Joshua 24

Appendix. The Typical Interpretation, Especially of the Cities, Boundaries, and Tribes of Israel. For those who have carefully examined what has been before us, it can hardly be needful to insist further on the truth and necessity of the typical interpretation. To some extent, indeed, all who accept Scripture as inspired of God must, of course, accept this. The “holy places made with hands” are thus expressly declared to be the figures of the true" (Hebrews 9:24); certain events in. Israel’s history are declared to have “happened to them for types” (1 Corinthians 10:11, marg.); the law in general is said to have a “shadow of good things to come” (Hebrews 10:1); and, in a similar way speak many well-known scriptures. Moreover, of some things plainly declared to be types, we have no inspired interpretation, as in the case of the passage of the sea, just as some of the New Testament parables are left for spiritual wisdom to interpret by the help of the context, and of truth found elsewhere. In the application of Melchizedek’s history (Hebrews 7:1-28) we find how minutely significant these histories may be. Names are translated, the very order of their occurrence insisted on, meaning is given to the omissions as well as the positive statements, in complete accordance with the idea of verbal inspiration, and the prophetic significance running through the whole. And on this verisimilitude between the Old Testament history and a pervasive typical meaning to be recognized in it, the apostle grounds his appeal even to foolish Galatians, who, if they desired to be under the law, should hear the law speaking to them in this way (Galatians 4:21, seq.) The historical books, from Joshua to Kings at least, were thus by the Jews entitled “the former prophets.” The sketch of the Pentateuch already given is an absolute demonstration that the types contained in these books are not scattered at random through them, but arranged in an orderly manner, the books at large, and every section of them, illustrating this. They are the pictures of spiritual realities, needing and finding their explanation elsewhere; in general, in the New Testament: as pictures, speaking for themselves to the spiritual mind, -of course when the light is thrown upon them. They then become illuminated with a strange glory, are lifted from simple history into prophecy, while they confirm, in this way, the history itself, as written with the pen of divine inspiration. The Old Testament witnesses thus to the New; and the New also to the Old: what otherwise might seem trivial becomes invested with a new dignity; the past reveals the future, and admonishes and encourages the present. To all this, moreover, the numerical structure adds its confirmation in every part, testing it by the imposition of conditions to which nothing but the truth could submit itself with success. And in Joshua, at least, we have found these symbolic numbers governing even catalogues of names and sections of a boundary line. The wonder of all which will be no doubt against it in the minds of many, producing a vague suspicion, at least, on the part of those even who are prepared, perhaps, to admit a certain truth in such spiritual mathematics within what they would deem safe bounds. Let us see, then, if the limits are safe: it is quite possible to test the matter in so rigid a way as to satisfy the most skeptical -where skepticism is not of the heart: for which no proof of this kind can be expected to avail. I have elsewhere* brought forward nine names from among Judah’s cities as an argument in this way. For simplicity, both in the names and numbers, I can find no better now; but we can test them more exhaustively: let us do this.
The names are found, Joshua 15:26-28; as cities of Judah, they should give material for “praise” on the part of the people of God. They are among the cities of the South which speak of the power of God in behalf of His own: as a third group of these, they give us the work of the Spirit in them. The names are nine in number; and nine seems always to be a 3 x 3: we have three stages, then, of this work, and three names on each stage. The first stage of the Spirit’s work in us is undoubtedly that of new birth: the first three names are —

1. Amam, “mother,” or “their mother,” -referring to our origin from Eve: “how can he be clean that is born of a woman?” Here is the need of new birth.
2. Shema, “report” for “faith cometh by a report, and the report by the word of God.” (Romans 10:17, Gk.). And thus —
3. Moladah, “birth.” For “we are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.” Here the truth is simple, and the numerals exact. One is the number of primacy, so of paternity, beginning, origin; two is the number of testimony; three, of resurrection and of the Spirit. As to the meanings of the words, only the first can be for a moment questioned; “mother” is, however, strictly legitimate from the Hebrew, and, indeed, the only rendering that it would seem to countenance, and is mostly accepted. The second stage is that of which the seventh of Romans speaks, -“from the law.” And here we have —
4. Hazar-gadda, “enclosure of conflict,” the dominion of law in the conscience shutting us up to this; next, the way of deliverance —
5. Heshmon, “quiet reckoning,” -faith, not effort, not fighting; and thus we find —
6. Beth-pelet, the “house of escape.” The doctrine it is not here the place to dwell on. The numbers emphasize, 1, the dominion of law; 2, deliverance; 3, the dwelling-place, the heart’s home, which is in Christ, where Christ is, -in each case what is of main importance. As to the names, only Heshmon could there be any doubt of. I take it as a compound word from hashah, to be still, and manah, to “measure,” or “reckon,” in its participial form. The third stage is that of “realized sanctification,” or of being “in the Spirit,” where we have —
7. As implied in the dominion of the Spirit, Hazar-shual, the “jackal-pen,” the fettering of the flesh, though still in us; as it is said, “Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfill the lusts of the flesh.”
8. Beersheba, the “well of the oath,” naturally speaks of assurance as connected with the living water, the Spirit of God as “witness” for Christ in the soul; while —
9. Biziothiah, “among Jah’s olives,” reminds us of the indwelling of the Spirit in the Christian; for the olive is that in which the oil resides. Here the names of this section end. There can be no question as to the meaning, and that of the numerals is simple and clear. Now let any one try but to put these words in a different order, what would be the result? Confusion at once, and in every way; nor could any power of imagination avail to rescue from this. Leave out but one of them, you will find there is a manifest gap in the meaning. Nay, I will go further, and say that, of all the many names upon these lists, I doubt whether there could be any substituted for any here, that would convey the meaning that these do: so little is there of chance or of guesswork about it. Every number has its place necessarily in connection with the name attached. Every name must fill its place in its section; every section must similarly fill its place in connection with the series as a whole; this, again, finds its place as a third group among the cities of the South; these cities of the South have their meaning as the first division of the cities of Judah: and so we might go on.

If this be chance, I confess I do not see why letters thrown out at random should not form themselves into words and intelligible sentences. If it be imagination, I cannot understand why it should be able to move so readily in certain ways, and not at all in others. Why should the imagination be so easily able to make “Amam, Shema, Moladah,” speak intelligibly, but not Moladah, Amara, Shema; nor yet Shema, Amam, Moladah; nor Moladah, Shema, Amam; nor Shema, Moladah, Amain; nor Amain, Moladah, Shema? Of the nine names together there are 362,880 possible combinations, and just so many chances to one against their being found in this precise order. And how is it that, burdened with so many conditions as we have found, imagination should be able to marshal hundreds of names in constant obedience to its desires, and transform a barren catalogue into images of exquisite beauty, bathed in heaven’s own sunlight, and musical with anthems of devout worshipers? But this is allegory; and it is decided by many, even in the face of Scripture itself, that allegorizing is but fancy, pure and simple, -specious and alluring, but dangerous, and to be shunned! It is certain that Paul says of parts of Abraham’s history, “which things are an allegory.” It is certain that one book of Scripture is either “allegory” or a love-song. On the other hand, it is most certain that there has been a profanation of allegory on the part of many, from Origen to the present time, which has roused many against all allegorical interpretation. They “concluded,” says Calvin, “that the literal sense was too mean and poor, and that under the outward bark of the letter there lurked deeper mysteries, which cannot be extracted but by beating out allegories. God visited this profanation by a just judgment, when He suffered the pure meaning of Scripture to be buried under false interpretations. I acknowledge that Scripture is a most rich and inexhaustible fountain of all wisdom; but I deny that its, fertility consists in the various meanings which any man at his pleasure may assign. Let us know, then, that the true meaning of Scripture is the natural and obvious meaning; and let us embrace and abide by it resolutely.” To which Schaff adds: “This style of interpretation is not exposition, but imposition: the meaning is not read out, but read in. History, the grammar, and the dictionary, are the proper aids in Bible study; not the subjective imagination.”*
Yet he has to admit that “the apostle Paul himself gives instances of the sacred allegory, although his use of it is so exceptional and so restrained that it does not countenance it as a method!” Is this true, that it is so exceptional and restrained? -or that any fair examination of Scripture will show that it does not countenance the method? If by that is meant, indeed, the setting aside of the literal sense, “the natural and obvious meaning,” then, of course, it does not countenance this; but Paul’s allegorizing did not either. If there is meant by it simply that there are often deeper meanings than the natural and obvious one, every type in the Old Testament stands really as proof. And going back of the legal system to the book of Genesis, we shall find, from the beginning, God both in speech and act choosing to convey truth to us after this manner. What else does the ordinance of the Sabbath show in the light of the “sabbatism that remains for the people of God”? (Hebrews 4:9.) What, the first paradise, in view of the “tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God”? (Revelation 2:7.) Adam is thus, as head of his race, a type of Christ the last Adam (Romans 5:14; 1 Corinthians 15:45); and the consequences, on either side, are compared by the apostle. So his relation to Eve represents, we are told, that of Christ to the Church (Ephesians 5:32).

In the history of the fall, the serpent and his doom are not to be taken in the simple letter; nor is the bruised heel of the woman’s seed; Abel’s sacrifice, in being typical, is simply allegorical. Going on to the flood, the salvation of Noah and his house are declared by Peter to be typical (1 Peter 3:21); the rainbow is an allegorical “sign” of the covenant with the new earth. Abraham’s history has connected with it the elaborate and minute allegory of Melchizedek; the covenant as to his seed is sealed by an allegorical vision (Genesis 15:1-21); Sarah and Hagar, Ishmael and Isaac, are all allegorical; circumcision is a sign; Isaac, after his offering is received back “in a figure” from the dead (Hebrews 11:19). Bethel speaks allegorically, by its ladder, to Jacob; as does the wrestling with the angel upon his return to Canaan. The names of Judah, Zebulon, Issachar, Dan and Gad, are all allegorized in their father’s prophecy. The dreams of the butler and baker, and of Pharaoh afterwards, are all pure allegory. Yet allegorizing not countenanced as a method! On the other hand, we may surely assert to those who go so far it will not be possible to stop at this point. The limits are evidently not marked off: a Joseph separated from his brethren, exalted among the Gentiles, afterward receiving in the time of their necessity his brethren again, -a Benjamin, son of his mother’s sorrow, but of his father’s right hand, -compel us to go further; while the further we go the wider the field becomes. It is not those who have trodden this path who will be led to believe that it is not a practicable or a safe one. The extension of the method is, at the same time, its safeguard. Partial views have been the hindrance, or a main one, to consistency; and the knowledge of the distinctive features of the book, with their divisions and numerical structure gives a unity of apprehension most favorable to clear vision. Every specific type finds its place in relation to the whole; and there are checks and counter-checks of all sorts to mere unbridled fancy. We have seen, as to the names of Israel’s cities, how well they guard their meaning, and how impossible it seems to read what thoughts we please into them. They speak very definitely, in general; even as to the meanings of the words leaving very little margin for difference of understanding. The most part are beyond controversy, and every name ascertained preserves the same meaning in any after-recurrence, which in these lists is not at all infrequent. The cities given to Levi, at the close of all this part, are a rearrangement, almost entirely, of what is already familiar to us; and where, therefore, there is absolutely no room for any change of meaning anywhere: a most rigid and perfect test of accuracy, which they most perfectly endure. It is earnestly hoped that the interpretation of all this part will receive the patient study which it demands, and which it will again so well repay. Only in this way can it be expected that any well-grounded conviction of its truth will be attained; which, when realized, will not only yield abundant instruction to him who seeks it, but also will confirm and deepen in him the apprehension of the perfect -minute -inspiration of Scripture, and make him better able to draw from the divine fullness which it everywhere contains. It had been intended, in further proof, to append here a brief review of the truths which the cities and boundaries of the tribes of Israel present to us, and the relation in which they are found to one another; but to do this aright would occupy almost as much space as has been already given to them. This must be left, therefore, to the student of the Word to follow out for himself, with the clue afforded, -a task which will be found one of peculiar interest: for it is in this connection and relation of divine truths to each other that these types find so much the power for instruction and blessing for the soul. May we have the diligent heart only that shall be made rich!