Num. 3; 4
GENERALITIES ON THE GOSPEL-AGE LEVITES. GERSHONITES. KOHATHITES. MERARITES. COVERING THE VESSELS AND FURNITURE. BEREAN QUESTIONS.
WE GAVE above a brief analysis, type and antitype, of Num. 1, 2, 26. We found that the chapters give a typical history of the organization of the nominal church in its twelve general denominational divisions, as chapter one also gives a little on the Gospel-Age Levites-the tentatively justified believers. These chapters will likewise have Epiphany and Millennial antitypes. The act of numbering the people in their tribes seems to type the act of describing and limiting the denominations as such. That the symbolic meaning of numbering is describing and limiting seems to be manifest from Ps. 48:12: "Walk about Zion; tell (literally, number, i.e., describe and limit) the towers [the main and strongest truths] thereof." So viewed, the first ten chapters of Numbers give us a typical history of the main organizational work of God's people, nominal and real, during the Gospel Age, as well as during the Parousia, Epiphany and the Millennium.
We now desire to study, type and antitype, Num. 3:1-51, in so far as it applies to the Gospel-Age picture, which is the viewpoint of Heb. 3:1—4:3. The Parousia picture (1 Cor. 10:1-14), and especially the Epiphany picture (Mal. 3:2, 3), differ from the Gospel-Age picture. In the Gospel-Age picture all of the new creatures were Priests. During the Parousia, which was the transitional period between the Gospel Age and the Epiphany, the more rebellious new creatures (viewed from God's, but not from our standpoint) began to become antitypical Levites, as can be
seen from the antitype of Korah and his 250 Levite companions (P '19, 144, col. 2, par. 1); but God continued in spite of His knowledge of their real Great Company character to treat the more tractable of them throughout the Parousia as Priests, while during the Epiphany the Great Company become from our standpoint manifested as antitypical Levites. On the other hand, the tentatively justified throughout the Gospel Age until the Epiphany are the antitypical Levites. They are "the Gentiles"—the special class among the unconsecrated, uncircumcised—symbolic Gentiles—who during the Gospel Age have the antitypical Court as their place of standing before the Lord (Rev. 11:2). For the sake of clearness in presenting our subject we will in this chapter limit our study to the Gospel-Age picture, leaving the other pictures for later study.
(3) Usually in the book of Numbers when Moses and Aaron are referred to as acting together Moses types our Lord and Aaron the Little Flock (Num. 12:1-15; see Berean Comments). This is the viewpoint of Num. 3:1. In some connections Moses types sometimes the Law, sometimes Jesus; Aaron, sometimes Jesus and sometimes Jesus and the Church; and Aaron's sons, the Church. When, apart from the mention of Moses, in Leviticus and Numbers Aaron and his sons, without the latter's names being mentioned, are referred to together, usually Aaron types Jesus and his sons the Church. But if the sons are mentioned by name, then usually Aaron types the entire Christ, Head and Body, Nadab (willful) types the Parousia Second Death class, Abihu (he is my Father) types Epiphany Second Deathers as leaders of the Great Company (T. 119, note), and Eleazar (mighty helper, or God is helper), when the type refers to the Harvest of the Jewish Age, represents in general the Twelve Apostles (into whose charge the Truth and the entire Church were committed by our Lord, Num. 4:16; Matt. 16:19; 18:18; Rev. 12:1), and especially the
Apostle Paul (Num. 19:3-7; T. 110), though not exclusively so; for the other Apostles also pointed out to the Church the faithfulness of the Ancient Worthies. For the Harvest of the Gospel Age Eleazar types our Pastor, who was given the charge of the Church and the Truth as "that Servant" (Num. 4:16; 16:36-40; Matt. 24:45-47; Luke 12:43-46; 1 Cor. 10:5-10). For the Gospel Age Ithamar (field of palms) types those leading "secondarily prophets," stars, who successively acted as the special teachers and leaders, more particularly directing the work of the tentatively justified, and for the Epiphany, its messenger (Ex. 38:21; Num. 4:28, 33; 7:8). The special service of the Twelve Apostles, "that Servant," and the other secondarily prophets who have been star-members is typed by the expression, "Eleazar and Ithamar ministered in the priests' office in the sight (prominently) of Aaron (Jesus and the Church) their father" (Num. 3:4). The fact that Nadab and Abihu were childless types the fact that none belonging to the Second Death class will be readmitted into the Little Flock (Heb. 10:26-31; 12:16, 17). Thus briefly as the Gospel-Age picture does Num. 3:1-4 give us a typical statement of the works of Jesus as Administrator (Moses), Jesus and the Church as Priests (Aaron), the Second Deathers (Nadab), the Great Company (Abihu), the Twelve Apostles and "that Servant" (Eleazar), and the other star-members as secondarily prophets (Ithamar).
(4) In Num. 3:5-10 Moses types our Lord as Jehovah's Vicegerent—not as the Church's High Priest—administrating Jehovah's arrangements. Aaron in this section usually types Jesus as the Church's High Priest, and his sons type the Church as Under-priests. Hence in this section Jehovah addresses Moses as His administrator. This section types the apportioning of the service of the antitypical Priests and Levites. V. 6, from the standpoint of the Gospel-Age picture, shows
how the Lord Jesus, as Jehovah's Administrator, brought the tentatively justified (the tribe of Levi) forward for their official work by working in them repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus—making them antitypical Levites. As such they were set before the Head and Body (Aaron) as servants to further them in their priestly work. Such setting them before antitypical Aaron implied that they were given the necessary teaching and character-development to qualify them for such service. V. 7 shows that their service would help both the antitypical Priesthood and the entire nominal people of God (the whole congregation), when the latter would engage in any service pertaining to God (before the tabernacle of the congregation). The expression, "to do the service of the tabernacle," implies that the tentatively justified were to do the servant work, but not the sacrificial work in connection with the antitypical Tabernacle. In v. 8 the Levites were charged to keep every one of the tabernacle's articles, incorrectly in this verse translated furniture; for this chapter, vs. 25, 26, 31, 36, 37, shows that they had a service toward every article belonging to, and toward every part of, the tabernacle. This types that the tentatively justified were to give some service connected with all the teachings, practices, history and works of the true Church, and thus render some service to the Priests and the nominal people of God. V. 9 shows that they are separated from the world of professed Christians solely ("wholly given") for the sake of serving the Priesthood in the interest of the people. Therefore, if any tentatively justified person ceased to minister in this way, his tentative justification lapsed; for only those wholly given to Jesus and the Church could be antitypes of those "wholly given" to Aaron and his sons. Jesus, as God's Administrator, appointed (v. 9) to Himself as Chief Priest and to His members as the Under-priesthood the sacrificial work that each member of the Priesthood is to
perform according to God's instruction to Jesus as His Administrator. And any one not of the Priesthood (the stranger), who would presume to do the work of a Priest, would lose his real standing before God. Thus, if a tentatively justified one presumed to do a Priest's work, he would lose his tentative justification, and thus cease being an antitypical Levite, as an antitypical Israelite so presuming would cease to be of God's nominal people.
(5) Vs. 11-13 show the relation of the tribe of Levi to Jehovah. In the full, vitalized sense of the terms used in this section, it antitypically applies to the Little Flock and the Great Company as the antitypical tribe of Levi now, and to the Little Flock, Ancient Worthies, Great Company and Youthful Worthies as the antitypical tribe of Levi in the Millennium. Nevertheless, the Levites here referred to can in a general sense be applied as types of the Gospel-Age Levites—the tentatively justified; for they have been tentatively passed over during the time that Jehovah has been destroying the New Creatures (firstborn of man) and the humanity (firstborn of beasts) of the Second Deathers. Thus both the Little Flock and the justified were by God set aside for His service (v. 13). We are not, however, to understand that in the antitype the Firstborn were put aside, and that the Consecrated and the tentatively justified were taken in their place. Actually, in the antitype the Firstborns and the antitypical tribe of Levi are the same persons. The two classes of persons in the types represent merely two different aspects of the same persons in the antitype. Thus we are the Firstborn from the standpoint that we come into God's family before the world; and we are of the antitypical tribe of Levi from the standpoint that we are set apart to God in connection with the At-one-ment work. God has been pleased to use the above mentioned two sets of typical persons to represent these two aspects of the same persons (v. 12).
(6) Vs. 14-21: In this section, for the Gospel-Age picture, Jehovah commands our Lord to describe and fix the various groups among the tentatively Justified. The term, "house of their fathers," refers to the three general groups of the Levites as descendants of Gershon, Kohath and Merari; and the term, "by their families," refers to the subdivisions of these groups. While Levites had to be 30 years old before they could serve (Num. 4:3, 23, 30), which types that only the properly qualified were to do the official work of the tentatively Justified, yet all the males from a month old and upward were counted, which types that the Lord has described and classified the immature as well as the mature tentatively Justified. Our Lord, throughout the Age, in the pertinent teachings and in the uses and non-uses to which the Justified were put, numbered—described and classified—them as mature or immature for these services (v. 16). As of the typical Levites, so of the antitypical Levites, there have been three general divisions. This holds true also of the Gospel-Age Levites—the tentatively Justified (v. 17). From the fact that the Kohathite Levites received no chariots (organizations) for this work, but bore their burdens on their shoulders (Num. 7:9), and from the typical service which they performed (v. 31), we infer that the antitypical Kohathites (Kohath, ally) of the Gospel Age were those justified ones who, more or less aided by their fellows, individually, by their researches, writings, and lecturings, served the Priesthood and the nominal people of God with Biblical and Ecclesiastical information. From the fact that the Merarites (Merari, bitterness) had four chariots (organizations) for their assistance in their work (Num. 7:8), and from the particular parts of the Tabernacle that were their charge (vs. 36, 37), we infer that the antitypical Merarites of the Gospel Age have been those justified ones who, assisted by their fellows, served the Priesthood and God's nominal people in connection with editing
and publishing organizations, by editing and issuing Bibles and other pertinent religious literature. From the fact that the Gershonites (Gershon, a stranger there) had two chariots (organizations) for their assistance in their work, and from the particular parts of the Tabernacle that were in their charge, we infer that the antitypical Gershonites of the Gospel Age have been those justified ones who, assisted by their fellows, served the Priests and God's nominal people in connection with ministerial organizations, and evangelistic and missionary organizations. These definitions of the three groups of the Gospel-Age Levites will become more manifest as true when we further on in this chapter examine the work of their types and recognize the antitypical significance of the work of these types. Certainly, during the Gospel Age our Lord has caused a description and an apportioning of the above-defined three classes of antitypical Levites to be made, and has assigned certain qualified tentatively justified persons to these services of the antitypical Tabernacle.
(7) In v. 18 there are given the two subdivisions of the Gershonites—Libni (white, or free) and Shimei (famous). We understand the antitypical Libnites of the Gospel Age to be those tentatively justified ones who, with their helpers, have been as clerical missionary and evangelistic (1) writers (Jehiel, God lives), and (2) speakers (Zetham, olive) and (3) as lay workers (Joel, Jehovah is God) seeking to convert sinners and heathen, corresponding to the three groups of Libnites (1 Chro. 23:8). The Shimite Gershonites of the Gospel Age have been those tentatively justified ones who, with their helpers, have sought to give religious instruction as ministers—(1) clerical writers on right living and consecration (Haran, mountaineer), (2) clerical speakers on right living and consecration (Haziel, foreseen by God) and (3) lay workers, elders, etc. (Shelomith, peacefulness), corresponding to the three groups of Shimites (1 Chro. 23:9). In our definitions
we have spoken of missionaries and evangelists with their helpers, and ministers with their helpers, etc. Our reason for this is the following: all Levites from a month upward were counted; but only those from thirty to fifty years (Num. 4:3, 23, 30) were privileged to do official work. The serving Levites typed missionaries, evangelists, ministers, lay workers, scholars, authors, lecturers, teachers, editors and publishers; while those justified ones who were not mature enough for these things, but who assisted their mature brethren in their work, are typed by those Levites who were under thirty years of age. Those justified ones who ceased acting as missionaries, evangelists, ministers, lay workers, scholars, authors, lecturers, teachers, editors and publishers are typed by those Levites who were beyond fifty years of age, and who, as a result, ceased doing official Levite work.
(8) In v. 19 the four subdivisions of the Kohathites are given—Amram (high people), Izehar (oil), Hebron (friendship), and Uzziel (power of God). The Amram Levites consisted of the descendants of Moses exclusively, because Amram's only other son was Aaron, whose descendants were the priests (1 Chro. 23:13-17). Because the priests were taken from the Amramite Kohathites, the latter, as more nearly related to the priests, were the highest of the three Levitical groups, and the Amramites, as next of kin to the priests, were the highest subdivision of the Kohathites; hence the Amramites were the highest subdivision of the Levites. This types the fact that the antitypical Amramites of the Gospel Age would do a service that would be more nearly priestly—yet without being priestly—than that of any other subdivision of the Justified, and that would be more helpful to the Little Flock than that of any other subdivision of the justified.
(9) The Amramites consisted of two families, Gershonites and Eliezerites. What class of justified men
have given the most helpful service to the Priesthood? We answer, those scholars who have furnished direct linguistic Bible Helps—the antitypical Amramites. These—not antitypical of Moses (Ps. 99:6)—preserved the Bible and served as to its wording. Some of the writers that, as antitypical Levites, we will mention, were undoubtedly new creatures, this being particularly true of those of them who wrote between 1874 and 1914; for they were among the antitypes of the twelve spies. The first division of these, corresponding to the Gershonite descendants of Moses (1 Chro. 23:14-16); are text critics who have prepared critical recensions of the Hebrew, Chaldee and Greek originals of the Scriptures and of their various ancient versions, like Origen in the third century; Erasmus, Stephens and Beza in the sixteenth century; Walton in the seventeenth century; Mills, Bentley, Bengal, Wetstein and Griesbach in the eighteenth century; and Ginsburg, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Westcott and Hort in the nineteenth century.
(10) The second group of the antitypical Amramites, corresponding to Moses' descendants through Eliezer (1 Chro. 23:15—17), consist of a number of subdivisions, all of whom served as to the wording of the Bible: (1) Hebrew, Chaldee and Greek lexicographers of the Old and New Testaments, like Gesenius, Fuerst, Tregelles, Davidson, Davies, Young, Brown, and Strong, who have given us lexicons far the Hebrew and Chaldee of the Old Testament, the last six basing their lexicons on Gesenius, who was undoubtedly the greatest of all Hebrew and Chaldee lexicographers; and like Grimm, Robinson, Thayer, Young and Strong, who have given us Greek lexicons of the New Testament. Brown's revision of Gesenius' Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon of the Old Testament, and Thayer's translation and revision of Grimm's Greek Lexicon of the New Testament are undoubtedly the very best Lexicons for English students in existence in their respective
departments. (2) The next group corresponding to other descendants of Moses through Eliezer are Grammarians who have furnished us with Hebrew and Chaldee Grammars for the Old Testament, like Gesenius, Ewald and Green, and Greek Grammars for the New Testament, like Winer, Buttmann, Blass and Thayer. (3) The third group of these scholars corresponding to some others of Moses' descendants through Eliezer are Translators who have given us translations of the Scriptures. There are numerous examples of these. The translations called the Authorized, English Revised and American Revised Versions are well known. Wilson, Young and Rotherham have given us very fine translations. While various translations have certain unique excellencies, Rotherham's last revision, using to decided advantage the best of Dr. Ginsburg's critical readings of the Hebrew text, and using Westcott's and Hort's Greek Recension, which up to that time was generally considered the best of all Greek texts, as the basis of his translation, is probably the most valuable Version of the Bible in English. After this translation we would place Young's Version, the Baptist Version and the American Revised Version. (4) The fourth group of scholars corresponding to some of Moses' descendants through Eliezer are Concordance-makers, like Cruden, Young and Strong, for the English text, and especially Wigram, for the Hebrew, Chaldee and Greek text, in the Englishman's Hebrew, Chaldee and Greek Concordance. Hudson's Concordance to the Greek New Testament is an excellent work, but merely cites the references. There have been other worthy men who wrought in this department of Bible Helps.
(11) A little consideration will convince us that the chief antitypical Levite helpers of the Priests have been scholars who have labored on direct Bible helps, both to preserve it and to serve as to its wording as text critics of the Hebrew, Chaldee and Greek texts
and of ancient Versions, as lexicographers and grammarians of Scriptural Hebrew, Chaldee and Greek, as translators of the Bible from the original languages and as Concordance-makers. Frequently, our dear Pastor has expressed his gratitude for the help that these scholars gave him above the help of all other scholars; and all of us know by more or less experience how much more help in our priestly work we derived from various scholars of this group of Levites than we have gotten from all other Levites. Both the character of their work and its supreme aid for the Priests prove them to be the highest subdivision of the Levites, those nearest to the Priests—the antitypical Amramites (high people). Such scholars also by their labors—"by the charge of the congregation"—have assisted God's nominal people, especially those of them who have prepared easier Helps for the people along the above-indicated lines.
(12) The word Izehar means oil. Oil is used to type the Spirit of God (Ps. 45:7; 133:1, 2), the Word of God (Jas. 5:14; Zech. 4:3, 14, see margin), and the spirit of understanding the Word (Matt. 25:3, 4, 8). The Izeharites would, therefore, seem to type those justified ones who have had much to do with the Bible books and texts, furnishing a limited understanding of these helpful to the Priests and the people. We, therefore, understand them to type for the Gospel Age a group of tentatively justified believers whose scholarly representatives have given the Priests and the people more or less help in elucidating general questions respecting the Bible and its books and texts, by their expository, harmonetical and introductional writings. These scholars are especially of three groups (Ex. 6:21). The first of these (Zichri, famous) are those justified scholars who as introductionists have furnished us with introductional lectures and works on the Bible in general and on the various books of the Bible, setting forth general facts as to their authorship,
credibility, the time, occasion and purpose of their writing, their divisions and their general contents. Home, Keil and Westcott are among the best known of these writers. Almost all Commentators have done work in this department. The second group of the antitypical Izeharites consists of those justified scholars (Nepheg, sprout, Ex. 6:21), who as exegetes have lectured and written Commentaries on various Scriptural books helpful to the Priests and the people. A host of scholars have worked in this department: Grotius, Clark, Peloubet, Barnes and Bengal have been most helpful to the Priests and the nominal people of God, though, except Grotius and Bengal, they are not counted amongst the princes of exegetes. A third group of antitypical Izeharites consists of justified scholars (Ex. 6:21, 24, Korah, baldness) who have furnished us with lectures and works on Biblical harmonics. To this group belong those justified scholars who, like Bengal, Newcombe and Robinson, have prepared (1) harmonies (Assir, captive, collected) of the four Gospels, and of the books of Samuel, of Kings and of Chronicles, usually giving the various accounts of the same events in parallel columns; (2) those scholars who, like Johns and Canne, have prepared (Elkanah, God provides [like thoughts]) collections of parallel passages; and (3) those scholars who, like West, Hitchcock and Nave, have given us topical compilations of Bible matters, like topical indices and topically arranged passages (Abiasaph, my father gathers).
(13) The Hebronites, the third subdivision of the Kohathite Levites, consisted of four families (1 Chro. 23:19). Hebron means friendship, and the Hebronites represent for the Gospel Age a set of justified scholars who have been more friendly toward the Priests and toward their Levitical brethren of all groups than any other set of antitypical Levites. They are such as have dealt with religious history, biography, chronology, archaeology and geography, and have consisted of four
groups. The first group consists of religious historians and biographers (Jekameam, he sets forth the people). The leading Biblical historians are Kurtz, Milman, and Edersheim; and the leading Biblical biographers are Edersheim, Neander, Andrews, Conybeare and Howson. The leading Church historians are Mosheim, Neander, Hagenbach, Kurtz, Milman and Fisher. The best historians of Church Doctrines are Neander and Hagenbach. Very many able scholars have wrought in these fields. The second group of antitypical Hebronites consist of chronologians (Jahaziel, God foresees). In the field of chronology men like Usher, Priestly, Hales, Jarvis and a number of others have served the Priests and the nominal people of God. The third group of Gospel-Age Hebronites are the archaeologists (Amariah, Jehovah says). In Biblical archaeology, i.e., natural history, domestic habits, occupations, social relations, weights, measures, coins, religious usages, etc., of Bible lands, Lightfoot and Thomson, and in Christian archaeology Smith and Coleman, have done good work for the Priests and the nominal people of God. The fourth group of Gospel-Age Hebronites are Biblical geographers (Jeriah, grounded by Jehovah). In the field of Biblical Geography Reland, Thomson and Hurlbut have given the Priests and God's nominal people helps and maps. Cyclopaedists who have given us Biblical Dictionaries, like Smith, Hackett, Abbott, Kitto, Hastings, etc., with their colaborers, and who have given us Ecclesiastical Encyclopaedias, like McClintock, Strong, Schaff and Herzog, with their colaborers, have wrought in every branch of antitypical Hebronite activity with much profit to the Priests and the nominal people of God.
(14) The fourth and last group of Kohathite Levites, the Uzzielites, consisted of three subdivisions (Ex. 6:22). Uzziel means power of God, and we believe that the antitypical Uzzielites of the Gospel Age are those justified scholars who have especially labored
in the field of Systematic Theology, giving treatises on conduct, doctrine and evidence of Christianity in a systematic manner. The Uzzielites, Mishael and Elzaphan, carrying away the dead priests (Lev. 10:4, 5), typing how error-teaching theologians would be used by the Lord Jesus to lead away from the Faithful the Second Deathers, seem to suggest that the Uzzielites type the systematic theologians. This is further indicated by the fact that Elzaphan (Num. 3:30) was made chief of the Kohathites; and undoubtedly the systematic doctrinal theologians have, among the antitypical Levites, been the most influential of all Biblical scholars. There have been three groups of justified believers who as systematic theologians have corresponded to the three subdivisions of the Uzzielites. The first of these consist of those justified believers who have lectured on, and written systematic works on, conduct (Mishael, who is what God is [in character]?), usually called Ethics. Butler, Edwards and Martinsen are among the most fruitful writers on Christian Ethics. The second group of justified scholars who as systematic theologians have lectured on and written works on systematic theology are the Biblical and creedal dogmaticians (Elzaphan, a mighty one protects). Some of these have furnished the great systems of theology for the various denominations and have elaborated and defended their creeds; others of these have sought to set forth their understandings of Biblical dogmatics apart from the creeds. Each denomination has its own favorite dogmaticians. The following are the greatest dogmaticians of various churches: Aquinas (Catholic), Gerhard (Lutheran), Calvin (Presbyterian), Beveridge (Episcopalian), Gill (Baptist), Watson (Methodist), Barklay (Quaker). These and numerous other dogmaticians have not only set forth and sought to prove their own doctrinal views, but also have defended them from attacks, and have attacked opposing doctrinal views. The third
group of justified scholars who as systematic theologians have lectured and written works on systematic theology are those apologists (Zithri, protection, defense) who have set forth systematically the external and internal evidence of the Christian religion. Some of the leading lecturers and writers of this group are Butler, Watson, Paler, Rawlinson and Blunt.
(15) Thus we have presented the antitypes of the Kohathite Levites in their divisions, subdivisions and sub-subdivisions. We have seen that the antitypical Amramites as preservers of the Bible and as students of the words of the Scriptures have had to do, linguistically, with the Bible and its wording; that the antitypical Izeharites, as students of the contents of the Scriptures, have had to do, interpretationally, with the books and with the thoughts of the books and verses of the Bible, individually and in their relation to one another; that the antitypical Hebronites as historical students have had to do, historically, with Biblical and Ecclesiastical persons, principles and things; and that the antitypical Uzzielites, as thinkers, have had to do, systematically, with (imperfectly understood) Biblical theology and with Creedal theology. The antitypical Kohathites of the Gospel Age are the scholarly writers sand teachers of Christianity, writing and lecturing from a more or less scientific standpoint. As we look at the typical Kohathite Levites and their work, and then at their Gospel-Age antitypes, surely we recognize the striking correspondence of the type and antitype. This correspondence will become more strikingly impressive when we come to study the articles of the Tabernacle which the typical Kohathites had as their charge in the service.
(16) The third group of typical Levites were the Merarites, who consisted of two subdivisions—Mahli (sick, weak) and Mushi (withdrawing) (Num. 3:17, 20, 33). These typify a class of justified ones who do a work that supplies the gap in religious needs not
filled by the work of the other two groups of Levites. The antitypical Kohathites furnish the learned works for the Priests and God's nominal people. The antitypical Gershonites furnish the discourses and printed matter influencing people to repentance, faith and consecration. The Merarites seem to type those editors who prepare these works for publication and those publishers who see to their printing and circulation. The Mahlites (weak) seem to type the justified editors who, as we use the word in this connection, are, not writers and conductors of periodicals and magazines, but preparers of others' writings for the press, e.g., by compiling, arranging, emending, annotating, indexing, etc., the writings of the antitypical Kohathites and Gershonites—editors in the same general sense of the word as those brethren are who prepared the Tower Reprints for the press; they edited them, but did not write them. Their work is to compile and arrange the articles, to insert notes for various reasons, some of which point out where a clearer presentation of the subject is to be found, to prepare indices for them, etc. But, of course, the editors of the Tower Reprints are not Gospel-Age Mahlites; they are transitional Mahlites. Usually such editors prepare a preface for the work that they are editing, and often also a biography of its author, and add such things as are intended to increase its usefulness, clearness, completeness, etc. These editors have consisted of two classes: (1) editors of Bibles; (2) editors of other religious works, respectively typed by Eleazar (son of Mahli), mighty helper, and Kish, bow (1 Chro. 23:21). The virtual discontinuance of the separate activity of such Bible editors during the last seventy-five years, and their more or less uniting with the class of general editors of religious books are indicated in 1 Chro. 23:22.
(17) The Mushite branch of the Merarites types for the Gospel Age those publishers who have devoted themselves to arranging for the copying or printing and circulating of Christian literature. Before printing
was invented these secured scribes who copied such literature. Especially were certain of the monks employed in such copying work; and their orders or patrons saw to the securing of the materials for their work, and to the circulation of the copies which they made, and thus the former acted as publishers. With the invention of printing these conditions very materially changed. Individual, company and corporational publishers sprang up on all sides, and pushed forward the work of arranging for the printing and circulating of literature helpful to the Priests and God's nominal people. According to 1 Chro. 23:23, such publishers have been of three classes: (1) book publishers (Mahli, weak, sick); (2) tract, periodical and magazine publishers (Eder, flock, referring to the great number of these); and (3) Bible publishers (Jeremoth, heights, referring to the fact that this set of publishers was the highest order of all of the publishers of religious literature).
(18) Having already explained the antitype of Elzaphan, the Kohathite chief, we will now give the antitype of the Gershonite and Merarite chiefs. Eliasaph (a mighty one, or God, gathers) the son of Lael (for God) seems to type the evangelists who, acting for God in gathering many converts, have been the most influential group among the antitypical Gershonites (Num. 3:24). Zuriel (rock of God, or mighty rock) the son of Abihail (my father is strength) seems to type those publishers who, as publishers of the Bible—the power of God (Heb. 4:12)—in the living languages, were the most influential group among the antitypical Merarites of the Gospel Age.
(19) If with the name of the tribe, Levi, the names of its three divisions, of their subdivisions, of their sub-subdivisions, etc., as given above are counted, it will be found that they total 40 in all. But according to 1 Chro. 23:10, 11, 16; 24:20; 23:17; 24:21; 23
18; 24:22; 23:20; 24:24, 25, 26, 27, 29, there were 20 other persons, typing 20 sections coming under some of the subdivisions above mentioned. Hence the various sections of the Gospel-Age Levites consist of 60 in all, antitypical of the 60 persons named as the Levite leaders. There is a very specific reason for these 60 sections among the antitypical Levites, as we will see later on. Briefly would we now give our understanding of these remaining 20. These 20 typical sub-heads of Levite families seem to type some emphasized subsections of some justified groups already referred to. We have already seen that the antitypical Shimites—ministers—consist of three subdivisions (1 Chro. 23:9): (1) clerical writers on justified living and consecration; (2) clerical speakers on justified living and consecration; and (3) laymen workers, elders, etc. We believe that the four classes typed in 1 Chro. 23:10, 11 by the four descendants of Shimei are the lay-teachers, a subdivision of antitypical Shelomith (1 Chro. 23:9) and not its lay-elders division. These four would therefore refer to those justified ones who are general or local teachers of Christian life and faith in practically all denominations. Roughly we may group them as follows: (1) Prayer meeting workers (Jahath, united); (2) Bible Class leaders (Zazah, plenty); (3) laymen giving discourses on right living and consecration (Jeush, assembler); and (4) laymen writers on right living and consecration (Beriah, well of Jehovah). Those under (3) and (4) are few and may well be put into one group, because of their small numbers and of their non-clerical general efforts to help people toward consecration (1 Chro. 23:11).
(20) So, too, we find some specially marked Kohathites, whom we will now briefly consider, type and antitype. Several of these are among the Gershonite Amramites (1 Chro. 23:16; 24:20). As we have seen, the Gershonite descendants of Amram (1 Chro. 23:16) represent the text critics who have furnished
us with critical recensions of the Scriptures in the original languages and in the various ancient Versions. Shebuel (captive of God), as the chief of this branch of the Gershonite Amramites, seems to type the text critics who have given us critical Recensions of the Old Testament Scriptures in the original languages. Jehdeiah (may Jehovah make glad) seems to type those who have given us critical Recensions of the Greek New Testament. As we have seen, the Eliezerite Amramites (1 Chro. 23:17) type those justified ones who have given us helps on the words and wording of the Scriptures apart from the helps implied in the critical Recensions. The chief helpers in this respect, typed by Rehabiah (Jehovah enlarges), are the writers on Bible words. Isshiah (Jehovah loans), being the chief of Rehabiah's sons, seems to type Concordance makers. Special mention is made of some Izeharites other than those mentioned among the 40 Levite groups above treated (1 Chro. 23:18, 24:22). These type certain ones of antitypical Abiasaph, a subdivision under the third group (antitypical Korah) of the antitypical Izeharites, i.e., topical compilers. Those who compiled passages topically we believe are typed by Shelomoth (peacefulness); and those of such compilers are antitypical Jahath (united), who arranged these passages topically as a summary of the Scriptures. There are some Uzzielites other than those treated above among the 40 groups of Levites (1 Chro. 23:20; 24:24, 25). Of these, on the one hand, Micah (who is like Jehovah?) types that subdivision of the antitypical Elzaphanites—the dogmaticians—who are creedal dogmaticians, i.e., those who set forth the doctrines of the creeds as distinct from the Biblical doctrines; and Shamir (thorn) seems to type the controversial dogmaticians whose arguments are thorns to the opposing creedal dogmaticians; on the other hand, Isshiah (Jehovah loans) seems to type those antitypical Elzaphanites—dogmaticians—who have sought to set forth the Biblical doctrines; and Zachariah
(Jehovah remembers) seems to type those of them who have sought to set forth the New Testament doctrines as distinct from the Old Testament doctrines.
(21) So, too, do we find six Merarites (1 Chro. 24:26-29) mentioned additional to those treated among the 40 Levitical groups first explained above. The first of these are five descendants of Merari through Mushi, therefore typical of publishers. We are of the opinion that Jaaziah (Jehovah comforts) types the publishers of the antitypical Kohathite works, the scholarly scientific works on the Bible and Christianity. Therefore we would understand Beno (his son, in allusion to the publishers of the works of the chief Kohathite group) to type the publishers of the antitypical Amramite works; Shoham (onyx) seems to type the publishers of the antitypical Izeharite works; Zaccur (mindful—historical and factual writers must especially deal with matters of memory) seems to type the publishers of antitypical Hebronite works; and Ibri (Hebrew, the chief earthly people) seems to type publishers of antitypical Uzzielite works, whose authors as God's servants have been of the greatest repute among God's nominal people. The sixth of these additional Merarites is Jerahmeel (God has mercy) who was a descendant of Mahli through Kish—the type of editors of Christian books—and who seems to type editors of books of the antitypical Libnite Gershonites, which show forth the mercy of God to the unconverted. Thus in 60 sections the Lord has given us a typical view of the main activities of the Gospel-Age Levites.
(22) When we attentively consider the three general functions of the Gospel-Age Levites: (1) Kohathites, as scholarly writers and lecturers, preserving the Bible and furnishing Bible Helps; (2) Gershonites, as sermonizers, teachers and writers furnishing Helps toward the justification and consecration of people; and (3) Merarites, as editors and publishers, furnishing the Priests and God's nominal people with publications
of the Priests' and the antitypical Kohathites' and Gershonites' writings, and in some cases with helpful writings originating among writers of the antitypical non-Levitical tribes, we can readily see that these are the only Helps originating outside of themselves that the Priests and the nominal people of God need for their participation in the Divine service. Of course, there are writings which have originated among the Priests that help them and God's nominal people, as there are writings which have originated in the "Camp" which have helped the Priests and the nominal people of God. But in general their need of scholarly help in the way of scholarly works has been supplied by the antitypical Kohathites; their need of new Priests has usually been supplied by the efforts of the antitypical Gershonites, in leading certain ones to justification and consecration; and their need of publications has usually been supplied by the editing, printing and circulating efforts of the antitypical Merarites. What other human helps originating outside of themselves could the Priests need for their sacrificing? None. What other human helps originating outside of themselves and the Priests could the world need for their relations to God? None. Evidently, therefore, the above three groups of justified believers are the antitypes of the three Levitical groups; and the above-described activities of these three groups of justified believers are the antitypes of the activities of the three Levitical groups. Therefore the harmony between the Scriptures and the facts relating to the types and antitypes convinces us that the above presentation is correct. When we study antitypically the other types as given in Num. 3:21-51, etc., we will find this harmony still further corroborating our presentation. These considerations unanswerably demonstrate the Scripturalness, reasonableness and factualness of tentative justification; for they show us just who are, and what are the activities of, the tentatively justified.
(23) Above we studied briefly the Gospel-Age Levites in their sixty groups. These groups do not mark fixed individuals as such; rather they mark classes of workers according to the character of their work. So far as individuals are concerned one may be for awhile laboring in one group, and then later be laboring in another group. Yet, during the same period he may be laboring in several of these groups. As an example we might cite Dr. Edward Robinson, who is generally considered the greatest American Biblical scholar of the last century. As a Greek and Hebrew lexicographer he worked as an Amramite Kohathite. When he prepared his Harmony of the Gospels and did exegetical work he labored as an Izeharite Kohathite. As a writer of a Biblical Dictionary and as a writer on the Biblical Antiquities and Geography he labored as an Hebronite Kohathite. When he wrote on doctrinal subjects in his magazine, he worked as an Uzzielite Kohathite. As a preacher he was a Libnite or a Shimite Gershonite, accordingly as he preached for unjustified or justified persons; and as the editor and translator of others' theological works he acted as a Mahlite Merarite. Thus the group with which he acted at any particular time depended upon the character of his work at that particular time. Many of the Gospel-Age Levites began their official careers as ministers, which gave them opportunities to do evangelistic work as antitypical Libnites, and pastoral work as antitypical Shimites. Some of these, later, by their studies qualified themselves for Kohathite work, which in due time they did. In fact, this has been the usual course among those Levites who became antitypical Kohathites. Accordingly, we see that the typical Levitical groups did not represent for the Gospel Age fixed individuals in fixed antitypical Levitical divisions and groups; rather they represented classes of workers according to the character of their activities. It remains to be seen whether the Transitional
Levites—the Epiphany Levites—will in the finished picture have the peculiarity that we have just noted in the Gospel-Age Levites. We will have to wait some years before we can from the standpoint of facts reach certainty on this subject, though it would not surprise us, if this should prove to be the case. During the Millennial Age such a transition from one division into another division of the three Levitical divisions will be impossible; for no Ancient Worthy will become a Great Company member or a Youthful Worthy, and vice versa, though it is likely that within each of the three divisions every individual of each division will partake in the work of its various subdivisions, but not in the work of other divisions than his own.
(24) In Num. 3:21-26 we have a brief description of the Gershonites and their work. The description here is a general one and involves all the Gershonites upward of thirty days of age; while the description of them and their work in Num. 4:21-28 is a more particular one and involves the serving Gershonites alone. In Num. 3:22 the number of them from thirty days old and upward is given as 7,500. It will be noticed that from the same standpoint the Kohathites (v. 28) numbered 8,600 and that the Merarites (v. 34) numbered 6,200. We believe this types the following thought: that there would be more antitypical Kohathites in their officiating and supporting members than there would be of the officiating and supporting members of the antitypical Gershonites, but that the latter would be more numerous than the serving and supporting members of the antitypical Merarites. This is apparent because almost without exception the justified support the work of the antitypical officiating Kohathites, while not a few of the justified have withheld support from the antitypical Gershonites. Still smaller numbers support the officiating editors, publishers and printers who constitute the antitypical Merarites. The position assigned the Gershonites on the
west side, in the rear of the tabernacle (v. 23), seems to type the fact that their position and work were from the Divine standpoint the least honorable and useful of the Levitical divisions. This also becomes manifest when we consider the parts of the sanctuary and its articles that each division had as its charge, and when we consider the positions about the tabernacle occupied by the other Levite divisions and by Moses, Aaron and his family. We have already given our thought on v. 24 as teaching that the evangelistic workers—those inciting people to repentance, faith and consecration—have been the most influential group among the antitypical Gershonites and therefore are the antitype of Eliasaph, the son of Lael.
(25) In vs. 25 and 26 the sphere of Gershonite activity is set forth. The description in Num. 4:25, 26 is somewhat fuller than in the vs. that we are now studying; for Num. 3:25, 26 omits mentioning both the seal (incorrectly rendered badger) skin covering of the tabernacle and the instruments of the cords for the court's curtain and gate, both of which are mentioned in Num. 4:25, 26. It was our study of the articles mentioned in these verses and their symbolisms that enabled us to recognize that the Gershonites type for the Gospel Age those justified ones who as missionaries, ministers, evangelists, lay helpers and their supporters assist people to repentance and faith, and who as ministers, evangelists, lay helpers and their supporters assist justified ones to consecration and in some respects give the Priests help in their New Creatures and in their humanity. As we proceed, this, we trust, will become clear. First of all, the Gershonites had charge of the tabernacle, i.e., the linen curtains that were next to the boards. This restricted use of the word tabernacle, which usually, and in its broad sense, refers to the entire structure, types the Church as new creatures, either in the begotten or in the born condition (Heb. 8:2, 9, 11; Rev. 13:6; 15:5; 21:3).
Accordingly, the antitypical Gershonites have had a charge toward the new creatures. How could they have ministered to these? This will become manifest especially when we remember that throughout the Age until 1846, but more especially until 1878, there had been no outward separation between the Consecrated as a class and the justified, and that many of the former were members of churches in which some of the latter acted as pastors, evangelists and lay helpers. The sermons, teachings, conversations and writings of these have in not a few cases assisted the Priests, especially on questions of proper conduct. And thus they served the antitypical "tabernacle"—new creatures. The Gospel-Age Levites, of course, for obvious reasons, could not serve the Spirit-born new creatures, except indirectly, through advancing Jesus' work until 1878, and from then on His and the glorified Church's work.
(26) The next part of the Gershonites' service was the tent—the curtains of goats' hair that covered the "tabernacle"—the linen curtains. The use of the goats' hair curtains—which are here called the tent—ohel—the word usually translated tabernacle-as a tent to cover the linen curtains, readily suggests the thought of our humanity, which is expressly called a tabernacle, as being the tent, or house—the cover—of our New Creatures (2 Cor. 5:1, 4; 2 Pet. 1:13, 14). Its being white represents our humanity, justified through the righteousness of Christ (Is. 1:18; Rom. 4:6-8). Its doubled part in front of the tabernacle types the doubled feature in justification—tentative and vitalized justification. How have the antitypical Gershonites served the justified humanity of the Priests as typed by the Gershonites' ministry toward the "tent"—the curtains of goats' hair? We answer: By their sermons, teachings, conversations and writings they sometimes threw out suggestions that helped the Priests better to keep their justified humanity and to act in
harmony with righteousness, as well as to cleanse in a measure their earthen vessels; also by some of their teachings explaining and defending justification-the part of this curtain doubled in the front of the tabernacle-they helped the Priests. The third part of the tabernacle that was in charge of the typical Gershonites was the cover of the tent made of rams' skins dyed red. This part of the tabernacle, covering that which types our justified humanity, would very fittingly type our Lord's ransom sacrifice as our righteousness, which covers the blemishes of our humanity, making it righteous in God's sight (Is. 61:10; Rom. 4:6-8; 3:21-26; 10:4; 1 Cor. 1:30; Gal. 2:16; 3:22; Phil. 3:9). The red color—the color of blood—represents the thought that this righteousness could be made available to us only by the shed blood—the death—of the Lord Jesus. Rams' skins were used because Christ's humanity sacrificed unto death is frequently represented by the sacrifice of a ram. In the antitype, how did the Gospel-Age Levites minister to the humanity of the Priests in connection with the righteousness of Christ as its cover? This was done by their sermons, teachings, conversations and writings, which from time to time moved various of the Priests to lay firmer hold on the righteousness of Christ as the cover of their blemishes. If those of us who were Spirit-begotten while yet in the nominal church look back to some of our slips and blemishes of those days, we will doubtless recall how such help was rendered us by some antitypical Gershonites' work which sent us "to the blood again which makes and keeps me whole."
(27) The fourth part of the tabernacle that was in the charge of the Gershonites was the cover of seal skins, which lay over the cover of rams' skins dyed red (Num. 4:25). This represents our flesh as it appears to the world-repulsive and abhorrent. The Gershonites having this in charge type how ministers, evangelists, missionaries, lay helpers and their supporters
have made excuse for the real or supposed blemishes of the Priests' humanity, and defended them from more or less of opposition to their sacrificial course on the part of inimical persons. The last part of the tabernacle proper in the charge of the Gershonites was the first veil, the door of the tabernacle. This as we have learned types the death of the human will—the surrender of the human will; for if one desired to enter the Spirit-begotten condition he had to lay down in death his human will. In no other way could he become a New Creature. Hence the door of the tabernacle represents the death of the human will. What is typed by the Gershonites having this veil in their charge? We answer, the ministers, evangelists, lay helpers and their supporters encouraging by their sermons, teachings, conversations and writings tentatively justified persons to consecrate, and assisting them on various points until they consecrated. It is very remarkable how clearly some of these have understood the act of consecration—a thing which the natural man can understand. Thus we see that so far as the Faithful themselves—the true Tabernacle of God—are concerned, the Gospel-Age Gershonites have rendered them some service.
(28) Let us now look at the Gershonite activities as they pertain to the court. These are described in v. 26, while Num. 4:26 adds a particular not found in Num. 3:26, i.e., the instruments of the cords belonging to court hangings and gate. Our dear Pastor has shown us that the linen court hangings type Christ's righteousness, which the Gospel-Age Levites have been privileged to hold up to all in the antitypical Camp and Court, and that it has proven to be a wall of unbelief to those who remain without, in the Camp, and a wall of faith to those who come into the court. This court curtain being in the charge of the Gershonites types the fact that the Gospel-Age Gershonites would be privileged to serve by their sermons, conversations,
teachings and writings the justified and Unjustified with respect to sin, righteousness, the fall, the curse, the ransom, repentance, faith, justification, and right living. The second article of the court that was in the Gershonites' care was the gate of the court. This represents our Lord Jesus as the Door through whom alone one enters into justification (John 10:7; 14:6; 1 Cor. 1:30). Their having a charge respecting the gate of the court types the fact that it is the peculiar privilege of the Gospel-Age Gershonites in their Libnite branch—ministers, missionaries, evangelists, lay workers and their supporters—to hold up to the world by their sermons, conversations, teachings and writings the teachings that center in Christ as the Savior of sinners—teachings like those pertaining to the fall, sin, the curse, righteousness, repentance, Christ's righteousness and sacrificial death, faith, and justification by faith. The third thing connected with the court, and spoken of as being in the Gershonites' charge, consisted of the cords of the court's hangings and of the gate (Num. 3:26; 4:26). There seems to be no other mention made of these particular cords in the Scriptures. That they are not the cords that held the pillars in place is evident from the fact that these were in the charge of the Merarites (Num. 3:37; 4:32). They seem to have been cords that in addition to the hooks on the pillars helped to hold the curtains and the gate of the court in their proper positions on the pillars. These cords, like the hooks, probably passed through eyes at the top, and less probably at the bottom, of the curtains and gate, and then were bound about the posts, probably above the top and below the bottom hooks, thus co-operating with the hooks in holding the curtains and gate in their proper positions. If this is true, they would seem to represent teachings that refer to the Lord Jesus as Savior and to His righteousness, and that the Gospel-Age Gershonites would use for the help of one another and their Merarite and
Kohathite brethren in holding up Christ as the Door of Justification and His righteousness as the covering for human imperfection. By the expression, "their instruments," probably is meant the copper or silver used for the eyes of the hangings and gate through which the cords passed, and the copper or silver used at the ends of the cords. If copper was used, it would suggest the thought of justification, as our dear Pastor explained the copper sockets, etc., in the court. If silver was used, the thought of verity would be suggested, as he explained as to the symbolism of the chapiters, hooks and fillets of the pillars. However, it behooves us not to be dogmatic on these cord instruments as they are very indefinitely presented in Scripture, and apparently are referred to only in Num. 4:26, on which we are commenting.
(29) Certainly as we study the symbolisms of the tabernacle—the linen curtain, its covering of goats' hair cloth, its doubled part in front of the tabernacle, the covering of rams' skins dyed red, the covering of seal skins, the first veil, the court hangings and the gate, with their cords and the latter's instruments—it is very manifest that the Gershonites who had these in charge type those justified ones who have sought to win people to repentance toward God, faith in our Lord Jesus and consecration unto the Lord, and who have rendered some help to the Priests in their New Creatures and in their humanity, personally, as well as have measurably defended before the world the Priests' misunderstood course in sacrifice. The symbolism of the parts of the tabernacle and its court in their charge combined with the facts of the Gospel Age demonstrate the correctness of the above presentations on who have been the Gospel-Age Gershonites and what has been their Divinely appointed work.
(30) The chapter which we are explaining—type and antitype—in vs. 27-31 discusses the work of the Kohathites. In the next chapter, vs. 1-20, there are given many details connected with their work and with
the things with which they had to do. Of these greater details we hope to treat when, D.v., we discuss that chapter. We will just now limit our attention to the particulars mentioned in Num. 3:27-31. Above we explained the Gospel-Age antitypes of the Amramites, Izeharites, Hebronites and Uzzielites; therefore we need not go into detail on v. 27. We explained also, in our comments on v. 22, the antitypes of vs. 28 and 34. We will therefore make no further comments on v. 28. In v. 29, the place of the Kohathites' tents relative to the tabernacle is given as located on its south side. Apparently the south side of the tabernacle was, next to its east side, its most important side; and it was for this reason that the Kohathites, as the most important of the Levites, were privileged to dwell on the south side of the sacred structure, typing that the Gospel-Age Kohathites would be the highest class, as well as do the most responsible and important work of the Gospel-Age Levites. Certainly in the type the Kohathites carried the most sacred articles of the tabernacle, which types the fact that the Gospel-Age Kohathites would do a more important and responsible work than that of any of the other Gospel-Age Levites. We have already explained v. 30 to the effect that Elizaphan, the chief of the Kohathites, types the dogmaticians as the most influential of the Gospel-Age Kohathites.
(31) In v. 31, apart from the laver, of which no mention is made in the present Hebrew text of this verse, the particular articles of the tabernacle that were the charge of the Kohathites are set forth. It is a singular fact that the present Hebrew text of Num. 4:1-20, where the furniture of the tabernacle is enumerated, also omits mentioning the laver; yet the latter, being a part of the tabernacle furniture, was, of course, in charge of the Kohathites; and therefore very properly no mention is made of its being among the articles carried by the other Levites (Num. 3:25, 26, 36, 37; 4:25, 26, 31, 32). The Septuagint, the Samaritan
Pentateuch, and the Samaritan Version, all of which are many centuries older than our oldest MSS. of the present Hebrew text, contain in Num. 4:14 the statement that the laver was covered first with a purple cloth and then with seal skins, and, the reference occurring where it does, the laver evidently was carried by the Kohathites. We believe that these very ancient texts correctly represent the facts of the case. The first thing which v. 31 says was a charge of the Kohathites was the ark. As we have learned, the chest part of the ark types The Christ as the depository of Jehovah's full arrangement (T 121); and its mercy-seat, cherubim and glory-light type Jehovah—the Head of The Christ (T 123, 124). Hence the Kohathites bearing the ark type for the Gospel Age the fact that the tentatively justified Kohathites would perform services through their lectures and writings for God, and The Christ class in their condition beyond the veil, i.e., in the glorified condition, though not understanding clearly the Lord's mind on these subjects. Let us consider briefly how the four branches of the Gospel-Age Kohathites have rendered some service to the Priests and people in their labors pertaining to the antitypical Ark—God and The Christ beyond the veil. The Gershonite Amramites, who have had to do with the preservation of the Hebrew, Chaldee and Greek texts and of the ancient Versions, by doing such work gave the Priests and people the means for gaining a proper understanding of God, in His Person, Attributes, Plan and Works, and of The Christ as Divine, immortal Beings, as an elect Priesthood and as the Law's Fulfiller and Executor; for the passages which treat of these subjects they preserved to us, and thereby helped us, not to understand these subjects, but to have that which gives a right understanding of them. The Eliezerite Amramites, as Hebrew, Chaldee and Greek lexicographers and grammarians assist us by their definitions and grammatical explanations of Biblical words, phrases, clauses and
sentences in our understanding of the words and sentences of the original, relating to God and the glorified Christ; as translators they assist us by various renderings more clearly to see the Biblical thoughts on God and the glorified Christ; and as concordance-makers they assist us in our study of the meaning of Biblical words, sentences and teachings pertaining to God and the glorified Christ. In these ways the antitypical Amramites have assisted the antitypical Priests and people; and in giving these helps with reference to God and the glorified Christ they have borne the Ark.
(32) The antitypical Izeharites have also rendered help to the antitypical Priests and the people by carrying for them the antitypical Ark—ministering with respect to God and the glorified Christ. The introductionists (antitypical Zichrites), who have set forth the Divine origin, genuineness, credibility, and canonicity of the Bible, and the divisions and general contents of its books, have thereby given some help to an understanding of God as the Revealer of His Plan and of the glorified Christ as the Mouthpiece and Executor of God's Plan. The exegetes (antitypical Nephegites), who by their Biblical expositions, have shed some light on some of the texts that treat of God and the glorified Christ, have thereby as bearers of the antitypical Ark helped the antitypical Priests and people; and the Scriptural harmoniticians, by bringing together parallel verses and accounts, and topically arranged passages and indices, in so far as they treat of God and the glorified Christ, have borne the antitypical Ark, and thus have served the antitypical Priests and people, e.g., Nave, in his topical Bible brings together 90 pages of topically arranged texts treating of God, 93 pages of topically arranged verses treating of Jesus Christ, many of which refer to Him in his glorified condition, and nearly 30 pages of topically arranged passages treating of the Church. Furthermore, under other topics he cites many other verses treating of God and
of the glorified Christ. From his topical Bible, therefore, both the antitypical Priests and the people can find much help, though, of course, not infrequently he quotes passages under some topics to which they do not belong, as well as misapplies others. Accordingly, we recognize how the three groups of antitypical Izeharites bear the antitypical Ark.
(33) So, too, have the antitypical Hebronites shared in bearing the antitypical Ark. Those historical lecturers and writers (antitypical Jekameamites) who have given histories of God's activities as shown in the Bible and in Church History and who have described the resurrection history of the Lord Jesus and His work in Church History have borne the antitypical Ark. Those who have treated of these subjects from a chronological standpoint (antitypical Jahazielites) have from that standpoint borne the antitypical Ark. Those who have treated these subjects from the archaeological standpoint (antitypical Amariahites) and from a geographical standpoint (antitypical Jeriahites) have from these standpoints borne the antitypical Ark. As an illustration we might cite Dr. D'Aubigne's History of the Reformation as one which is thoroughly permeated with the idea of God's and Christ's hands shaping the events, etc., of that period; and from this standpoint he co-operated in bearing the antitypical Ark.
(34) The antitypical Uzzielitos have had something to do in bearing the antitypical Ark. Those who as ethical writers (antitypical Mishaelites) have described the holy character of God and of the glorified Lord Jesus and of the glorified Church did their part toward bearing the antitypical Ark. Those who as dogmaticians (antitypical Elizaphanites) wrote on the Person, Attributes, Plan and Works of God, on the Person, Attributes and Works of the glorified Lord Jesus, and on the Attributes and Works of the glorified Church, likewise bore the antitypical Ark. This is true
also of those justified ones (antitypical Zithrites) who lectured and wrote on the evidences of the Bible and its religion, and against the attacks of enemies of the Bible and its religion. Thus as they proved the Existence and Attributes of God and vindicated various features of His Plan, and Works, and as they proved the fact of the resurrection of Christ and defended His works in the history of the Church, they bore the antitypical Ark.
(35) Of course, we do not mean to say that the antitypical Kohathite Levites have seen clearly either the antitypical Ark or the other articles of the antitypical Tabernacle's furniture and their pertinent vessels and instruments which have been theirs to bear; for the next chapter shows (Num. 4:5—15) that the typical Kohathites carried under cover everything that they bore. This types the fact that the Gospel-Age Kohathites serve in connection with the antitypical Tabernacle's furniture and vessels without clearly seeing—understanding—them, yet having some general ideas thereon which are helpful to the antitypical Priests and people. What we have said above on their service of the antitypical Ark shows such to be the fact.
(36) The next article of the tabernacle that v. 31 shows as a charge of the Kohathites is the table of shewbread. This table types The Christ holding up the Bread of Life to the brethren, whereby they are strengthened in every good word and work for their journey (T 115). It therefore represents the Christ class developing one another in Christlikeness. This they do, not by enlightening one another's minds, which is done by them as the antitype of the golden candlestick, but by nourishing, stimulating and poising one another with pertinent parts of the Word—the antitypical Shewbread. The Kohathites' carrying the table represents, for the Gospel Age, the fact that the Kohathites of this Age minister to the Church in its capacity of strengthening the brethren in grace by giving
them some helps conducing to this result. Thus as antitypical Gershonite Amramites those justified ones who have preserved the Scriptures in their originals and ancient versions have served the Church as the antitypical Table in so far as they preserved those parts of the Scriptures that are used by the Church in strengthening the brethren, and thus they bore the antitypical Table. So, too, those Eliezerite Amramites who as lexicographers have defined, and as grammarians have grammatically explained, those terms that apply to the work of the Christ class as strengtheners of the brethren have ministered to The Christ in this respect, and thus have borne the antitypical Table. Those antitypical Eliezerite Amramites who as translators have rendered those parts of the Scriptures that are used by the Christ class as strengtheners of the brethren thereby served, and thus bore, them as the antitypical Table. Likewise those Eliezerite Amramites who as concordance-makers supplied the Christ class as strengtheners of the brethren with pertinent Scripture references served, and thus bore, them as the antitypical Table.
(37) The Gospel-Age Izeharites have also co-operated in bearing the antitypical Table. The Zichrite Izeharites have done such a service to the Church as the strengtheners of the brethren by showing the Divine origin, etc., of the Biblical books that contain thoughts helpful for the strengthening of the brethren. The Nephegite Izeharites have co-operated in such work by giving helpful expository thoughts as sprouts (Nepheg, sprout), of Truth on passages that strengthen the brethren; and the Korahite Izeharites have shared in such carrying of the antitypical Table by gathering together parallel and topically arranged passages and indices that apply to the strengthening of the brethren. The Gospel-Age Hebronites have in many ways helped the Church in its capacity of strengthening the brethren, as can be seen from the
historical, biographical, chronological, archaeological and geographical facts that they have given upon the Bible and Church History, illustrative of and conducive to such strengthening activities; for these frequently have helped the brethren to strengthen one another. The Gospel-Age Uzzielites, more particularly their Mishaelite branch, as lecturers and writers on incentives to character-development have by hints thrown out here and there helped the Church to strengthen the brethren in Christian character. So, too, in a less degree, by throwing out pertinent doctrinal-hints have the Elzaphanite Uzzielites helped the Church as the strengtheners of the brethren in Christlikeness. In some respects the Zithrite Uzzielites have assisted herein; for these assisted the Church to strengthen the faith of the brethren by defending the Truth of the Bible and various of its teachings, and by refuting infidel attacks on the Bible and its religion. In these various ways the Gospel-Age Kohathites have borne the antitypical Table.
(38) The third article of the tabernacle that was a charge of the Kohathites was the lampstand. As we have seen, this types the Christ class as the enlighteners of the brethren (T 115, 116). While the antitypical Table strengthens their hearts in Christlikeness, with the Truth, the antitypical Lampstand enlightens their minds with the Truth. The latter represents us as engaging in teaching work, the former in character-developing work. Accordingly, the antitypical Kohathites of the Gospel Age have assisted in various ways the Christ class in their work of enlightening, instructing and teaching the brethren. The Gershonite Amramites have done this while preserving the Scriptures in their originals and ancient versions, by providing the Church with the passages which the latter use to enlighten the brethren. The Eliezerite Amramites, through their lexicographers defining pertinent words, through their grammarians explaining various pertinent
matters grammatically, through their translators giving helpful renderings of pertinent words, etc., and through their concordance-makers collecting verses under pertinent words, have rendered the Christ class very much assistance in enlightening the brethren on the Lord's Word. Thus have the Gospel-Age Amramites borne the antitypical Lampstand. Likewise have the Gospel-Age Izeharites assisted the Christ class as teachers of the brethren, and thus have borne the antitypical Lampstand. The Gospel-Age Zichrite Izeharites in their giving general introductional information on the Bible and its books, the Gospel-Age Nephegite Izeharites by throwing light as exegetes on various passages, and the Gospel-Age Korahite Izeharites by collecting parallel and topically arranged passages and indices, have one and all assisted the Church in its work of enlightening the brethren, and thus have borne the antitypical Lampstand. So, too, have the Gospel-Age Hebronites borne the antitypical Lampstand. How, for example, could we expound the prophecies of the book of Revelation without the help of the Gospel-Age Jekameamite Hebronites, who in their Church Histories and in their Biographies of noted Christians have set forth the facts that are symbolized in that book? All of us know how much help the Church as enlighteners of the brethren have received for pertinent work by the lectures and writings of those Gospel-Age Hebronites who have furnished us with chronological, archaeological and geographical information. Every time we get from a Biblical Dictionary or Religious Encyclopedia some religious information that helps to clear up matters for the brethren we are assisted by Hebronites. In giving the Christ class help in these various ways for the enlightenment of the brethren, these Hebronites carry the antitypical Lampstand. Whenever a Mishaelite Uzzielite gives us information on ethical subjects, whenever an Elzaphanite Uzzielite gives us information on a doctrinal question, and whenever a Zithrite
Uzzielite gives us information on a matter of Christian evidence and apologetics, and whenever we use such information to enlighten the brethren, they bear the Lampstand.
(39) The fourth article of the tabernacle that was a charge of the Kohathites was the golden altar. This altar represents the Christ class, not as human beings, but as New Creatures, comforting, etc., their sacrificing brethren (T 120). As comforters and supporters of one another in sacrifice—the antitypical Golden Altar—they have received assistance from the Gospel-Age Kohathites, and thus these have carried the antitypical Golden Altar. From what we have shown to be the various phases of Gospel-Age Kohathite work we can the more readily see what is implied by their carrying the antitypical Golden Altar. Whatever the help is that the Christ class received for comforting, etc., their sacrificing brethren and for their prayers, if derived from the Scriptures preserved in their originals and in ancient versions, and from the lexicographical, grammatical, translational and concordantial labors of the Gospel-Age Kohathites, that help antitypes the work of the four Amramite groups in their charge as to the golden altar. Whatever the helps are that the Christ class received for their comforting and supporting fellow sacrificers and for prayer, if derived from introductional works on the Bible as a whole and on its separate books, from the exegetical works, and from the parallel and topically arranged passages and indices of the Gospel-Age Kohathites, these helps antitype the work of the three Izeharite groups in their charge of the golden altar. Whatever the help is that the Christ class received for their comforting and supporting fellow sacrificers and for prayer, from the historical, biographical, chronological, archeological and geographical works of the Gospel-Age Kohathites, that help antitypes the work of the four Hebronite groups in their charge respecting the
golden altar. And whatever the helps are that the Christ class received for their comforting and supporting fellow sacrificers and for prayer from the ethical, dogmatical and apologetical works of the Gospel-Age Kohathites, those helps antitype the work of the three groups of the Uzzielites in their charge toward the golden altar.
(40) The fifth article of tabernacle furniture in the charge of the Kohathites was the altar of burnt offering. This altar represents Jesus and the Church in their sacrificed humanity, that on and in which their life-rights are offered as an acceptable sacrifice to God. Whatever service the Gospel-Age Kohathites have rendered as to Jesus and the Church in their sacrificed humanity would be typed by the Kohathites bearing the altar of burnt offering. Thus by preserving the pertinent parts of the Bible in its originals and ancient versions, and by their pertinent lexicographical, grammatical, translational and concordantial works the Gospel-Age Kohathites have ministered as to the sacrificed humanity of the Christ class. Whatever Bible helps of an introductional, exegetical or harmonetical kind Gospel-Age Kohathites have given as to the Christ class in their sacrificed humanity antitype the Izeharites carrying the altar of burnt offering. Whatever historical, biographical, chronological, archaeological and geographical helps on religious matters the Gospel-Age Kohathites gave as to the Christ class in their sacrificed humanity, antitype the Hebronites carrying the altar of burnt offering. And whatever ethical, doctrinal, evidential and apologetical helps on Biblical lines Gospel-Age Kohathites gave as to the Christ class in their sacrificed humanity antitype the Uzzielites having the altar of burnt offering in their official charge.
(41) The last article of furniture in the charge of the Kohathites was the laver. This laver was of two
parts, a base and a bowl (Ex. 30:18). The laver represents the Bible; the water in it types the cleansing truths of the Bible (Eph. 5:26; Heb. 10:22; 1 John 5:6, 8); the base probably represents the Old Testament and the bowl the New Testament. Certain it is that the Bible consists of these two parts; certain it also is that the Old Testament is the basis of the New Testament; and certain it finally is that the cleansing truths of the Bible for the New Creation are mainly in the New Testament, even as the water of the laver was mainly in the bowl of the laver. It is hardly necessary to show how the Gospel-Age Kohathites have served with respect to the antitypical Laver; for all of their Divinely ordained work has been with reference to the Bible in its preservation, words, wording, books, verses, history, effects, precepts, teaching and truthfulness, which they have presented, among other ways, as the means whereby God offers us the cleansing truths.
(42) It will be noticed that we have said nothing respecting the vessels belonging to the tabernacle furniture and the second veil. These were also a charge of the Kohathites (Num. 3:31; 4:5-15). We have omitted a discussion of these, because they are not particularized in Num. 3:1-51, but are particularized in Num. 4:5-15. Hence we will leave them for future treatment, the Lord willing.
(43) The section that we have just treated, type and antitype, and the one that we will treat somewhat later have placed between them the remark that Eleazar, the son of Aaron, was the chief [prince] over the chief [princes] of the Levites, and had the oversight of those that had a charge in the sanctuary. This types how throughout the Gospel Age (Matt. 18:18) the Twelve Apostles by their writings and arrangements in the Church were over the chief Levites—antitypical Kohathites; and for the Epiphany (Matt. 24:45-47; Luke 12:42-46) it types how that Servant through
his writings and through his arrangements would be over the chief Levites, the Epiphany Kohathites; and that therefore his teachings and arrangements for them are Divinely given, and are obligatory upon them. Hence revolutionism against his teachings and arrangements as that Servant is grossly contrary to God's will, and is a sure proof of the fact that such revolutionists are Epiphany Levites—Great Company members. From this verse, as well as from Matt. 24:45-47 and Luke 12:42-46, we can readily see why the Lord through the Epiphany message has so trenchantly testified against the disregard of that Servant's teachings and arrangements on the part of the Epiphany Levites; for his general teachings and arrangements are thereby shown to be God's teachings and arrangements for these Levites, because God gave them to him to present as His to His people for the Epiphany Levites.
(44) There yet remains for us a study of the Gospel-Age Merarite Levites' activities from the standpoint of the parts of the antitypical Tabernacle that they have borne. We closed the preceding section of this chapter with an exposition of Num. 3:32, and our present study begins with Num. 3:33. We pointed out above that the Gospel-Age Mahlite Merarites type editors of Bibles and pertinent books, etc., and that the Gospel-Age Mushite Merarites type the publishers, transcribers and printers of such works (v. 33). We also pointed out above that the number of the Merarites being smaller than those of the other Levite groups types the fact that they would be in their antitypes less numerous than the other two antitypical Levite groups (v. 34). So, too, we pointed out the antitype of Zuriel, the son of Abihail, to be the publishers of Bibles in the living languages. The position of the Merarites on the North side of the Tabernacle types the fact that their antitypes would be inferior in honor of service to the antitypical Kohathites, but superior in honor of service to the antitypical Gershonites (v. 35).
(45) In vs. 36 and 37 there are enumerated the tabernacle's parts which were the special charge of the Merarites. Their significance, understood, will show that our understanding of the Gospel-Age Merarites' work, as consisting of editing, publishing, transcribing and printing the Bible and pertinent books, etc., is correct. The parts of the tabernacle building in the charge of the Merarites were the boards, bars, pillars and sockets (bases, or pedestals, not sockets, is the meaning of the Hebrew word adonim, translated sockets in the A. V.). In the tabernacle proper there were 48 boards (Ex. 26:18-23), 9 sets of bars—counting as a set each of the three rows on each of the three sides of the tabernacle (Ex. 26:26-28)—and 9 pillars (Ex. 26:32, 37). These, so counted, total 66, thus: 48+9+9=66. These 66 supports of the tabernacle proper—the linen curtains with their coverings (Num. 3:25; Ex. 26:1, 6), the former typical of The Christ as new creatures—type the 66 books of the Bible as the foundation and support of The Christ. It will be noted that we count the 9 pillars as typing 9 books of the Bible. This is not out of harmony with our Pastor's thought, who explained the five within the first veil as typing The Christ as embryo new creatures, and the four within the second veil as typing The Christ as born new creatures (T 114, 115). This latter thought is entirely correct, and not contradictory of the former thought; for these nine pillars type both sets of thoughts. Let us explain. Evidently the boards, which in the Holy as well as in the Most Holy were set on silver pedestals (Ex. 26:19-25), do not in the Holy type embryo New Creatures in justified human bodies, as the five pillars within the first veil do, because the former were set on pedestals of silver, whereas the latter show that they type such New Creatures as are in justified human bodies, by being set on pedestals of copper (Ex. 26:37). Hence the boards do not type New Creatures at all; much less would the
bars type such New Creatures, since they had no pedestals, but were attached to the boards by golden rings (Ex. 26:29). These considerations prove that there is at least a difference in the symbolic meaning of the boards and the five pillars in the Holy, and this difference consists in these pillars typing something additional to that which the boards type, i.e., embryo New Creatures. But as the boards and the pillars had a similar office—holding up the tabernacle—they from this standpoint type similar things. Therefore we understand the pillars also to type things additional to New Creatures—things like those typed by the boards. Hence we understand the pillars to type two sets of things—New Creatures and certain Biblical books; and because of their twofold antitypes they were constructed somewhat differently from the boards. Since it is the office of the Bible books, as a foundation, to support The Christ as God's real Tabernacle; and since we note that there are 66 books in the Bible, and that there were 66 parts of the typical tabernacle that as a foundation supported the linen curtains and their coverings, which specifically type The Christ as God's real Tabernacle, we infer from the correspondencies of the case that the boards, bars and pillars type the 66 books of the Bible. Thus by the tabernacle structure God has given us positive typical evidence that the canon of the Scriptures excludes from the Bible the Apocryphal books, which the Roman Catholic Church teaches are parts of the Bible.
(46) We note that from one standpoint there were 15 bars, and that from another there were 9. If we count the bars as separate pieces they totaled 15; but if we count them as sets of rows they totaled 9 (Ex. 26:26-28). For the reasons shortly to be given we believe the Lord uses the bars as rows in typing the number of books that they were designed to type: they type, to our understanding, those purely historical books of the Old Testament that historically hold up
and bind together the Scriptural books in a logical whole, the golden rings typing that they are Divinely empowered to perform such a work. These nine purely historical books, as we understand the matter, are the following: Genesis, Joshua, Judges, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, 2 Kings, 1 Chronicles and 2 Chronicles. These books are unlike the remainder of the Biblical books; for they are entirely historical as distinct from biographical and didactic, and their histories form the background and support to the religion revealed in the Word. Such books as Ruth, Ezra, Nehemiah and Esther are biographies and not histories, while Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy, etc., though containing some history, as distinct from biography, are more or less didactic, containing laws, etc. But the nine books above-mentioned are purely historical, and their histories are of such a character as to afford a background and support for the religion revealed in the Bible, both in connection with its types and its antitypes. It is because of this their peculiar relation to the religion revealed in the Bible that they hold up and bind together historically the Biblical books as a logical whole; and this their peculiar relation to the other Biblical books is fittingly typed by the bars, which held up, bound together and kept in place the boards of the tabernacle.
(47) In a remarkable way the Lord has indicated that six of these nine books would consist of three pairs. From the standpoint of the bars consisting of fifteen pieces there were five bars for each of the three board walls of the tabernacle (Ex. 26:26, 27); but from the standpoint of each row being a bar there were nine bars, three for each of the three board walls. The middle bar of each side was in one piece, reaching the entire length of its respective side; but the top and bottom bars of each side were of two pieces (Ex. 26:28, compare with vs. 26, 27). The three middle bars we understand type the three books, Genesis,
Joshua and judges; while, according to our understanding, the three top bar rows represent 1 Samuel, 1 Kings and 1 Chronicles, and the bottom bar rows type 2 Samuel, 2 Kings and 2 Chronicles. One may ask, Why did not the Lord have each of the top and bottom bars made as He did the middle bars, i.e., to consist of but one piece? We reply: (1) Because He purposed by each middle bar to type a supporting book that has no companion book—there is not a 1 Genesis and a 2 Genesis, a 1 Joshua and a 2 Joshua, a 1 Judges and a 2 Judges; and (2) because He designed by the two-pieced top bars and the two-pieced bottom bars to represent the thought that each of them types a supporting book that has a companion book—a 1 Samuel and a 2 Samuel, a 1 Kings and a 2 Kings, and a 1 Chronicles and a 2 Chronicles. Thus the top and bottom bars, by consisting of two pieces, were in each set related to one another in a way in which the middle bar had no relation to them or to any other bar, thereby typing the fact that the books represented by the top and bottom bars were respectively related to one another in a way that they were not related to the books represented by their corresponding middle bars, and in a way in which each of the books, represented by each of the middle bars, was not related to any other books. Thus the books represented by the top and bottom bars of each set are shown to have a relationship to one another by a peculiarity that none of the other books represented by the three middle bars have—the relationship of a pair or of a series of two books. And the fact that there were three sets of the top and bottom bars so related types the fact that there would be three pairs, or sets, of such books. Truly this is a remarkably ingenious way of arranging this set of symbols.
(48) Viewed, not from the standpoint of the nine pillars typing embryo and born new creatures, but from the standpoint of their typing Biblical books, we understand the nine pillars to type nine books—each
one of which was written by a different one of the nine writers of the New Testament. The five pillars in the Holy seem to type five books written by the five less important writers of the New Testament—Sts. Matthew, Mark and Luke, James and Jude. These five books we accordingly understand to be the three Gospels, written by Sts. Matthew, Mark and Luke, and the two Epistles written by Sts. James and Jude. The four pillars in the Most Holy we understand to type the four books written by the Lord Jesus, and Sts. Paul, Peter and John. These four books seem to be the Revelation, written by our Lord, Hebrews, written by St. Paul, and 1 Peter and 1 John [Correction: John; E11, 484], written respectively by Sts. Peter and John. These four are the more important writers of the New Testament. The varied importance of these two sets of New Testament writers is typed by books of the five less important ones being represented in the five pillars in the Holy, and books of the four more important ones being represented in the four pillars in the Most Holy. Additionally, the subject matter of these first five books, relating as they do to the death of the human will—the antitypical first Veil—logically places them at the entrance to the antitypical Holy; for these books especially treat of consecration, and incite to it those who are in the antitypical Court, as the subject matter of the second four books, relating as they do to the death of the human body—the antitypical second Veil—logically places them at the entrance to the antitypical Most Holy: for these books especially treat of faithfulness in sacrifice unto death, and incite to it those who are in the antitypical Holy. Some mad object, saying that St. John, not Jesus, wrote the Revelation. To this we reply that as an amanuensis whom an author of a book uses to write out what the latter dictates and pictures cannot be called the author of the book in question, so St. John, acting as our Lord's amanuensis, wrote the book of Revelation at our
Lord's dictation and at His furnishing the symbols of which the book largely consists (Rev. 1:1; 2:1, 8, 12, 18; 3:1, 7, 14). It is for this reason that we are right in calling St. Paul the writer of Romans, even thought Tertius acted as his amanuensis in its writing (Rom. 16:22). Apparently Galatians is the only one of St. Paul's books that he wrote with his own hand, his poor eyesight making it preferable for him to dictate the others to his helpers (Gal. 6:11). Repeatedly our Pastor in discourse and writing taught that the Lord Jesus was the Writer of the Revelation (H. 33, 2, etc).
(49) All the pillars had golden hooks, to support the veils and fillets, golden chapiters as their crowns, and golden fillets—poles joining pillar to pillar at the top, and attached to the hooks to support the pillars as the bars supported the boards (Ex. 26:32, 37; 36:38). The golden hooks holding up the first veil type how the teachings of the five pertinent books Divinely hold up to those in the antitypical Court the thought of consecration; while the golden hooks holding up the second veil type how the teachings of the four pertinent books Divinely hold up to those in the antitypical Holy the thought of faithfulness unto death. The chapiters served as crowns to the pillars; and golden crowns symbolize Divine authorization, either as a teacher, priest or king. Divine authorization as teachers is symbolized by the golden crowns on the heads of the 24 elders (Rev. 4:4). This seems to be the thought represented by the golden chapiters on the tops of the pillars—they tell us typically that the pertinent books, and thus their writers, are Divinely authorized teachers. The golden fillets seem to type the thought that the pertinent books and thus their writers are Divinely upheld in their mission. Most assuredly the Bible, our experiences and the history of the Church agree with this thought.
(50) The Most, Holy was a perfect cube, its height,
length and width each being ten cubits. Each of the boards was a cubit and a half in width. We are told that there were six boards, which equaled nine cubits in width, and parts of two other boards, that formed the west wall of the Most Holy (Ex. 26:22-25). Therefore there could be only a half cubit of each of the end boards within the Most Holy as a part of its west wall. In other words, only one-third of the corner boards showed inside as the wall of the Most Holy. For the same reason, on each of the two side walls of the Most Holy there were 6⅓ boards visible in the Most Holy. In other words, there were 18 entire boards visible from within the Most Holy; and of four other boards ⅓ of them was visible from within; while ⅔ of them were invisible in the Most Holy. These boards are likewise typical. The New Testament consists, as we know, of 27 books, nine of which we have found to be typed by the five pillars in the Holy and the four pillars in the Most Holy, and the remaining 18 of which we believe are typed by the entire 18 boards visible within the Most Holy. How about the four boards whose thirds form part of the four corners of the Most Holy? We believe that they type four of the five most important books of the Old Testament. The five books of Moses—the Pentateuch—are confessedly the most important books of the Old Testament. We have already seen that the first of these—Genesis—is represented by one of the middle bars. Hence we understand that Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy are represented by the four boards whose thirds are visible in the four corners of the Most Holy. This raises the question, Why is but ⅓ of each of the boards representing these books visible from within the Most Holy, while ⅔ of each of them are not there visible? This we believe is to show that while the books which they type do not as such belong among the New Testament books, yet their typical teachings determine the character and scope of
everything in the New Testament. Certainly, whoever understands the typical teachings of these four books knows that they shadow forth the teachings of the New Testament books as no other four books of the Old Testament do—yea, more so than do all the other Old Testament books combined. There remain yet 26 boards that thus far have not been discussed. It will be noted that they constitute the boards entirely within the Holy—13 in each of its side walls. These 26 boards we understand to type the remaining Old Testament books, probably those in the south wall typing the 13 more important, and those in the north wall typing the 13 less important. Surely in the bars, pillars and boards of the tabernacle the Lord has furnished us with a most remarkable set of symbols, and their fitness in symbolizing the 66 books of the Bible becomes apparent when we keep in mind that, as they were the foundation and support of the tabernacle proper—the linen curtains as well as their three coverings—so the 66 books of the Bible are the foundation and support of The Christ—God's real Tabernacle.
(51) There remain of the frame-work of the building proper yet to be considered the sockets—literally pedestals—and the tenons, which, by being inserted into mortise-holes in the sockets, served to hold the boards and pillars upright. All of these pedestals were of silver, except the five which supported the five pillars in the Holy (Ex. 26:19, 21, 25, 32). These five pedestals were of copper (Ex. 26:37). The silver pedestals represent the fact that the Truth is the basis of the Biblical books, and that these books are truly of Divine origin. The fact that the five pillars in the Holy rested on copper pedestals seems to type the thought that the five books which they type are especially useful for those who are just about to step, or who have just stepped from the justified into the Spirit-begotten condition. The two golden tenons (Ex. 26:17)
that fitted into the two mortise-holes in each pedestal seem, on the one hand, to type the fact that there are two Divine doctrines that firmly fix each book of the Bible in the Truth of God. These two Divine doctrines are Restitution and the High Calling or the Song of Moses and the Song of the Lamb (Rev. 15:2, 3). Because the Song of Moses is the main subject of the Old Testament, and because the Song of the Lamb is the main subject of the New Testament, the two tenons, on the other hand, seem also to represent these two parts of the Bible. From this standpoint their being in the mortise-holes of the pedestals types the fact that both parts of the Bible are equally and Divinely true, and are embedded in the Truth, and thus they, as the one Divine Revelation, Divinely and firmly hold in the Truth every one of their books. All of the tenons being equally distant from one another in the wall types the fact that these two parts of the Bible are Divinely harmonious with one another.
(52) The above discussion shows that the framework of the tabernacle—the boards, tenons, bars, pillars and pedestals—as a whole represents the Bible as such, and in its parts, the books of the Bible with their main characteristics and purposes. As it was necessary for us to understand the Gospel-Age significance of each part of the tabernacle that the Gershonites and Kohathites bore, in order to understand the work of the Gospel-Age Gershonites and Kohathites, so it is necessary for us to understand the Gospel-Age significance of each part of the tabernacle building that the Merarites bore, in order to understand the work of the Gospel-Age Merarites. Understanding the Gospel-Age significance of the frame-work of the tabernacle as above, we recognize that it has not been the work of the Gospel-Age Merarites to explain various matters pertaining to the contents of the Bible; for from various standpoints and purposes this has been the work of the Gospel-Age Kohathites and Gershonites. It
follows, then, that they had as to the Bible as their charge all of the Gospel-Age Levitical work which the other Levitical groups did not have as to the Bible as their charge, i.e., the work of editing, publishing, transcribing and printing the Bible. This work, then, is typed by the Merarites' taking down, carrying and putting up the frame-work of the tabernacle. Very noble and richly blessed indeed has been this work. Their industry and fruitfulness are manifest in the many editions of the Bible that have been prepared, transcribed, printed and circulated. All through the Age they have done this, first by hand and then later by the press. Since 1804, especially through the Bible Societies, there has been a veritable downpour of Bibles, refreshing and blessing the drought-blasted peoples of the earth. We thank God for the Gospel-Age ministry of the Merarites with respect to the Bible; for their labors have very greatly enriched the antitypical Priests, Levites and Israelites.
(53) However, additional to the work of editing, transcribing, printing and publishing Bibles, the Gospel-Age Merarites had the work of editing, transcribing, printing and publishing other literature—especially the writings of the Priests and of their fellow Levitical brethren on Biblical subjects. Yea, sometimes, in harmony with their office work, they have edited, transcribed, printed and published secular writings which have proven, as auxiliaries to religious knowledge, serviceable to the Priests, to their fellow Levites and to the nominal people of God. To understand this we must see the Gospel-Age significance of those parts of the tabernacle, not yet considered, which were in the charge of the Merarites. These are set forth as being the court pillars, sockets (pedestals), pins and cords (Num. 3:37). Our dear Pastor very properly explains the court pillars as typing justified believers (T 113, 2). It being not yet due, he did not explain why there were 60 pillars in the court (Ex. 27:10-16).
The light has since come on the question as to why there were 60 pillars in the court. There were 60 pillars in the court because there have been 60 sections of Gospel-Age Levites, as we showed above. Thus these 60 court pillars type for Gospel-Age purposes justified believers in their 60 Gospel-Age activities, just as God also gives us in Exodus, Numbers and 1 Chronicles as their types the 60 heads of Levite families. How marvelous is this piece of symbolism! On these pillars were hooks, fillets—poles—and chapiters, all of silver (Ex. 38:17). Our Pastor has explained the significance of the hooks (T 114, 2); therefore we will not repeat it here. The silver chapiters being the crowns of the pillars seem to type the thought that the 60 sets of justified believers were truly authorized to do their Levitical work and that the Truth that God put into their possession authorized them to do their Levitical work. The silver fillets—poles—joining pillar to pillar at their tops and attached to the pillars over the tatter's hooks, keeping the pillars from swaying or falling toward or away from one another, as the cords prevented their falling into or out of the court, seem to type the Truth by which the various Levite sections would truly support one another. Our Pastor has explained the significance of the copper pedestals of the pillars (T 113, 2); therefore we omit repeating his explanation here. The cords that held the pillars seem to type the helps, especially by discourses and writings, that the Levites have given to one another to support the various Levitical sections in their proper activities. The cords that were pinned to the ground within the court seem to type such helps, in so far as they pertain to religious matters; and those cords that were pinned to the ground outside of the court seem to type such helps in so far as they pertain to secular matters, e.g., many of the Gospel-Age Kohathites not only have prepared helps that have assisted the Priests and the people, but they
also have prepared helps that have assisted their fellow Levites of all three groups. Such helps seem to be represented by the cords. Among the helps purely intended for Levites—typed by these cords—we might mention text books on secular and religious subjects that they have prepared to assist young men with collegiate and seminary knowledge for the ministry, such as text books on history, logic, rhetoric, languages, preaching, catechizing, pastoral work and the various branches of theology. The copper pins by which these cords were fastened to the ground seem to type the thought that all of these helps were to be serviceable to justification, and that, as works of tentatively justified persons, these helps had the benefit of their tentatively-justified standing before God. The fact that the pillars, so constructed and supported, held up the linen curtains types the fact that the 60 sections of Gospel-Age Levites have had as their special work the service of holding up the righteousness of Christ—justification by faith.
(54) The Merarites' having charge of the pillars, their pedestals, cords and pins types the fact that by their editing, transcribing, printing and publishing secular and religious literature serviceable to justification to their fellow Levites, to the Priests and to the people, the Gospel-Age Merarites were to further one another and their fellow Levites in the good work of holding up the righteousness of Christ—justification by faith, as well as to put the helpful literary products of the Gospel-Age Kohathite and Gershonite Levites into the hands of the Priests, people and Levites. Those camping on the East side of the Tabernacle type Jesus as Jehovah's Administrator (antitypical Moses) and Jesus and the Church (antitypical Aaron and his sons) as Priests, having in their relation to the antitypical Tabernacle a more important position than had any of the Levitical groups. Any one not of this class who would presume to busybody in their work
would reap summary punishment (Num. 3:38). The exchange of the firstborn for the Levites (Num. 3:39-51) is not designed to type an exchange of certain persons for others; for the antitypical Firstborns and the antitypical Levites are the same persons. Rather, this bit of history is inserted to show how in Israel the tribe of Levi took the place of the firstborns in religious matters. The giving of the redemption money for the 273 surplus firstborns over and above the number of the Levites from 30 days old and upward is to show that the antitypical Firstborns and the antitypical tribe of Levi are of equal number, i.e., are the same persons. It is well for us to note that the power to be a Levite, with the privilege of exercising Levitical powers, was valued at five pieces of silver—shekels of the sanctuary.
(55) The service of the Gospel-Age Kohathites was described above. Their ministry was connected with carrying the furniture and vessels of the tabernacle, which they bore on their shoulders (Num. 3:31; 4:1-20; 7:9). But before they could bear the furniture and vessels, the priests had to prepare them for the purpose by covering them according to the Lord's Word. The covering of the furniture and the vessels, like the furniture, the vessels, the tabernacle, the priests and the Levites, was typical of better—higher—things. It is our purpose in this chapter to set forth our understanding of the priests' work in covering these articles as typical of these better—higher—things.
(56) The Lord has been pleased to open our eyes of understanding as to the antitypical meaning of the sacred vessels, and it gives us pleasure to set this forth before the brethren. For many years we have known from Is. 52:11 that the sacred vessels typed Biblical teachings; and for several years we have understood the antitypes of certain of the vessels. We knew in 1910 that the censers represent Bible passages, and we
stated this in print (P '19, 144, par. 5), when explaining the antitypes of the censers of the 250 Levites who with Korah offered incense in competition with Aaron. So, also, for years we have known from the type of John's head being placed on a charger, that the tabernacle chargers or plates typed teachings corrective of misconduct. So, too, from the vials or bowls of Rev. 16 we knew that bowls typed truths refutative of error; but it was not until the Spring of 1922 that we gained a viewpoint that enabled us to see what all of the sacred vessels type.
(57) We knew from Is. 52:11 that the tabernacle vessels type Bible teachings, and while seeking by meditation and prayer, to learn the antitypes of all of the vessels mentioned in Num. 4:5-20, 2 Tim. 3:16, 17 came to mind, and gave us the clue. We had previously noted the fact that in connection with certain furniture of the tabernacle, apart from the censers there were four sets of vessels belonging to the brazen altar (Num. 4:14; Ex. 38:3), to the golden table (Num. 4:7) and to the golden lampstand (Num. 4:9); and quite likely with the golden altar (Num. 4:11, 12) the same number of sets of vessels were had as were used in connection with the brazen altar. For many years we have known from 2 Tim. 3:16, 17 that the Scriptures are especially intended to teach four lines of thought: (1) "doctrine," (2) "reproof," i.e., refutation of error, (3) "correction," disapproval and setting aside of wrong qualities and conduct, and (4) "instruction in righteousness," inculcation of proper qualities and conduct. In our study of these vessels, compared with this passage, the thought struck our mind: The four sets of vessels connected with the four pieces of tabernacle furniture, typing Biblical teaching, seemingly correspond to the four sets of Biblical teachings brought to our attention in 2 Tim. 3:16, 17. The reasonableness of this thought inheres in the nature of the case; for if we ask ourselves, What
do the priests, apart from Bible passages, the antitypical censers, use in their sacrificial service, in teaching lines, as antitypes of the typical vessels? we must answer from the facts of the case, that they, in teaching lines, apart from Bible passages, use doctrines, reproofs, corrections and instructions in righteousness. Not only does the correspondence of the facts of the case, but also the fulfilled Scriptures respecting chargers, bowls and censers, show that our thought is evidently a Scriptural one.
(58) Having thus pointed out in general what the tabernacle vessels type, we desire to show what, generally speaking, is the antitype of the priests' covering the vessels and the furniture. The covering of the vessels and furniture was for the purpose of preventing the Levites and the people (Num. 4:20) from seeing them. As, therefore, the typical covering concealed the typical vessels and furniture from the natural sight of Levites and Israelites; so the antitypical covering must hide the antitypical vessels and furniture from the mental sight of all who are not antitypical Priests. Hence the antitypical covering of the vessels and furniture makes them so that they cannot be understood by antitypical Levites and Israelites. The Priests, therefore, act in such away toward the antitypical furniture and vessels as to make them not understood by the non-priests. How do they do this? By faithfully using, in the spirit of the Lord and in harmony with their consecration, these antitypical vessels, and by faithfully sacrificing with and for those who are typed by the furniture they make the antitypical vessels and furniture seem untrue and unnatural, and hence not understandable, to the natural mind (1 Cor. 2:1-16). Certainly, our faithfully presenting the Truth as against the errors of the antitypical Levites and Israelites, our using these in ways that run athwart their selfishness and worldliness, and our using these to defend the Divine plan, which they reject, cannot
but make these teachings ununderstood and unnatural mysteries to them. Certainly, our faithfully sacrificing in the interests of God, Christ, the Truth and the brethren will make the selfish and worldly minds of the antitypical Levites and Israelites, who fail to get from us, just because of such sacrificing on our part, the selfish profit that they desire, not understand the antitypical furniture. To God and the priesthood, our course herein appears what it actually is—faithful—typed by the blue cloth; but to the selfish and worldly our course herein is repulsive—typed by seal skins. Thus, because of the natural-mindedness of the antitypical Levites and Israelites, the faithfulness of the priests toward the antitypical vessels and furniture blinds the former to the heavenly things—the antitypical furniture and vessels.
(59) A few illustrations will clarify the Biblical teaching on this subject, which is elaborated by St. Paul in 1 Cor. 2:1-16: e.g., the faithful consecrated wife, while doing fully her duty to her unconsecrated husband, often follows a course that, impinging against his selfishness and worldliness, makes him think of the Truth and Truth people, and the God and Christ who stand for such a course, as repulsive and beyond understanding. Again, e.g., the faithfulness of our Pastor in correcting imperfect views formerly presented, as he did on the covenants, the difference between Advocate and Mediator, etc., etc., disgusted antitypical Levites and Israelites with him, his supporters and the kind of a God and Christ that these truths presented, which blinded them to the pertinent truths and persons. And again, e.g., who of us through our faithfulness in presenting the Truth and faithfully serving God, Christ and the brethren, has not been the occasion of hiding these from the understanding of the unfit? Evidently, the latter are "they that stumble at the Word, being disobedient."
(60) It will be noticed that in each case the vessels
were covered with blue cloth and with seal skins, and in certain cases cloths of other colors were used. In every case the blue typed the faithful course of the antitypical priesthood and how their course appeared as faithful in deed and in truth to God and to the Priests; while the same faithful course, impressing the antitypical Levites and Israelites as repulsive, is represented by the seal skins which, except in the case of the ark, were the outside covering and the only thing visible to the typical Levites and Israelites.
(61) Having thus given some general explanations necessary for the understanding of Num. 4:5-20 as a whole, we now desire to enter into the particulars of this Scripture. In vs. 5 and 15 mention is made of the camp setting forward; and this raises in our minds the question: What is typed by the Israelites' being encamped and by their marching from one station to another? The antitypical marching becomes clear when we remember that Israel's journey from Egypt to Canaan types the Lord's people leaving the present evil world and progressing to the Kingdom. Israel's marches, therefore, represent progress in grace, knowledge and service, leading onward to the Kingdom. Every trialsome experience of Israel occurred while they were in camp. Hence trials as to the immediately preceding growth in grace, knowledge and service are typed by the pertinent encampments. The breaking of camp would represent the transition from the completed trial to fresh opportunities of growth in grace, knowledge and service, while erecting a new camp would represent the experiences leading up to the trials in line with the immediately preceding growth. As in the type the breaking of camp began (v. 15) with the priests beginning to cover the sacred vessels and furniture, so in the antitype the Priests always start to minister faithfully as to the things along the lines of which progress in grace, knowledge and service is to be made, and it is only after the Priests have made this
beginning on each phase of the antitypical covering, that next in order the antitypical Levites have started to work along those pertinent lines, and later the antitypical Israelites have begun such pertinent activity.
(62) Aaron's and his sons' covering the ark with the second veil types how the faithful sacrifice of the priesthood in its various members unto death has hidden the antitypical Ark—God and the Christ—from the antitypical Levites and Israelites. Such sacrificial deaths being abhorrent to the antitypical Levites and Israelites (Heb. 13:12, 13) is typed by the covering of seal skins. But that these, while not understanding God and the Christ beyond the veil, will later come to recognize them as fully faithful, is typed by the wholly or perfectly blue cloth being put as the final covering over the ark. The 2 staves (v. 6) that were placed in the ark rings to enable the Levites to bear the ark, seem to type the Old and the New Testaments; for it is by means of these that the antitypical Levites have ministered to the antitypical Priests and Israelites so far as God and the Christ beyond the veil are concerned, i.e., borne the antitypical Ark. The placing of these staves into the rings types the priesthood commending the Old and New Testaments to the antitypical Levites as the means by which they could serve God and the glorified Christ, the antitypical Ark.
(63) The covering of the table, its bread and vessels, is described in vs. 7 and 8. The table types the Church as strengtheners of the brethren with the bread of life. The covering of the table with a blue cloth represents that the faithful ministry extended to the Priests for their growth in grace and service, by the more developed Priests strengthening them with the bread of life, appears to God and the priesthood as it is in deed and truth—faithful, blue. The putting of the pertinent vessels and the shewbread on the blue cloth represents the thought that the ministering Priests faithfully use with the bread of life, the supporting.
and pertinent truths as the means of facilitating their strengthening their brethren. The dishes or chargers represent the corrections; the spoons (which were used especially for the sweet incense, Num. 7:14, etc.) represent instructions in righteousness; the bowls represent refutations; and "the cups to pour withall" (mistranslated "the covers to cover withall") represent the doctrines. Cups were used for the drink offerings, which like the meat offerings type our praise and worship, i.e., service, of Jehovah. We worship Him by serving His cause, and praise Him by declaring His plan which manifests His glorious character to others. Hence the cups type the doctrines of the plan, which, of course, show forth God's praises (1 Pet. 2:9). The scarlet cloth (v. 8) that was cast over these, represents the merit (sacrifice) of our Lord, which must cover the Church (the table) as it feeds the brethren with the strengthening Word, to make their service acceptable; and its use in connection with the table and its appurtenances also suggests that the strengthening brethren teach and emphasize to the priesthood that for their being strengthened in growth unto every good word and work they must have the Lord's merit as theirs to make them acceptable while growing as New Creatures. Their placing the final covering of the seal skins over the table and its vessels and bread represents that the faithfulness of the antitypical Priests in such service makes these things repulsive to the nonpriests. The staves and their placing in the rings has a meaning similar to the same things and act in connection with the ark, except that the table represents the Church as strengtheners of the brethren and not God and Christ in heaven—the antitypical Ark.
(64) Vs. 9 and 10 treat of the covering of the lampstand and its vessels. The lampstand represents the Church as the enlighteners of the brethren, and its vessels represent the teachings that the enlightening brethren use for the enlightenment of their fellow Priests.
These vessels were of four kinds: the lamps, the tongs or snuffers, the snuff dishes and the oil vessels. The lamps type the doctrines, which are the especial things that give enlightenment; the tongs or snuffers, used to trim the wicks, etc., represent the refutations of error (Is. 6:5-7); the snuff dishes or trays, used as depositories of the wick trimmings, etc., represent the corrections of bad qualities and misconduct; and the oil vessels, used as oil containers, represent the instructions in righteousness, in which the spirit of understanding (oil) is held. The priests' covering the lampstand with blue represents the fact that the faithful service of their antitypes toward the antitypical lampstand appears to God and the Priests as being faithfully done; and their covering its vessels types the fact that their antitypes faithfully use the antitypical vessels—teachings—in enlightening the brethren, and are recognized by God and the priesthood as so doing, while the repulsiveness to the non-priests of the Church and its teachings in their enlightening capacity, when faithfully exercised, is typed by the covering of the lampstand and its vessels with seal skins. The placing of these so covered upon a bar was likewise typical. Since the priesthood receives its main enlightenment from the New Testament, we understand the bar used to carry the covered lampstand and its vessels to type the New Testament. The priests' putting the bar in position for the use of the Levites in carrying the lampstand and its vessels, types the faithful Priests commending the New Testament to the Levites for their use in ministering to the antitypical Priests and Israelites as respects the antitypical lampstand and its vessels.
(65) Vs. 11 and 12 treat of the covering of the golden altar and its vessels. While these verses do not expressly mention vessels as connected with the golden altar, v. 12 implies that such vessels were connected with the golden altar, by the expression, "all the instruments
of the ministry wherewith they minister in the sanctuary," i.e., the Holy as distinct from the Court and the Most Holy. Apart from the vessels that belonged to the table and the lampstand, and that were covered with the pertinent furniture, all of the vessels of the Holy belonged to the golden altar. Another consideration is in line with this thought: Lev. 16:16 by the expression "tabernacle of the congregation" means the Holy, while Lev. 16 everywhere that it uses the expression, Holy, means the Most Holy. The atonement for the tabernacle of the congregation accordingly means atonement for the Holy as distinct from the Court and the Most Holy; but this atonement according to Ex. 30:10 was for the golden altar. Hence the golden altar, as the most important thing in the Holy, sometimes stands for the Holy, and reversely the term, Holy, sometimes stands for the golden altar. Such we understand to be the case in v. 12 in the use of the term, sanctuary, which word is the translation of the same Hebrew word as is usually translated, the Holy. Accordingly, we understand the vessels referred to in v. 12 to mean the vessels of the golden altar. It will also be noted that these verses do not particularize different kinds of vessels as is done in connection with the table, the lampstand and the brazen altar; nevertheless, because the two altars view the same things from different standpoints, the golden altar giving the Divine viewpoint, and the brazen altar giving the human viewpoint, we are warranted in assuming that, apart from the censers, there were four kinds of vessels connected with the golden altar, as there were four kinds of vessels, apart from the censers, connected with the brazen altar (Ex. 38:3).
(66) The covering of the golden altar with the blue cloth represents the faithful service that the priesthood give the antitypical Golden Altar—the Church in sacrificial respects, and also types that Jehovah and the priesthood regard such service as faithful, while the
covering of it with the seal skins represents that the priesthood's service toward the antitypical Golden Altar is abhorrent—repulsive—to the non-priests. The same thoughts apply to the covering of the vessels belonging to the Golden Altar: the priesthood's faithful presentations of the doctrines, refutations, corrections and instructions pertaining to the antitypical Golden Altar are regarded by God and the priesthood as faithful and by the non-priests as abhorrent, who thus are prevented from understanding them. The staves used to carry the golden altar, as in the case of the staves of the ark, the table and the brazen altar, represent the Old and the New Testaments. Their placing these in the rings represents the antitypical priesthood commending them to the antitypical Levites for their use in serving the sacrificing Church in sacrificial respects, while the bar that was used to carry the vessels of the golden altar seems to represent the Old Testament, which even more than the New Testament is used by the priesthood in connection with the teachings pertaining to the Church in sacrificial respects. This is apparent from the many allusions to the Old Testament that are found as to sacrificial matters in the writings of the Apostles and Secondarily Prophets, e.g., the book of Hebrews and our Pastor's writings. Placing the vessels on the bar represents the antitypical Priests commending the Old Testament to the antitypical Levites for their use in ministering to the Biblical teachings pertinent to the Church in sacrificial respects.
(67) Vs. 13 and 14 treat of the covering of the brazen altar. This altar represents the sacrificed humanity of the Christ class. The ashes of the altar represent the past sacrificial services of the Christ class as memories, histories. The taking of, these out of the altar represents the thought that these deeds are of the past and, apart from the lessons to be derived from them, are to be set aside, and new deeds of sacrificial service are to take their place, e.g., there was a sacrificial service that pertained to the sowing. Such service,
being no longer due to be done, exists now only as a memory of past actual services, and though good lessons are to be derived from its activities, they were set aside as services no longer due when the reaping time came, and reaping service was done in their stead; later among those that have been reaped other forms of service were to be performed, e.g., garnering, etc. The setting aside of a finished service, which now exists only as a memory of a former actual service, is what is typed by the removal of the ashes—they are now no longer acts to be performed, but are only past services as memories or histories.
(68) It will be noticed that a purple cloth was spread over the brazen altar. One may ask why not a blue cloth? We answer that purple is a combination of blue and scarlet, and was designedly used by the Lord to type: in its blueness, the faithfulness of the priesthood, and in its scarlet, the atoning work of the priesthood; while the purple, arising from the mixture of blue and scarlet, typed the thought that this sacrificing priesthood was the prospective royal priesthood. The faithful, sacrificial and royal character of the priesthood's service is, therefore, typed by the purple cloth. God and the priesthood regard their service in connection with the altar and its vessels from this standpoint, while the world regards this sacrificed humanity of the Christ—the antitypical Brazen Altar—and their sacrificial acts for the antitypical Brazen Altar as repulsive, and while their sacrificial service in connection with its pertinent teachings is regarded as repulsive by the non-priests, which facts are typed by the seal skin covering the altar and its vessels.
(69) There were five kinds of vessels used at the brazen altar (v. 14, compared with Ex. 38:3). We have already shown that the censers type the Bible passages that the priesthood use in sacrificial service. The flesh hooks, used to manipulate the flesh to and on the altar, represent the corrections that the Word gives to
the faults and weaknesses of the flesh. The shovels, used to manipulate the fire and the ashes, represent the instructions in righteousness used in connection with the sacrifice of the Christ's humanity. The pots represent the doctrines that assist in the sacrifice of the Christ's humanity. The basins, translated fire pans in Ex. 38:3, represent the refutations of error that help the Christ class in sacrificing its humanity. The staves, as in all the other cases, represent the two parts of the Bible, the Old and the New Testaments, that enable the Levites to give certain helps to the antitypical priesthood and Israelites in connection with the sacrifice of the humanity of the Christ class. The placing of the staves into the altar's rings, types the antitypical Priests' commendation of the Old and the New Testaments to the antitypical Levites for their use in ministering as to the sacrificed humanity of the Christ. While the Levites could touch the staves and bars, they were not permitted to touch the furniture and the vessels (v. 15), which, if done, would result in their death. This seems to type the fact that the antitypical Levites should not attempt to do with the antitypes what the antitypical Priests did with them—sacrifice with them; for any attempt to do so would lead to a contamination, a corrupting, a misusing of the antitypes; and any antitypical Levite who would do so, would lose his Leviteship—would antitypically die as a Levite.
(70) It is quite fitting that in connection with the account of the furniture and the vessels, mention should be made of the one in charge of these as well as of the tabernacle and its appurtenances. Eleazar, the elder of Aaron's two surviving sons, was given this charge (v. 16). For the Gospel Age up to its Harvest, Eleazar types the twelve Apostles; and for the Harvest of the Gospel Age, he types that Servant, as we have already shown (P '22, 10, par. 3). How do we know this? From Scriptures, facts and the correspondence of the types and antitypes. Jesus directly shows that to bind
and loose was given to the Apostles (Matt. 18:18, 19), i.e., to give the obligatory teachings, constitution and practices to the Church and to free them from all other teachings, constitutions and practices. These things the Apostles did, first orally and later in writing, for the Churches of their day. This, through their writing, they have also ever since done, as their general charge of the Church as to teachings, organization and practices. Thus Scriptures and facts prove this with reference to the Apostles. Our Lord's statement with reference to that Servant (Matt. 24:45-47; Luke 12:42-44) proves that our Pastor as antitypical Eleazar had this work of teaching the truths, organization and practices of the Gospel-Harvest Church, as well as the management of its general work.
(71) When we look at the correspondence of the type and antitype, the same thing is manifest. Eleazar's charge of the oil, for the light, types first the Apostles' and then that Servant's having the charge of the right understanding of the Truth. Therefore all other servants of the Truth were by the Lord's arrangement obligated to submit their understanding of religious teachings to the decision of the former; and any attempt to present such teachings not submitted to the former was an infringement on their office powers. The sweet incense represented the things sacrificed by the priests—their human perfections actual or reckoned—and these were in the charge of the antitypical Eleazar in the sense that their uses in manner, method and spirit, in the Lord's service, was to be according to the directions of the antitypical Eleazar as indicated from the Word. The daily meat offering types the praise and worship of Jehovah through the antitypical Priests' setting forth the Word that reflects credit upon God—praises Him, and through their ministering to the outworking of His Plan. Thus the general direction of the work of presenting the Truth as a means of praising and serving Jehovah, was undoubtedly under the
Apostolic care in their days and during the Gospel-Age—under their direction as they were represented in their writings, while in the Gospel-Age Harvest this general oversight was exercised by our Pastor, as the facts prove.
(72) The anointing oil represents the Holy Spirit in its growth in the graces, etc., fitting the priesthood for the present and future ministry (Ps. 45:6; 133:1-3). This antitypical anointing oil was in the charge of the antitypical Eleazar in the sense that they were to explain it clearly, and direct the general work of building up the brethren in the various features of the anointing. This, also, they certainly did. Eleazar's oversight of the tabernacle and its contents and its vessels and their contents, types the fact that the antitypical Eleazar would have the general charge of the Church in all its Spirit-begotten aspects and all its teachings, privileges and possessions. Certainly, the direct Scriptures, the correspondencies of type and antitype, as well as the facts of the case, show that the twelve Apostles and that Servant were the antitypical Eleazar.
(73) Antitypically, vs. 17-20 contain an exhortation by Jehovah to Jesus as God's Executive (Moses) and to the Christ class as the priesthood (Aaron), to encourage the antitypical Kohathites to do their work, and to restrain them from busybodying in the Priests' work, both being done to safeguard the antitypical Kohathites in their proper service. By not properly and faithfully presenting the truths and serving the Church from its various aspects, and by encouraging the antitypical Kohathites to touch or look at (vs. 15, 20) the antitypical furniture or vessels, the antitypical Moses and Aaron would cut off the antitypical Kohathites in their various groups from among the antitypical Levites, and thus prevent their serving the antitypical Priests and Israelites according to the Lord's arrangements; as a faithful and proper "covering" of the antitypical furniture and vessels and encouragement ("appoint")
of the antitypical Kohathites, on the part of antitypical Moses and Aaron, to do their various works would inure to the antitypical Kohathites remaining such ("live and not die") and performing a service helpful to the Antitypical Priests and Israelites (vs. 18, 19). But the antitypical Kohathites should not presume to go beyond their appointed service and speculate on the things pertaining to the Holy ("not go in to see," v. 20), for this would result in their misrepresenting the spiritual things, which would occasion their death as antitypical Kohathites.
(74) Indeed, the Lord has forbidden not only the non-priests, but even the priests, except His special successive priestly mouthpieces to them throughout the Gospel Age, to do what to the former He calls "to gaze" (Ex. 19:21-25). The Hebrew word translated "to gaze" in Ex. 19:21, is the same as that translated "to see" in Num. 4:20. It means antitypically, to speculate. As the type indicates an effort on the part of the people and the priests "to gaze" during the preparation for giving the Law Covenant, so the antitype shows that during the Gospel Age when preparatory acts of giving the New Covenant are performed, there has been much effort made "to gaze"—speculate—on the part of the people and on the part of those Priests whom the Lord has not used as special mouthpieces—Aaron (lights, Ex. 19:24). Those Priests who have persisted in this "gazing" have lost their priesthood; and some of them are now being manifested as Great Company Levites by presenting their speculations—false revolutionary teachings—before the Church. Yea, some of them have gone so far in this as to lose life altogether—those who speculated until they denied the Ransom, or the Church's share in the Sin-offering, or both. During our Pastor's life there was considerable of such "gazing," against which he frequently gave warnings; but more especially since his death there has been an ever-increasing measure of such gazing. This is manifesting Great Company member after
Great Company member as such, and we fear is manifesting some of the Second Death class. As our Pastor in the Lord's name repeatedly warned against it, so in the Lord's name we exhort the brethren everywhere, "Break not through [the bounds Divinely set to your privileges in an attempt to come] unto the Lord to gaze"; for many have thereby lost the priesthood and not a few additionally have thereby lost life itself; which danger is indicated in the word: "Lest He break forth upon them," and "many of them perish" (Ex. 19:24, 21).
(75) Our study of Num. 4:5-20, given above, and our other Epiphany Truth presentations are not such speculations; but are, as the Scriptures cited in connection with them show, the Divinely given light on the subjects now due in the Epiphany for the Epiphany-enlightened saints to enjoy and use. May the Lord bless their reading and study to all of us.
(1) What two chapters of Numbers are analyzed in P '20, 108-110? What two classes are typed in these chapters? How? What other antitypes are implied in these chapters? What does numbering symbolize? Prove it. What does this view of it imply as to the typical teaching of Num. 1-10? What will help to a better understanding of our present study?
(2) What chapter does our present study investigate? From what standpoints? How do the antitypes of this chapter differ in the Gospel-Age Parousia and Epiphany? Who are the Gentiles of Rev. 11:2?
(3) What are the usual antitypes of Moses and Aaron in Numbers? Cite some examples of this. What are two of the antitypes of Moses and Aaron? What do Aaron's sons type when not mentioned by name? When mentioned by name what do they and Aaron type? Prove this. What is typed by the childlessness of Nadab and Abihu? Briefly summarize the antitypes of Num. 3:1-4.
(4) What do Moses, Aaron and his sons type in Num. 3:5-10? What three things does verse 6 type? What do the two charges (v. 7) of the Levites type? What were
the two kinds of tabernacle service and what did they type? What charge (v. 8) was given the Levites? What does this type? What is typed (v. 9) by the Levites' being wholly given to the priests? What does this imply in the antitype? What is typed (v. 10) by Moses' appointing Aaron and his sons to their service? What does the death penalty to the busy-bodying stranger represent? Give illustrations of this.
(5) What three sets of antitypes in their relation to God are pictured in vs. 11-13? What thing that was done in the type (v. 13) is not done in the antitype? Why not? Give an example on this point.
(6) Summarize type and antitype, vs. 14-21. What are meant by the terms "house of their fathers" and "by their families"? What is typed by the Levites' being held back from service until 30 years old, and by their being numbered from 30 days old and upward? How was this done antitypically? Of how many general divisions did the Levites, type and antitype, consist? What is typed by the Kohathites' having no chariots and carrying their burdens on their shoulders? What did the Kohathite service type for the Gospel Age? What is typed by the Merarites' having chariots and by their services? What is typed by the Gershonites' having chariots and their services? What has our Lord had to do with these antitypes?
(7) How were the Gershonites subdivided, type and antitype? How were the Libnites subdivided, type and antitype? How were the Shimites subdivided, type and antitype? How have the officiating antitypical Levites and their helpers been typed? How have those been typed who ceased serving?
(8) What were the four subdivisions of the Kohathites? What do their names mean? Whose descendants alone were Amramite Levites? Why? Which was the chief Levite group? Why? Which was the chief subdivision of these? Why? Which antitypical subdivision of the Kohathites has done a service nearest like that of, and most helpful to, the Priests? Why did their service partake of such characteristics?
(9) How many subdivisions were there among the Amramites? What were they called? What and whom did the Gershonite Amramites type?
(10) What and whom did the Eliezerite Amramites type in these four groups?
(11) Why have the antitypical Amramites been the most helpful to the Priests? Whose experience illustrates this? Whom additionally have they helped? Along what lines especially?
(12) What does Izehar mean? What three things are symbolized by oil? Prove this. What is the general work of the antitypical Izeharites? What are the groups, type and antitype, of the Izeharites? Name some of the representatives of the three antitypical groups. Describe the three classes of Kohathite Izeharites, type and antitype, and name some of the latter, describing briefly their work.
(13) What does Hebron mean? How many families were there among the typical Hebronites? What kind of tentatively justified men, and how many classes of these did they type? Describe, type and antitype, each of these classes, mentioning individuals of each antitypical class. What class of writers have wrought in all departments of antitypical Hebronite activities? Mention some of them by name.
(14) Who were the fourth group of Kohathites? Of how many subdivisions did they consist? What does Uzziel mean? Who have the antitypical Uzzielites been? What two considerations seem to prove this? Explain the three subdivisions, type and antitype, of the Uzzielites, and mention some individuals of each of the antitypical subdivisions.
(15) State briefly the kind of work that each of the four groups of antitypical Kohathites had to do. In general, what kind of men were they? Why are these men to be considered the antitypical Kohathites?
(16) What was the third group of Levites? What were its two subdivisions? What is meant by the names of this group and its subdivisions? What is the relation of the antitypes of this group to the antitypes of the other two groups of Levites? What are the antitypes of the Mahlites? Explain their work in detail. What are their two kinds, type and antitype?
(17) What are the antitypes of the Mushites? How did they do their work before and since printing was invented?
How many kinds of Mushites, type and antitype, are there? What did each antitypical kind do?
(18) Who were the chiefs of the three Levite groups? What did their names mean? Whom did they type?
(19) How many groups, divisions, etc., of the Levites have so far been studied? According to 1 Chron. 23 and 24, how many others were there? What do all these total and type? What kind of Levitical sections did the twenty Levite leaders of 1 Chro. 23 and 24 type? What are the three subdivisions of antitypical Shimites? What do the four Shimite Levites of 1 Chro. 23:10, 11 type? What may we gather from 1 Chro. 23:30 as to the third and fourth of these?
(20) What do the two Gershonite descendants of Amram (1 Chro. 23:16; 24:20) type? What do the Eliezerite descendants of Amram (1 Chro. 23:17) type? What do the two Korahite descendants of Izehar by Abiasaph (1 Chro. 23:18; 24:22) type? What do the four Elzaphanite descendants of Uzziel type?
(21) What do the five Mushite descendants of Merari (1 Chro. 24:26, 27) type? What does the Mahlite descendant of Merari through Kish (1 Chro. 24:29) type? How many Levite groups are given in the Bible?
(22) Briefly summarize the mutual activities of the three groups of antitypical Levites to one another, to the Priests and to the nominal people of God. From whom else have the Priests and the nominal people of God gotten help? What Priestly needs did the three antitypical Levite groups satisfy? What do these need-satisfying activities of such persons prove? What other considerations add force to the proof?
(23) What do and what do not the above Levite types mark? Give an example that illustrates this. How did many Gospel-Age Levites as such begin their careers? Into what did some of these develop? How will this principle as to fixed individuals apply to the Epiphany Levites? The Millennial Levites?
(24) Of whom and what kind of descriptions are given in Num. 3:21-26 and in Num. 4:21-28? How many Levites were in each group? What is typed by the difference in the numbers of the three groups? What is typed by the dwelling in the rear of the tabernacle? What other considerations
strengthen this thought? What does Eliasaph, the son of Lael, type?
(25) What is set forth in Num. 3:25, 26? How do these verses differ from Num. 4:25, 26? What do the articles that the Gershonites bore prove of the Gospel-Age Gershonites? In what two senses is the word tabernacle used in this connection? Who bore it in the restricted sense of that word? What did it type? What does this teach as to certain Gospel-Age Gershonite activities? How did they perform such services both to Spirit-begotten and Spirit-born persons?
(26) What was the second part of the Gershonite service? What did it type? Why? What is typed by its being white? Why? What is typed by one of its parts being doubled as a part of the front of the tabernacle? What things are typed by the Gershonites' bearing it? What was the third part of the tabernacle in the Gershonites' charge? What did it type? Why? What did its being red type? Why did it consist of ram skins? Explain the antitype of the Gershonites' bearing that ram-skin covering of the tabernacle. '
(27) What was the fourth part of the tabernacle in the Gershonites' charge? What did it type? What is typed by the Gershonites' having it in charge? What was the fifth and last part of the tabernacle proper in the Gershonites' charge? What did it type? What is typed by the Gershonites' having it in charge?
(28) Of what do Num. 3:26 and 4:26 treat? What does the latter give that the former omits? What do the court hangings type? What is typed by their being in the Gershonites' charge? What was the second court article in the Gershonites' charge? What did it type? What is typed by its being in the Gershonites' charge? What is the third thing of the court in the Gershonites' charge. Distinguish between these cords and those in the Merarites' charge. What do the cords in the formers' charge type? What is probably meant by their instruments? What did they probably type?
(29) What is manifest from a study of the parts of the tabernacle borne by the Gershonites? What do the pertinent symbolisms combined with the facts of the Gospel Age prove as to our view of the Gospel-Age Gershonites?
(30) Whom does Num. 3:27-31 discuss? What does Num. 4: I-20 give of them? What is represented by the Kohathites' dwelling on the south side of the tabernacle? What other reason can be given for this fact?
(31) Where is mention made of the articles carried by the Kohathites? What article of tabernacle furniture is not mentioned in Num. 3 and 4? What three reasons prove that the laver was in the Kohathites' charge? What was the first piece of furniture in the Kohathites' charge? What do the ark's chest, mercy-seat, cherubim and glory-light type? What is typed by the Kohathites' bearing the ark? How did the antitypical Gershonite Amramites and the Eliezerite Amramites bear the antitypical Ark?
(32) What were the antitypical Zichrite, Nephegite and Korahite Izeharites? How did the antitypical Zichrite Izeharites, the antitypical Nephegite Izeharites and the antitypical Korahite Izeharites bear the antitypical Ark?
(33) What were the antitypical Jekameamite, Jahazielite, Amariahite and Jeriahite Hebronites? How did each of these subdivisions bear the antitypical Ark? Describe a Jekameamite Hebronite's work.
(34) What were the antitypical Mishaelite, Elizaphanite and Zithrite Uzzielites? How did each one of these subdivisions bear the antitypical Ark?
(35) How did the typical Kohathites bear all the articles of the tabernacle's furniture with their pertinent vessels? What did this type? What do the antitypical facts prove as to this point?
(36) What was the second article of the tabernacle furniture borne by the Kohathites? What did the table type? How does the Christ class fulfill the antitype of the table? What is typed by the Kohathites' bearing the table? How did the antitypical Gershonite Amramites and the antitypical Eliezerite Amramites bear the antitypical Table?
(37) How have the antitypical Zichrite Izeharites, the antitypical Nephegite Izeharites and the antitypical Korahite Izeharites borne the antitypical Table? How have the Gospel-Age Hebronites borne the antitypical Table? How have the antitypical Mishaelite Uzzielites, the antitypical Elzaphanite Uzzielites and the antitypical Zithrite Uzzielites borne the antitypical Table?
(38) What was the third article of tabernacle furniture in the Kohathites' charge? What did it type? What is the difference in the activities of the antitypical Lampstand and the antitypical Table? What did the Kohathites' bearing the lampstand type? How have the antitypical Gershonite Amramites and the antitypical Eliezerite Amramites borne the antitypical Lampstand? How have the antitypical Zichrite Izeharites, the antitypical Nephegite Izeharites and the antitypical Korahite Izeharites borne the antitypical Lampstand? How have Gospel-Age Hebronites borne the antitypical Lampstand? Give some illustrations of their helpfulness. How have the Mishaelite Uzzielites, the Elzaphanite Uzzielites and the Zithrite Uzzielites borne the antitypical Lampstand?
(39) What was the fourth article of tabernacle furniture borne by the Kohathites? What does it type? What is typed by the Kohathites' bearing the golden altar? How did the two antitypical Amramite groups bear the antitypical Golden Altar? How did the three antitypical Izeharite groups bear the antitypical Golden Altar? How did the four antitypical Hebronite groups bear the antitypical Golden Altar? How did the three antitypical Uzzielite groups bear the antitypical Golden Altar?
(40) What was the fifth article of tabernacle furniture in the Kohathites' charge? What does it type? How has each subdivision of the four Kohathite divisions borne the antitypical Brazen Altar?
(41) What was the sixth and last article of tabernacle furniture in the Kohathites' charge? What were its parts? What did it, its water and its two parts represent? Show the reasonableness in each case. Briefly how did the subdivisions of the antitypical Kohathite divisions bear the antitypical Lever?
(42) What belonged to each one of these six pieces of furniture? Who bore these? What other Tabernacle feature was in the Kohathites' charge? Why are these not discussed in the article under study?
(43) What subject is treated parenthetically between the description of the Kohathites' and Merarites' work in Num. 3? What was Eleazar's relation to the Levites and their leaders? What does this type for the Gospel-Age Levites? What does this type for the Epiphany Levites?
Against whom actually is revolutionism against "that Servant's" teachings and arrangements? Why? Who is actually the source of the Epiphany oppositions to Levitical revolutionism?
(44) What phases of the Levites in Num. 3 have we thus far studied? What phase of the Levites in Num. 3 yet remains to be studied? What did the Mahlite and the Mushite Merarites type for the Gospel Age? What is typed by their being the least numerous of the three Levite groups? What did Zuriel, the son of Abihail, type? What is typed by the Merarites' dwelling to the North of the Tabernacle?
(45) Where do we find a record of the tabernacle parts in the Merarites' charge? What does the antitypical significance of these parts prove as to the work of the antitypical Merarites? What parts of the tabernacle did the Merarites have in their charge? How many boards, sets of bars and pillars were there in the tabernacle? What do they total? Why is it reasonable to understand them to type the 66 books of the Bible? How can we harmonize the thoughts that the nine pillars type New Creatures and nine Biblical books? What symbolism shows that the boards in the Holy do not type New Creatures in justified human bodies? Why not? What do the boards of both the Holy and the Most Holy not type? Why do the bars not type new creatures in the flesh or in the spirit? What do these considerations prove as to the pillars in contrast with the boards and bars? What consideration proves that they have a typology similar to that of the boards? Why do we conclude that the boards, pillars and bars type the 66 Biblical books? What does this prove as to the Apochryphal books?
(46) Viewed from the standpoint of pieces and from the standpoint of sets of rows, how many bars were there? Which of these numbers types the corresponding number of Biblical books? What kind of Biblical books do they type? What is typed by the golden rings that held the bars in place? What are the Biblical books typed by the bars? Compare and contrast these nine books with the other Biblical books, particularly with the eight mentioned by name in our study. Why are these nine books represented by bars and not by boards or pillars?
(47) Of what do six of these nine books consist? How many bars as pieces and as rows were there for each of the three tabernacle walls? Of what did the top, bottom and middle rows consist? What did the three middle bars type? What did the three top and the three bottom bars type? Why did not the top and the bottom bars consist of but one piece each, as did the middle bars? Explain the details of this symbolism.
(48) What two sets of things do the nine pillars type? How many books do the nine pillars type? Why are there just nine pillars? What do the five pillars in the Holy type? Who were their writers? What do the four pillars in the Most Holy type? What are these books and who were their writers? What is the first reason for placing the types of the five in the Holy and the types of the four in the Most Holy? What is the second and deeper reason for their respective places? What are the facts and the parallels proving that Jesus was the writer of Revelation? Who taught this view?
(49) What three things were attached to the pillars? Of what metal were they? What were the fillets? What was their office? What was the office of the golden hooks? What did those type that were on the pillars in the Holy and in the Most Holy? What was the office of the pillar chapiters? What does a golden crown symbolize? What do the golden crowns on the 24 elders symbolize? What do the golden chapiters on the pillars type? What is typed by the golden fillets? What three things corroborate this?
(50) What were the dimensions of the Most Holy? What was the width of its boards? How many boards were in its west wall? How much of the end boards of the west wall were visible from within the Most Holy? How many whole boards were in the north and in the south sides of the Most Holy? How much of the southeast and of the northeast corner boards were visible and invisible from within the Most Holy? Of how many books does the New Testament consist? By what 27 parts of the tabernacle are these 27 books typed? By what parts of the tabernacle are the five books of Moses typed? Why are the thirds of four of these placed in the corners of the Most Holy? How many Old Testament books have not yet been typically pointed out by pertinent tabernacle parts? By
what tabernacle parts are these remaining Old Testament books typed? What is a proper characterization of the symbolic features of the tabernacle boards, bars and pillars? Why, briefly, do they type the 66 Biblical books?
(51) What parts of the tabernacle framework have not yet been studied? Of what metals did the sockets consist? Which sockets only were of copper? What is typed by boards and pillars resting on the silver sockets? What is typed by the pillars resting on the copper sockets? What was the office of the two golden tenons? What two things did they type? What did their fitting in the sockets type? What is typed by their being equally distant apart?
(52) What does the above discussion of the tabernacle's framework show? Why is it necessary to understand the typical significance of each part of the tabernacle, its furniture, etc., in its relation to the three Levitical groups? What does the Merarites' part in the burden of the tabernacle's framework prove was not the work of the Gospel-Age Merarites? What does this leave them for their work? How is this work typed? How did they fulfill this part of their work throughout the Gospel Age?
(53) What other two kinds of work did the Gospel-Age Merarites do? In connection with what parts of the tabernacle was this typed? What did the court pillars type? Why were there 60 of them? In what books are the 60 groups of Levites corresponding to these 60 pillars named? What three kinds of things were on these 60 pillars? Of what metal were they? What was the office of the hooks? What do they type? What does their holding up the court curtains type? What two things did the silver chapiters of the court pillars type? For what were the court pillar fillets used? What did they type? What did their steadying the pillars type? Of what did the court sockets consist? What did they type? What was the office of the court cords? In what two positions were they? What did they type? What did they type in respect to these two positions? Give some illustrations of this. What two thoughts are typed by the copper pins? What is typed by the pillars, so constructed and supported, holding up the linen curtains?
(54) What is typed by the Merarites' having charge of the pillars, sockets, cords and pins? Who is typed by those
dwelling on the east side of the tabernacle? What does its east side type? What was the typical and antitypical penalty of any stranger drawing near to these? What was the exchange of the Levites for the firstborn not designed to type? What is typed by the redemption of the 273 surplus firstborns? What was the redemption price for each one?
(55) Where has the service of the Gospel-Age Kohathites been described? What was their service, type and antitype, and how did they perform it? What preceded their performing their service, type and antitype? What was the character of the priests' covering the furniture and vessels of the literal tabernacle? What is purposed in this article?
(56) What privilege has the Lord given as respects the antitypes of the vessels, the furniture and their covering? What does such a privilege imply? What do the vessels of the tabernacle type? What passage proves this? Show this. Prove the meanings of the antitypical censers, chargers and bowls. When did the Lord first give the full view of the antitypical vessels? What did the lack of such an understanding prevent previously?
(57) What Scripture gave the clue to the antitypes of all the vessels of the sanctuary, apart from the censers? How many sets of vessels, apart from censers, were connected with the furniture in the Holy and with the brazen altar? What four uses have the Scriptures, according to 2 Tim. 3:16, 17? How are these related to the four sets of vessels apart from the censers? Why is this so? What other evidence is in line with this thought?
(58) What is typed by the priests' covering the vessels and the furniture? Why were these things covered, type and antitype? What did the covering of the vessels, type and antitype, do to them? How is this done by the Priests in the antitype (1) with the furniture? and (2) with the vessels? How does such priestly activity affect the non-priests? What verse shows this antitype? Briefly show how it proves this. What qualities in the non-priests make such a result inevitable? What is typed by the blue covering? By the seal skin covering?
(59) Briefly show how this is in line with 1 Cor. 2:1-16.
Give some illustrations that show these lines of thought to be true. Who take part in such works?
(60) With what two kinds of material were all the vessels and furniture covered? What additional things were used in certain cases? What did the blue cloths and the seal skins always type?
(61) What have the explanations hitherto given made clear? What else is to be brought out in this study? What is represented by the Israelites' marching, encamping, breaking camp and erecting camp? Who began breaking camp, type and antitype? How was this done? In what order did breaking camp proceed? What did this type?
(62) What is typed by Aaron's and his sons' covering the ark with the second veil? What effect did this have on the antitypical Levites and Israelites? Why? How is this represented? What is represented by the final covering of blue? What do the staves of the ark type? Why? What is typed by their being placed by the priests in the ark's rings?
(63) What does the table represent? What is represented by covering it with blue? What is represented by putting the shewbread and the table's vessels on the blue cloth? What does each of the four sets of table vessels type? Why? What is typed by putting the scarlet cloth over the table and the vessels? What is typed by covering all of these things with seal skins? What is typed by the table's two staves, and by their insertion into its rings?
(64) What do the lampstand and its vessels type? What is the difference between the antitypical lampstand and table? What does each of the four kinds of lampstand vessels type? Why? What is typed by covering the lampstand and its vessels with blue cloth and with seal skins? What does the bar type? Why? What does placing them on a bar type?
(65) What do the golden altar and its vessels type? Prove by two lines of thought that the expression, "all the instruments of the ministry" in v. 12, means the vessels of the golden altar. What is lacking from the description of these vessels? Why do we hold that, apart from the censers, they were of four kinds?
(66) What is typed by covering the golden altar with blue cloth? With seal skins? What is typed by covering its vessels with blue cloth? With seal skins? What do the staves represent? What does their being placed in the rings by the priests represent? What is typed by the bar? Why? What is typed by placing the covered vessels of the golden altar on the bar?
(67) What does the brazen altar represent? What do its ashes represent? What is represented by their removal before the camp would move? Give some illustrations that clarify this answer.
(68) What kind of cloth was used to cover the brazen altar? What did each ingredient of its color, and its color itself, type? What is typed by covering the brazen altar with it? and with the seal skin?
(69) How many kinds of vessels were used in connection with the brazen altar? What does each of these type? Why? What do the staves type? What does their placing in the altar's rings type? What were the Levites not permitted to touch? What would happen if they did touch them? What is their antitype?
(70) Why is Eleazar's office work, type and antitype, introduced in this connection? Who were the antitypical Eleazar? What two lines of thought prove this?
(71) What third line of evidence proves it? What is typed by Eleazar having charge of the oil for the lamps? The sweet incense? The daily meat offering? Give the reason in each case.
(72) What is typed by Eleazar's having charge of the anointing oil? The tabernacle and its contents? The vessels and their contents? Prove the reasonableness of each answer. Sum up the three lines of evidences proving who the antitypical Eleazar was.
(73) What do vs. 17-20 contain? Whom do Moses and Aaron here type? In what two ways could the typical and the antitypical Kohathites have been cut off from their service? In what two ways could they be helped to preserve their standing as Kohathites? What two things should the Kohathites, type and antitype, not do? What
happened, if they did these two things, type and antitype? What is antitypical "gazing"?
(74) Even who were in Ex. 19:21-25 forbidden to gaze? What is the relation of the Hebrew word translated "to see" in Num. 4:20, and "to gaze" in Ex. 19:21? What is typed by the people's and the priests' gazing in Ex. 19:21-25? Who only of the Underpriests could directly approach the Lord during the Gospel Age for first seeing the new truths that were about to become clear, without the sin of speculation? What has happened to the others—those who have disregarded this admonition? What even has happened to still others—the worst gazers? At what periods has such gazing been especially manifest? What exhortation was given on this line during the Parousia? What exhortation is now in the Epiphany especially appropriate on this line?
(75) Of what character do the Epiphany presentations not partake? Why not? How should we use them?
HOLINESS on the head;
Light and perfections on the breast;
Harmonious bells below, not raising the dead,
To lead them unto life and rest,—
Thus are true Aarons drest.
Only another Head
I have, another Heart and Breast,
Another Music, making live, not dead,
Without whom I could have no rest,—
In Him I am well drest.
Christ is my only Head,
My alone only Heart and Breast,
My only Music, striking me even dead,
That to the old man I may rest,—
And be in Him new drest.
So, holy in my Head,
Perfect and light in my dear Breast,
My doctrine turned by Christ, who is not dead,
But lives in me while I do rest,—
Come, people: Aaron's drest.