because the design is to distinguish between them. If no such design had been intended, the distinction would not have been made; even as in the Aaron picture, when no distinction is intended, the crown-retainers and losers are represented in Aaron.
(4) While on this point we desire to give some examples—Calvin, Menno and Socinus—to show that they were not Little Flock members in the Jacob and Aaron types, but in the twelve-princes type. This was true; for each of these helped to make sects of their respective denominations. Thus Calvin sectarianized the Zwinglian movement into the Reformed or Presbyterian Church; Menno sectarianized the Hubmaier movement into the Baptist Church; and Socinus sectarianized the Servetus movement into the Unitarian Church. Thus these three are typed in three of the twelve princes of Israel, and not in Jacob in begetting his sons and in Aaron at the numbering of the Israelites. Hence we are to think of them as Great Company members at most; and in Socinus' case, he having renounced the ransom, we may doubt his being even in the Great Company.
(5) Above we have set forth our reasons for believing that certain of the crown-lost new creatures
(actually Great Company persons) in twelve groups are the antitypes of the twelve princes of the twelve tribes of Israel described in Num. 1 and 7. Accordingly, the antitypes of the offerings of the twelve princes, as described in Num. 7, are the things offered the Lord by twelve groups of Great Company leaders, one group for each of the twelve denominations of Christendom. With these preliminaries we now proceed to discuss the details brought out in this lengthy and interesting chapter, remembering that we are not studying the Epiphany, nor Millennial, but Gospel-Age antitypes of this chapter, even as our preceding consecutive studies in Numbers have had respect to the Gospel-Age antitypes.
(6) It will be recalled that we applied v. 1 to the Epiphany as a proof that, before the Epiphany chariots would be given to the Epiphany Levites (Vol. V, Chap. III), all the Little Flock would be sealed in the forehead, using the expression, "on the day that Moses had fully set up the tabernacle … the princes … offered, etc.," as the probative words. This proof we regard as correct. But that fact raises several questions: (1) If the day of the verse is the Epiphany, how can the passage be applied to the Gospel-Age? and (2) if applied to the Gospel-Age, how can the expression, fully set up the tabernacle, be true of the Gospel-Age prior to the Epiphany? In view of our method of proof above referred to, these questions naturally arise, but they are susceptible of satisfactory answers in harmony with our above-indicated thought. In answer to the first question we would say that as our former studies, covering Numbers 1-6 and 26, prove the threefold application—the Gospel Day, the Epiphany Day and the Millennial Day application—of the things there studied, so with the rest of the book of Numbers the same principle holds: it is a typical history of these three periods. The tabernacle setting of matters requires these three application to be true,
and the fulfilled facts of two of them prove the same thing; for not only, as will be shown in this chapter, have the Gospel-Age antitypes of this chapter been fulfilled; but part of their Epiphany applications have also occurred. Thus the tabernacle picture is by the fulfillments of the one entirely, and of the other partly, proven to be correct. But it is precisely this fact that emphasizes the second question; for on the surface its Epiphany application seems to deny the possibility of applying the words to the Gospel-Age, in view of the expression, "fully set up the tabernacle, etc."
(7) Here it behooves us to remember the proverb, "Who distinguishes well teaches well," if he rightly divides the Word of Truth (2 Tim. 2: 15). The following distinction will clarify the matter: (1) At Pentecost the entire Church of the Gospel-Age was set up tentatively and representatively; (2) By Sept. 16, 1914, the whole Church had been set up tentatively and individually; and (3) By the Millennium the entire Church will have been set up unchangeably and individually. A few explanations will help clarify these considerations. By the term tentatively we mean probationarily. At Pentecost, of course, the Church was set up probationarily. It was a conditional thing as to whether those who were there made parts of the Church would remain parts of the Church. Therefore, the Church in them was then set up tentatively. The same principle applies to the Church since Sept. 16, 1914, when the Epiphany first began to lap into the Parousia: Those then received into and those already in the Church embryo were on probation— they were only tentatively and not unchangeably a part of the Church. Not only was the Church set up tentatively at Pentecost, but also representatively, i.e., the brethren in the upper room through the begettal of the Spirit were not only made the Church tentatively, but representatively; for from the Divine standpoint they stood at that time for the whole
Church. It is for this reason that the atonement type of the high priest sacrificing the Lord's goat pictures our Lord on Pentecost offering the whole Church to God (Heb. 7: 27). It is for this reason that St. Paul says of Him after His ascension that He purged our [the entire Church's] sins before He sat down at the right hand of God (Heb. 1: 3; 10: 14). Thus the entire Church is represented by the brethren in the upper room at Pentecost. For these reasons we said above that the entire Church was tentatively and representatively set up at Pentecost.
(8) But while the entire Church was set up tentatively and representatively at Pentecost, and tentatively but not representatively in the beginning of the Epiphany, it was set up individually as well as tentatively at the beginning of the Epiphany, i.e., the full 144,000 who constitute and will forever constitute the Body of Christ were found by Sept. 16, 1914. Thus by that date all the individuals who will ever be of the 144,000 were in the Body. But some might ask: If by that date the entire Body of Christ was won, and none of them this side of the vail will thenceforth fall, how could they any more be spoken of as tentatively in the Body? We answer: God's foresight of their proving faithful did not make them unable to fall; for just as Christ Jesus who was foreseen by the Father as faithful unto death, and who was not thereby made unfallable, could have fallen, but was so faithful that He did not fall; so with those this side of the vail in the Body of Christ, since Sept. 16, 1914. They could be unfaithful, and thus fall, if they would; but they so faithfully do and will conduct themselves that they will not fall. Their not falling is not caused by God's foreknowing it, but God's foreknowledge of it is occasioned by their not falling; for if any of them would fall, God would have foreknown it as a result of what they would do. Thus by the beginning of the Epiphany the entire Church was won; and because
those this side of the vail added to those beyond the vail filled up the elect number, it is proper to speak of the entire Church as having been set up individually by the Epiphany. Of course, when the entire Church is beyond the vail it will be set up unchangeably as well as individually.
(9) Hence, from the standpoint of the three distinctions above made, we see the propriety of applying antitypically the expression, "on the day that Moses had fully set up the tabernacle," among other applications, to the Gospel-Age or Day. Applying this statement to its Gospel-Age antitype we would interpret it as follows: The Church as the antitypical tabernacle was fully set up tentatively and representatively at Pentecost, the first part of the Gospel Day or Age, by Christ as Jehovah's Executive, antitypical of Moses. During, and sometime after the beginning of, this day, which began at Jordan and first ended with Sept. 16, 1914, in the beginning of its lapping into the Epiphany, an offering was made by those New Creatures who lost their crowns, and who became sectarian leaders. The Church thus tentatively and representatively set up, had been anointed and sanctified both in itself as God's dwelling, revealing and blessing place [tabernacle], and in its various uses [instruments] and in its teachings [vessels] before the antitypical princes brought their offerings. To anoint the tentative and representative Church as the antitypical sanctuary means to develop the brethren who became the tentative and representative Church at Pentecost in the qualities and abilities of the Holy Spirit for the Church's mission as God's dwelling, revealing and blessing place in the Spirit (Is. 11: 2, 3; Eph. 2: 21, 22). To sanctify it as such means to separate it from selfishness and worldliness, especially as these were manifest in Judaism and heathenism, unto the purposes of God's dwelling, revealing and blessing place. The instruments of v. 1 seem to have special reference to the furniture of the
Most Holy and the Holy. Jesus as the only part of the Christ in the antitypical Ark at Pentecost, had, while in the flesh, undergone the antitypical anointing and sanctifying; and thus when He became the Ark He could have been spoken of as anointed. The tentative and representative Church on Pentecost became the lampstand in its capacity of enlightening the brethren, the table in its capacity of strengthening the brethren, and the altar in its capacity of comforting, encouraging, etc., the brethren. Its anointing in these three respects would mean its being given the qualities and capabilities of the Spirit to act efficiently in these three capacities; while its sanctification in these three respects would type its separation in them from self and the world, and its use in them for the Lord.
(10) The altar of v. 1 seems to refer to the brazen altar, and thus would typify the justified humanity of the Christ. This is anointed in the sense that the Christ is given the qualities and capacities of the Spirit for His sacrificial work as respects His humanity in making it act as a proper sacrifice should—energized for the Lord (Rom. 8: 10, 11). The sanctification of the altar would type the separation of the sacrificed humanity of the Christ from self and the world as well as from sin and error, unto sacrificial work for the Lord. The altar's vessels—five kinds in all—type the doctrines, refutations, corrections, instructions in righteousness and Bible passages, used in connection with the sacrifice of the Christ's humanity. The anointing of these vessels would type a use of them in harmony with the Spirit's qualities and capabilities and interpreting and using them in such harmony; while their sanctification would type their separation from self, the world, sin and error and their use for the Lord in deed and in truth.
(11) The connection between vs. 1 and 2 shows that all the acts of v. 1 precede the acts of the rest, of the chapter. In other words, it was to be after the
anointing and sanctification of the Pentecostal Church that the princes of antitypical Israel would bring their offerings. And this is exactly what the antitype shows to be the case, even as was the case with the type. In Chaps. I and III we have explained the antitypes of the princes. In the former reference we explained what is typed by their participation with Moses and Aaron in numbering the people, i.e., describe, limit, define the sects and the appurtenances of each sect, each antitypical prince doing this to his antitypical tribe only. The present chapter, under the type of the offering of Israel's princes, shows how they did at least a part of the numbering antitypical of Num. 1 and 2. When v. 2 says that the typical princes offered, we are to understand it to type that the crown-lost leaders of the various sects performed a religious service for the Lord that was good and commendable. We are not to understand such offerings to be Azazelian in character, because as such they would not be offering unto the Lord, but unto Satan, whom Azazel's Goat actually serves. That the same class can render both kinds of service is due to their double-mindedness—the good part of their minds has served God in a measure, and the bad part of their minds has served Satan. In this chapter the good part of their service is set forth typically.
(12) V. 3 describes the first set of offerings that the typical princes brought—six wagons and twelve oxen. The statement that they brought them before the Lord types the fact that a service of God in religious respects is implied. And their bringing them before the tabernacle shows that it would be a public work in the domain of religion recognized as such by Christians, nominal and real, especially by the latter. Wagons or chariots (Ps. 46: 9) in the symbols of the Bible type organizations (2 Kings 8: 21; Is. 31: 1, see Berean comments; 66: 15; Rev. 18: 13). Hence the antitypes of the chariots here referred to must be certain organizations or classes of organizations that
leading Great Company members have developed during the Gospel-Age, and that have been serviceable to the Church. The wagons' being covered types the fact of their being protected or guarded by legal or other rights. In Biblical symbols draft animals as such represent teachings, principles and laws. Thus in the above-cited passages the horses type teachings, as is also manifest from other Scriptures (Rev. 6: 2, 4, 5, 8; 19: 11, 14, 21). Like horses, asses and oxen as beasts of draft, not oxen as sacrifices, seem to type teachings, principles and laws, e.g., constitutions, or charters, and by-laws (Ps. 144: 14; Is. 30: 24; Jer. 51: 23). The fact that two princes brought a wagon types the thought that the various denominational leaders would have the same kinds of organizations for their differing denominations. And the fact that each prince brought his own ox and that no two united in bringing an ox, types the fact that the constitutions, or charters, and by-laws differ in each denomination from those in other denominations, the sectarian leaders accommodating them to the sectarian ideas of each separate denomination.
(13) In the preceding paragraph we defined the antitypical wagons as organizations. While this is true, it is not sufficiently specific in this instance, because there are many different kinds of organizations—many more than six. Nor is it sufficiently specific to say that they are religious organizations, since there are more than six kinds of these, e.g., every one of the twelve denominations of Christendom is a religious organization; and it is very evident that these are not typed by the wagons, both from the disparity of the numbers, 6 and 12, and from the fact that the twelve tribes of Israel represent these twelve denominations in the tabernacle picture. From what is said in vs. 7 and 8 as to the disposal of the wagons—two of them given to the Gershonites, and four of them given to the Merarites for their services—and from the nature of the services of the Gospel-Age Gershonites and
Merarites (Chap. II), we conclude that these six wagons type (1) Missionary Societies, both home and foreign; (2) Clerical Societies, like ministerial conferences, synods, assemblies, etc., (3) Bible Societies, (4) Tract Societies, (5) Book-publishing Societies and (6) Periodical-publishing Societies. From this standpoint it becomes manifest that the oxen represent the constitutions, or charters in case of corporational Societies, and by-laws of these six mentioned kinds of societies; for constitutions, or charters, and by-laws do to such societies what the twelve oxen did to the six chariots—draw them on to carry out their functions, to forward their mission.
(14) We are not to understand that the six wagons here type six individual organizations, but six kinds of organizations, as is implied in the fact that all the denominations have the same six kinds of organizations. Thus there are many Missionary Societies, at least one general one and several special ones in each denomination. So, too, there are many Bible Societies, like the British and Foreign Bible Society, the American Bible Society, Prussian Bible Society, etc. The same remark applies to the other four kinds of societies above mentioned. It is these facts that lead us to think that the six wagons here type six kinds of organizations, not six individual organizations merely. So, too, the oxen here do not represent merely six constitutions, or charters, and six sets of by-laws; but six kinds of constitutions, or charters, each kind adapted to the pertinent kind of organization, and six kinds of sets of by-laws, each kind adapted to the pertinent organization. According to this the two oxen drawing each wagon would represent one kind of constitutions, or charters, and one kind of by-laws.
(15) When we speak of these six kinds of societies, we are to be understood as having the finished picture in mind. Actually such societies as are mentioned above have not existed from shortly after the Apostolic times.
They have, apart from the Clerical Societies, all come into existence within modern times. But bodies doing a similar work have been in existence since early in this Age; and these are included in this picture, though the finished picture exhibits the antitypical wagons in somewhat different forms. Thus for example various national Churches, like the Irish and British Churches, in sending out and supporting missionaries in the sixth, seventh and eighth centuries, were in effect Missionary Societies. Thus, too, various monastic orders that saw to the transcribing of Bibles, other Christian books and Christian tracts, were in this respect in effect Bible Societies, Book-publishing Societies and Tract Societies. In fact, business companies and even individuals that published such literature, like Samuel Bagster and Sons, Harper Brothers, Scribner's Sons, Tauchnitz, etc., very properly are included in these antitypical wagons, the viewpoint of the Lord being that all who engaged in such activities form groups which the Lord reckons as societies. Periodical-publishing Societies, of course, did not come into existence until about two centuries ago, and they, like the Bible, tract and book publishers, include as an antitypical wagon, not only publishing societies, but non-priestly firms and individuals who publish periodicals. A Priest, like our Pastor, publishing his priestly writings would not be considered as a part of this antitype; for it refers to Levite work.
(16) Vs. 4—8 show the disposal made of the wagons. Jehovah was pleased (vs. 4, 5) to charge Moses to accept the wagons from the princes for the service of the tabernacle, typing the fact that Jehovah accepted for the service of the antitypical Tabernacle—the Church—the offering of the antitypical wagons from the sectarian Great Company leaders in the various denominations, and charged our Lord Jesus to receive such antitypical wagons for such service. His charging Moses to give them to the Levites, types Jehovah's
charging our Lord to give the six kinds of organizations to the antitypical Levites—the faith-justified ones—who could avail themselves of such organizations for their particular work. His charging Moses to give them to the Levites according to their service (v. 5) restricted the wagons to the Gershonite and Merarite Levites; for the weight and bulk of the parts of the tabernacle which they had to bear made it impossible for them to carry them on their shoulders. Hence the wagons and oxen were given to these Levitical subdivisions only, as vs. 6-8 show: two wagons and four oxen going to the Gershonites (the weight and bulk of their part of the service—the curtains, cords and their appurtenances—required no more than two wagons and four oxen), and four wagons and eight oxen going to the Merarites (the weight and bulk of their part of the service—boards, bars, pillars, posts and their appurtenances, being especially heavy, required no less than four wagons and eight oxen). These wagons and oxen were given these Levitical subdivisions by Moses through the agency of Ithamar (v. 8), who had charge of the Gershonite and Merarite Levites (Num. 4: 28, 33).
(17) Remembering that the Gershonite part of the service in the tabernacle typed (Chap. II) the work of bringing people to justification and consecration, we can very readily see in what the antitypical Gershonites needed help—they needed help (1) in their home missionary (evangelistic) and foreign missionary work. Hence they needed the help of home and foreign Missionary Societies, or their equivalents as shown above. Therefore, the Lord saw to it that they received the help of such organizations. Hence we understand that one of the wagons given to the Gershonites (the Libnite Gershonites) typed the Missionary Societies; and the oxen of that wagon typed the pertinent constitutions, or charters if they were incorporated, and the pertinent sets of by-laws. This, the first antitypical wagon, served them in their work of bringing
people to justification. But the antitypical Gershonites needed help (2) in their work of developing people from justification to consecration—the work of the antitypical Shimite Gershonites. Hence the antitypical Gershonites need a second antitypical wagon—Pastoral or Clerical Societies: ministerial conferences, synods, assemblies, etc., supporting them in their pastoral and congregational labors whereby they sought to lead the justified unto consecration. The pertinent antitypical oxen were the constitutions, or charters if these societies were incorporated, and by-laws of these societies. Without the help of these two antitypical wagons, the two groups of antitypical Gershonites could not have done their Divinely authorized work.
(18) The antitypical Mushite Merarites had the work of publishing; and the antitypical Mahlite Merarites had the work of editing, (1) Bibles, (2) tracts, (3) Christian books and (4) periodicals. This we saw in detail in Chap. II. Thus they have had a fourfold work to do for the antitypical Tabernacle. And this fourfold activity of theirs suggests to us the antitype of the four wagons given to the Merarites. The Bible Societies have been necessary to produce the millions of Bibles needed for the Lord's work. The Tract Societies have been needed to produce the billions of tracts needed for the Lord's work. The Book-publishing Societies have been needed to produce the millions of books needed for the Lord's work; and the Periodical-publishing Societies have been needed to produce the millions of magazines and papers needed for the Lord's work. The constitutions, or charters if incorporation was necessary, and by-laws for each of these four antitypical wagons, were the antitypes of the eight oxen given to the Merarites. Each set of these antitypical oxen was adapted to the needs of its particular symbolic wagon.
(19) We understand that for the Gospel-Age Ithamar [isle or land of palms, i.e., the one who has to do with the palm bearing (Great Company) class (Rev. 7: 9)]
types the stars of the five stages of the Church between the Harvests—those "secondarily prophets" whom the Lord used as His special eye, hand and mouth to the rest of the brethren during the Smyrna, Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardis and Philadelphia stages of the Church, Eleazar representing the stars of the two reaping periods. Moses' giving the wagons and oxen to the Gershonites and Merarites through Ithamar, represents our Lord's paving the way for the antitypical Gershonites and Merarites to receive, and encouraging and arousing them through the above-described five stars to avail themselves of the use of, the above-mentioned societies or their equivalents in the work that the Lord gave them to do. E.g., the twelve great reformers, Luther, etc., arranged for and encouraged and aroused them to use these antitypical wagons.
(20) V. 9 assures us that the Kohathites did not receive any wagons and oxen, because their part of the sanctuary's service was to be carried on their shoulders. Thus they typed that, as distinct from the other antitypical Levites, the antitypical Kohathite work was a personal one; and, by several of the typical Kohathites' carrying one piece of furniture or one set of vessels on their shoulders between them, they showed a co-operation of individuals; and thereby they typed the fact that antitypical Kohathites would act co-operatively as well as individually. When we look at the nature of the antitypical Kohathite work (Chap. II)—producing the (1) linguistical (Amramites), (2) interpretational (Izeharites), (3) historical (Hebronites) and (4) systematical (Uzzielites) lectures and works with reference to the Bible and the Christian Religion as a service of the antitypical tabernacle, we see at once that they do not need organizations to do their work. How could an organization directly write books and deliver lectures? Manifestly this is personal work, and this personal feature of the work is typed by the Kohathites' carrying their burden on their shoulders. But in writing books and preparing
lectures, the antitypical Kohathites get help from one another—from one another's oral or written instructions. And, again, they sometimes work together in writing separate parts of the same books, e.g., in writing the articles of Bible Dictionaries and Religious Encyclopedias. Such assistance of, and co-operations with, one another are typed by two or more Kohathites' bearing between them on rods the tabernacle furniture and vessels.
(21) The above study manifests a factual and reasonable interpretation—type and antitype—of Num. 7: 1-9. It adds probative and corroborative force to our previous interpretations of the pertinent parts of Num. 1, 3 and 4. It and they show a harmony and correspondence in the principles of the Scriptures and the facts of Church History such as we should expect to find between types and antitypes. Throughout these studies we have strictly adhered to our Pastor's definitions; and by paralleling as type and antitype these definitions with the facts adduced we have found a complete correspondence between them, such as are characteristic of Jehovah's types and antitypes. Accordingly, we have the assurance of faith that in this the Lord has given us a further development of the Epiphany Truth on the Gospel-Age picture—some more light from the moon, shining now in the night time of trouble (Ps. 121: 6). For this we thank, worship and praise the Father of Lights, from whom cometh down every good gift and every perfect gift.
(22) We now desire to continue the study of this chapter, beginning with v. 10. But we believe that a brief review of our study of Num. 1-6 and 26 will help us better to gain a more connected view of the antitypical setting of the book, and thus better to see how the general features of the Gospel-Age people of God are typed in the general features of Numbers. Therefore we will first give a brief review of our former studies: Num. 1: 1-17 shows us typically the agents that the Lord has used in marking, defining, limiting,
etc., the twelve denominations of Christendom. Then, the marking, defining, limiting, etc., of these denominations are set forth typically in vs. 18-46, while in vs. 47-54 the faith-justified ones in these denominations are typically described as distinct from these denominations in the antitypical camp. Chap. II describes typically the denominations from the standpoints: (1) of their central creedal thought as respects God's attributes: those on the antitypical East centering their creedal thought on God's Power, those on the antitypical South, on His Wisdom, those on the antitypical West, on His Justice, and those on the antitypical North, on His Love; and (2) the time and logical order of their development in so far as this is compatible with the basal creedal thought of the four groups. These two chapters thus set forth typically the development of the Nominal Church in twelve denominations as distinct from the Real Church, while Num. 26 shows typically the main subdivisions and sub-subdivisions of these twelve denominations.
(23) Num. 3: 1-4 sets forth typically the Real Church, while Num. 3: 5—4: 49 sets forth typically the Gospel-Age Levites in three groups and eight subdivisions, and their services, as well as the relations of the Priests to these. Thus these four chapters set forth the Real and Nominal Churches during the Gospel-Age in so far as there is a Divine approval of their relations. Num. 5: 1-10 sets forth the three classes of Gospel-Age sinners: the Great Company, the Second Death class and Nominal Christians, while vs. 11-31 show Christ's relation to the Real Church and the Nominal Churches from the standpoint of their relations to symbolic chastity. Thus this chapter brings out certain relations between the Real Church and the Nominal Church further than those indicated in the first four chapters of this book, typically giving the reason for the difference between them. Num. 6: 1-27 sets forth typically the teachers in the Church, more particularly the Apostles and those of the secondarily
prophets who have been used as the Lord's special eye, mouth and hand. Then Num. 7 brings out typically the good services of the crown-lost leaders during the Gospel-Age, as helpful to the Levites (vs. 1-9) and to the Priests (vs. 10-89). All these features bring out in greater detail certain features mentioned in Revelation, especially in chapters 1-3, 7 and 17. Thus Israel's organization, parts and works type corresponding Gospel-Age matters. With this brief review of matters hitherto given in some detail in these columns, we now proceed to discuss further features of Num. 7, beginning with v. 10, remembering that the entire chapter treats typically of the good services of Gospel-Age crown-lost leaders: (1) for the Levites (vs. 1-9), and (2) for the Priests (vs. 10-89).
(24) V. 10: The altar of this verse is the golden altar, because the vessels offered by the princes were of gold and silver, while, if the brazen (copper) altar were meant, the vessels would have been of copper. The expression, "before the altar," with which v. 10 ends, should read, "for [i.e., in the interests of] the altar." The Hebrew word liphne, here translated before, frequently means for in the sense of in the interests of (Ps. 116: 14), its primary literal meaning being, for the face of. Our suggested translation is necessary; for the princes did not go into the Holy before the golden altar. The altar, of course, types the Christ as He appears to God and new creatures, in His capacity of comforting, encouraging, correcting and warning the Priesthood while it is sacrificing. The anointing of the golden altar would type the qualifying of the Christ for this work in the requisite abilities and graces. This anointing occurred in the Gospel-Age—"the day"—and in particular respectively after each period of the Gospel-Age in which the Little Flock leaders gave the impulses to the movements that later the crown-lost leaders perverted into sects. Hence in each case it was sometime after each movement was inaugurated, as is implied by its
taking place during the anointing of the antitypical Altar; for the Christ gets His anointing gradually through faithfulness in sacrificing and helping fellow sacrificers. Hence in each set of Little Flock representatives so anointed, the completing of the anointing was a considerable time after that part of the Church would initiate the pertinent movement later perverted into a sect by the crown-lost leaders. Thus, for example, after Zwingli, and then later his colaborers, Oecolampadius, Haller, etc., had started the Little Flock movement on the Lord's Supper as a symbolic service, and had by the Word and providence of the Lord received their anointing as the then standing Altar, Bullinger, Calvin, Beza, Knox, etc., offered the antitypical vessels, etc., as the princes (leaders) of antitypical Judah. These antitypical vessels, etc., were presented for the dedication of the antitypical Altar—to support, defend and justify the faithful in their bringing forth and supporting the truth underlying the pertinent movement, showing and proving that they and their service in this respect were dedicated (presented) to God in a proper manner and were accepted by Him as having been properly done. Thus they brought their offering for the benefit of the antitypical Altar.
(25) V. 11 shows typically Jehovah's willingness to accept the offerings of the crown-lost princes of antitypical Israel. This is typically implied in Jehovah's charge to Moses to arrange a separate day for each of the princes to bring the typical offerings, representing how Jehovah charged our Lord as His Executive to arrange for distinct and separate periods for the twelve antitypical princes to make their offerings. These antitypical periods in some cases were far apart, and in other cases were very near one another. In some cases they are not given in the type in the chronological order of the antitype; for the type presents the twelve princes as offering in the order that Num. 2 presents the tribes in their stations about the tabernacle,