15. The Ark at Kirjath-Jearim; or, God's Presence Withdrawn
Chapter 15 - The Ark at Kirjath-Jearim; or, God’s Presence Withdrawn THE men of Kirjath-jearim were not unwilling to accept the overture made by their neighbors at Bethshemesh. They "came and fetched up the ark of the Lord, and brought it into the house of Abinadab in the hill, and sanctified Eleazar his son to keep the ark of the Lord." 1 Samuel 7:1-2. Theirs was no city of Levites, and yet their service was accepted. There are two things very noticeable here. We trace a distinction between what providence orders, and what it permits---between what it directly sanctions, and what it designedly allows---between what it brings about, and what it overrules. The ark, under divine direction, is brought into the midst of Kohathites, that there may be no excuse for a breach of the divine law: the ark, under human control, is carried to a city of Judah, and there, for wise purposes, God suffers it to remain; but it is there as a stranger in a strange place, bereft of its rightful attendants and wonted ceremonies. We see also in this, the real superiority of the moral over the ritual. The men of Bethshemesh were of the tribe set apart to minister before the Lord; but their official sanctity could not compensate for their unholy presumption. The men of Kirjath-jearim were of Judah’s tribe; yet their willing mind and their earnest piety were accepted in lieu of the ceremonial obedience they could not render, and the tabernacle services they were unable to perform. Not with thoughtless levity, but with reverential care, they gave reception to the valued shrine. Having no tabernacle wherein to bestow it, they concealed it from view, and screened it from harm, beneath the shelter of a private dwelling, whose elevated site would nevertheless make the honored spot a visible center, toward which their eyes could safely turn in penitence and prayer. In absence of the priest and the altar, they might immolate no sacrifices; but they set apart one of their number to observe the purifications and abstinences enjoined on the sons of Aaron, that, if possible, he might be temporarily accepted as its sacred guardian. For the apparent want of any effort on their part to send the ark forward, and locate it in the tabernacle, we cannot account; though we have no warrant to charge them with any undue assumption. The lack of effort in their countrymen to see it restored to its ancient abode arose from the apathy and heartlessness which at that time pervaded the nation;---"it came to pass, while the ark abode in Kirjath-jearim, that the time was long,"---the time, namely, before the people began to think of it; "for it was twenty years." Then, but, as it would seem, not till then, "all the house of Israel lamented after the Lord." The fact that Samuel did not interfere to counsel its restitution is unexplained; but we may well believe that it was either because he received no prophetic impulse to that effect, or else because some heavenly mandate constrained his silence. If it is asked why Jehovah interposed not to ordain its restoration, one answer is obvious. It was because He "forsook the tabernacle of Shiloh, the tent which He placed among men; moreover He refused the tabernacle of Joseph, and chose not the tribe of Ephraim, but chose the tribe of Judah, the Mount Zion which He loved." Psalms 78:60;Psalms 78:67-68. Such was His divine purpose, and here we see the first step towards its accomplishment. The prolonged severance of the ark from the tabernacle was to prepare the way for the abrogation of the one and the worthier re-establishment of the other. The continuance of the ark at Kirjath-baal seems to have been altogether of seventy or eighty years’ duration. Comp.1 Samuel 7:2;1 Samuel 7:16;Acts 13:21;2 Samuel 5:5;2 Samuel 6:2. There are some, indeed, who conclude that at the expiration of the first twenty years the re-awakened feeling of national piety led to the bringing back of the ark, not indeed to Shiloh, but to the tabernacle which had been pitched elsewhere;---that, during Saul’s reign, they were carried about from place to place; and that this renewed wandering of the two conjoined explains the offering of sacrifices, or casting of lots, or presenting of showbread, or laying up of documents "before the Lord" in Mizpeh, Nob, and Gilgal. 1 Samuel 7:6;1 Samuel 10:17;1 Samuel 10:19;1 Samuel 10:25;1 Samuel 13:8-9;1 Samuel 13:12;1 Samuel 15:31;1 Samuel 21:6-7. There are, however, many objections to this idea. We have already hinted [Section X., (on Judges 20:1.)] that the expression "before the Lord" does not necessarily imply the presence of the ark. The offering of sacrifice, moreover, is known to have taken place during this disordered state of Israel’s affairs, elsewhere than at the brazen altar, as for example, when the family sacrifice at Bethlehem was held by David’s brethren. 1 Samuel 20:24-29. The oracular responses might, in like manner, be vouchsafed wherever the priest and his ephod were found, as at Keilah and Ziklag. 1 Samuel 23:9-12;1 Samuel 30:6-8. The offering of show-bread may have been kept up as a regular weekly service, the form being retained when the significance of the action was lost. In addition to this, we must observe that David found the ark, not only still at Kirjath-jearim, but still in "the house of Abinadab;" and if we give due weight to this consideration, there will seem a strong ground for the conclusion, that it had never been restored to its former curtained enclosure. This, at least, is certain, that from the time of the ark’s removal to the battlefield before Aphek, its history and that of the tabernacle never again coincide in the sacred page. We find reference now to the one, and now to the other; but no distinct trace of both, in one and the same connection, until the Mosaic tent was rolled up, and carried as a mere relic into that more substantial building to which it had given place. In regarding the events that befell the symbol of God’s presence among His people, we have to look on its protracted sojourn at Kirjath-baalah as a season almost entirely devoid of incident. On one occasion only, during three quarters of a century, do we find an intimation which favors the idea of its temporary removal from the house of Abinadab. Of this we will hereafter speak. In the meanwhile, let us glance at the state of things which accompanied and characterized this deprivation of religious ordinances. The nation seems to have been in a spiritual lethargy. Having first lost sight of God’s presence, and then lost the possession of that which most perceptibly symbolized it, their superstitious reverence had degenerated into a semi-infidel forgetfulness. God had hidden His face from them; but they knew it not. Year after year passed on; public ordinances were either neglected, or found to be a mere shell whose kernel was removed. An awakening came at last: the people "lamented after the Lord." They awoke to the conviction that Jehovah was not with them as in the days of old, and the conviction wrought sorrow; but the sorrow wrought no permanent effect for good. The ark was still neglected, the Holy of Holies was still vacant. Missing the token of their heavenly Ruler’s presence, they mistakenly sought to rear a throne for an earthly monarch; and "the glory of Israel" was again forgotten. The history of the ark during the reign of their earliest king is given in the mournful avowal, "We enquired not at it in the days of Saul." 1 Chronicles 13:8. Well would it have been had they sooner come to the resolve, "Let us bring it unto us again." Impotent and idle was the lamentation which vented itself in fruitless tears, instead of exciting to holy resolutions and manful efforts. Had they in Samuel’s day sought the public reinstatement of the missing pledge, the twenty would not have been followed by an extra fifty years’ privation of its solace.
Here, again, we remark that there are similar seasons in the Christian’s spiritual life,-seasons when the light of Jehovah’s countenance is turned away. We believe that usually, if not always, the origin and continuance of this melancholy state lie with the believer himself. We speak not now of a wholly different order of experience, in which physical disease has induced erroneous impressions, and the sufferer imagines God’s presence withdrawn, because its manifestation is not realized by a soul whose morbid condition bars the door to felicity of every kind. We refer now to the case of those whose capabilities of enjoyment are unimpaired, who can enter with keen relish into all their favorite pursuits, who are in the full vigor of life and health, but who derive no profit from God’s ordinances, take no delight in His word, find no pleasure in communion with Him as once they did. Rare indeed are the instances in which this can be traced to a mere act of divine sovereignty; few the Christians so eminent, that they are called to pass through such discipline for the sake of others only. Without absolutely denying the possibility of such cases, we may yet safely take it for granted, that none of our readers dare to arrogate to themselves so peculiar a position. Self-knowledge will enable most, if not all of us, to see reasons manifold and amply sufficient to account for the loss of that blessedness we knew when first we saw the Lord. It is likely enough that we are unprepared to lay our finger on one special act of iniquity, and pronounce that to be the cause of our abandonment. Our backsliding may have been very gradual. We may by slow degrees have lost the vision of God’s truth, and not, as the Israelites, lost the ark in one grand disastrous conflict. For a long while we may have been unconscious of our loss, as the Israelites were forgetful of theirs. God may have hid His face, and we may nevertheless have gone on frowardly in the way of our heart. Have we been at length aroused? Are we lamenting after the Lord? Are we exclaiming,
"Oh! that I knew where I might find Him! that I might come even to His seat! Behold, I go forward, but He is not there; and backward, but I cannot perceive Him; on the left hand, where He doth work, but I cannot behold Him; He hideth himself on the right hand, that I cannot see Him?" Is this a mere profession of sorrow, or are we truly instituting a deep, active, earnest search after God? At such a crisis, much depends on the course that is taken. Let the mind nurse a sentimental grief, and weep, and sigh, and seek to human advisers, and put away a few glaring evils, and then rest content, like Israel of old, with God’s presence unrestored,---and like Israel, we may sink into a deeper and a longer slumber than the first. An appeal is made to us to open the door, that we may let Him in who alone can bless us; but if now we slothfully refuse, we may hereafter rise to open to Him, and find He has "withdrawn himself and gone." On the other hand, let the soul be fully possessed with holy longings of desire, let it be fired with strong determination, girt up to fervent entreaty, and animated with a godly zeal,---then shall we find that, drawing near to Him, He will draw near to us, and returning to Him, He will heal our backslidings, and love us freely, and be to us again as the dew, causing us to grow as the lily, and to cast forth our roots as Lebanon. Let none delay thus to find,---by delaying thus to seek Him. His absence has enfeebled us, it is true; we are shorn of our strength; but we can come to Him in our weakness, if we are but willing to be made strong. It will not do to fold our hands. We may offer the petition, "Draw us," but we must be prepared heartily to add the requisite promise, "Draw us, and we will run after thee." We may say, "Tell us, Oh thou whom our soul loveth, where thou feedest, where thou makest thy flock to rest at noon;" but if we wish to reach the spot, we must obey the direction given us, and "go forth by the footsteps of the flock." If we prize the ark of God’s presence, we must prove our value for it by promptly arising to take measures for its recovery.