Introduction. Throughout this study we have sought to prove that God’s true children are bound strongly to doing His will exactly as He has revealed His will. Jesus warned that only those who do this will enter the kingdom of Heaven (Mt 7:21-23). Every specific command must be followed exactly as revealed with no variation. This is the true faith and trust God is seeking. Our respect for God and His Word is too precious to allow any changes. But general commands are different. God allows our wisdom, but we must thoroughly examine every aspect of a command to be certain they remain within the principles of expediency:
- First, it must be lawful. (1Cor. 10:23) Every effort put forth to know God has not specified anything through command, example, or necessary inference that would forbid it.
- Second, there must be no qualms, reservations, or issues of conscience (Rom. 14:20-23). If we feel sense of guilt while engaging or believing something, then to that degree it is not expedient and therefore not lawful for us.
- Third, we must assess the church and world to be certain it will not harm them or damage our influence (1Cor. 10:31-33). If it violates a conscience or creates turmoil in the church or damages our reputation in the world, it is not expedient.
All of these things fall under the heading of expediency because they are “helpful” to fulfill the commands in a “profitable” manner. But do we have the authority to make such large additions to a command? Do we have any examples in the Scriptures where a general command allowed such large additions? One clear example is seen after God divided the work of the tabernacle for the three sons of Levi. Kohath was to carry all the articles of the tabernacle (Num. 4:4-20). Gershon was told to carry all the curtains, coverings, and hangings of the court (Num 4:21-28). Merari’s work was to carry all the boards bars, pillars and sockets (Num 4:29-33).
After the tabernacle was built and prepared, it came into the heart of the leaders of the tribes of Israel to bring a gift to help them with their work. “Then the leaders of Israel, the heads of their fathers' houses, who were the leaders of the tribes and over those who were numbered, made an offering. And they brought their offering before the Lord, six covered carts and twelve oxen” (Num. 7:2-3). This was a free will offering based on their desire to help the sons of Levi with the work of moving the tabernacle to the Promised Land.
Since God commanded Moses to accept the gifts, it is evident that this profitable and helpful expediency was within the general command to carry the tabernacle. “Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, ‘Accept these from them, that they may be used in doing the work of the tabernacle of meeting; and you shall give them to the Levites, to every man according to his service.’” (Num. 7:4-6). God left it up to the discretion of Moses about how to divide these six carts among the three sons of Levi. He only demanded that they be “to every man according to his service.” “So Moses took the carts and the oxen, and gave them to the Levites. Two carts and four oxen he gave to the sons of Gershon, according to their service; 8 and four carts and eight oxen he gave to the sons of Merari, according to their service”. (Num. 7:6-9). When we consider the loads of fabric compared to the loads of boards, pillars and sockets, it is easy to understand why it was more expedient, profitable and helpful to give two for the fabric and four for the boards.
But what about the Kohathites? They were not given any carts. Was this an unfair decision? Absolutely not! “But to the sons of Kohath he gave none, because theirs was the service of the holy things, which they carried on their shoulders.” (Num. 7:9). Moses was forbidden by a specific command to give Kohath a cart. While Gershon and Merari received a general command to carry, Kohath was given a specific command to carry it on their shoulders. For them a cart could only be a temptation to sin since they were forbidden by a specific command from using them. But what would happen if someone did use a cart? Ask King David.
After disastrous misuse of the ark by Eli’s sons Hophni and Phinehas, the ark was taken by the Philistines (1Sam. 4:1-10). When it was returned, it remained separated from the rest of the tabernacle until David’s reign: “let us bring the ark of our God back to us, for we have not inquired at it since the days of Saul” (1Chr. 13:3-14). After consulting with the leaders and the people, “they carried the ark of God on a new cart from the house of Abinadab, and Uzza and Ahio drove the cart.” The very thing Moses would not allow the Levites to do was the choice David made with the approval of all Israel. They saw it as an expedient and possibly believed they were giving honor by placing it on a new cart. But it could never be an expedient! It was a clear violation of a specific command. This placed God in a dilemma. Would God overlook the violation of the law and allow them to worship, since it had been done in ignorance in all sincerity or would He punish them?
God chose to punish them. As He did with Saul when He said “to obey is better than sacrifice“ (1Sam. 15:22-23), “when they came to Nachon's threshing floor, Uzzah put out his hand to the ark of God and took hold of it, for the oxen stumbled. Then the anger of the Lord was aroused against Uzzah, and God struck him there for his error; and he died there by the ark of God. And David became angry because of the Lord's outbreak against Uzzah.” (2Sam. 6:6-8) David’s anger revealed that it was not what he was expecting. His initial anger appears to mirror that of Cain, with the exception that he controlled and ruled over it.
While some think the problem was only because Uzzah touched the ark, that is not what David said. After a few months of study and meditation, David gave his conclusion: “Then David said, ‘No one may carry the ark of God but the Levites, for the Lord has chosen them to carry the ark of God and to minister before Him forever.” (1Chr. 15:1-15). The problem turned out to be simple. It was a clear violation of a specific command. They had treated the command to carry it on their shoulders as a general command and went beyond the Scriptures: “sanctify yourselves, you and your brethren, that you may bring up the ark of the Lord God of Israel to the place I have prepared for it. For because you did not do it the first time, the Lord our God broke out against us, because we did not consult Him about the proper order.” David could see clearly that it was “because YOU did not do it the first time, the Lord our God broke out against us.”
It was a simple problem. They had violated the specific command to carry it on their shoulders. The was a violation of “the proper order.” This term means “the due administration of judgment” and “rendering a proper verdict.” By putting that ark on a cart they had violated both God’s right to administer His judgment by modifying it to suit them. They also violated His demand that we always render the proper verdict when “judging His commands.” The command David speaks of is given in the next verse: “the children of the Levites bore the ark of God on their shoulders, by its poles, as Moses had commanded according to the word of the Lord.”
Conclusion. The carts were given “according to their service.” This is the perfect definition for the parameters of expediency. Because Gershon had a lighter load to carry than Merari he did not need as many carts. Thus expediency is no excuse for extravagance. Merari needed extra carts for the heavy weight and bulk of all the boards, sockets and pillars they needed to move. It was much easier and thus helpful, profitable and expedient for them to have carts. But God had given a specific and clear command for Kohath to carry everything on their shoulders. The only thing a cart could do for them was create a temptation to violate God’s clear command. Thus it could never be helpful, expedient or profitable in the eyes of God for them to have a cart to move the furniture of the tabernacle. As David noted “the proper order” was for Kohath to carry them on their shoulders (1 Chr 15:11-15). This is the first and primary issue for all expediencies. There must be a law of God that they make profitable or helpful to fulfill. If in any way they compromise the command or outcome, or add anything to God’s intent and will (unlawful), they violate the proper order, interfering with God’s due administration of judgment.
After the tabernacle was built and prepared, it came into the heart of the leaders of the tribes of Israel to bring a gift to help them with their work. “Then the leaders of Israel, the heads of their fathers' houses, who were the leaders of the tribes and over those who were numbered, made an offering. And they brought their offering before the Lord, six covered carts and twelve oxen” (Num. 7:2-3). This was a free will offering based on their desire to help the sons of Levi with the work of moving the tabernacle to the Promised Land.
Since God commanded Moses to accept the gifts, it is evident that this profitable and helpful expediency was within the general command to carry the tabernacle. “Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, ‘Accept these from them, that they may be used in doing the work of the tabernacle of meeting; and you shall give them to the Levites, to every man according to his service.’” (Num. 7:4-6). God left it up to the discretion of Moses about how to divide these six carts among the three sons of Levi. He only demanded that they be “to every man according to his service.” “So Moses took the carts and the oxen, and gave them to the Levites. Two carts and four oxen he gave to the sons of Gershon, according to their service; 8 and four carts and eight oxen he gave to the sons of Merari, according to their service”. (Num. 7:6-9). When we consider the loads of fabric compared to the loads of boards, pillars and sockets, it is easy to understand why it was more expedient, profitable and helpful to give two for the fabric and four for the boards.
But what about the Kohathites? They were not given any carts. Was this an unfair decision? Absolutely not! “But to the sons of Kohath he gave none, because theirs was the service of the holy things, which they carried on their shoulders.” (Num. 7:9). Moses was forbidden by a specific command to give Kohath a cart. While Gershon and Merari received a general command to carry, Kohath was given a specific command to carry it on their shoulders. For them a cart could only be a temptation to sin since they were forbidden by a specific command from using them. But what would happen if someone did use a cart? Ask King David.
After disastrous misuse of the ark by Eli’s sons Hophni and Phinehas, the ark was taken by the Philistines (1Sam. 4:1-10). When it was returned, it remained separated from the rest of the tabernacle until David’s reign: “let us bring the ark of our God back to us, for we have not inquired at it since the days of Saul” (1Chr. 13:3-14). After consulting with the leaders and the people, “they carried the ark of God on a new cart from the house of Abinadab, and Uzza and Ahio drove the cart.” The very thing Moses would not allow the Levites to do was the choice David made with the approval of all Israel. They saw it as an expedient and possibly believed they were giving honor by placing it on a new cart. But it could never be an expedient! It was a clear violation of a specific command. This placed God in a dilemma. Would God overlook the violation of the law and allow them to worship, since it had been done in ignorance in all sincerity or would He punish them?
God chose to punish them. As He did with Saul when He said “to obey is better than sacrifice“ (1Sam. 15:22-23), “when they came to Nachon's threshing floor, Uzzah put out his hand to the ark of God and took hold of it, for the oxen stumbled. Then the anger of the Lord was aroused against Uzzah, and God struck him there for his error; and he died there by the ark of God. And David became angry because of the Lord's outbreak against Uzzah.” (2Sam. 6:6-8) David’s anger revealed that it was not what he was expecting. His initial anger appears to mirror that of Cain, with the exception that he controlled and ruled over it.
While some think the problem was only because Uzzah touched the ark, that is not what David said. After a few months of study and meditation, David gave his conclusion: “Then David said, ‘No one may carry the ark of God but the Levites, for the Lord has chosen them to carry the ark of God and to minister before Him forever.” (1Chr. 15:1-15). The problem turned out to be simple. It was a clear violation of a specific command. They had treated the command to carry it on their shoulders as a general command and went beyond the Scriptures: “sanctify yourselves, you and your brethren, that you may bring up the ark of the Lord God of Israel to the place I have prepared for it. For because you did not do it the first time, the Lord our God broke out against us, because we did not consult Him about the proper order.” David could see clearly that it was “because YOU did not do it the first time, the Lord our God broke out against us.”
It was a simple problem. They had violated the specific command to carry it on their shoulders. The was a violation of “the proper order.” This term means “the due administration of judgment” and “rendering a proper verdict.” By putting that ark on a cart they had violated both God’s right to administer His judgment by modifying it to suit them. They also violated His demand that we always render the proper verdict when “judging His commands.” The command David speaks of is given in the next verse: “the children of the Levites bore the ark of God on their shoulders, by its poles, as Moses had commanded according to the word of the Lord.”
Conclusion. The carts were given “according to their service.” This is the perfect definition for the parameters of expediency. Because Gershon had a lighter load to carry than Merari he did not need as many carts. Thus expediency is no excuse for extravagance. Merari needed extra carts for the heavy weight and bulk of all the boards, sockets and pillars they needed to move. It was much easier and thus helpful, profitable and expedient for them to have carts. But God had given a specific and clear command for Kohath to carry everything on their shoulders. The only thing a cart could do for them was create a temptation to violate God’s clear command. Thus it could never be helpful, expedient or profitable in the eyes of God for them to have a cart to move the furniture of the tabernacle. As David noted “the proper order” was for Kohath to carry them on their shoulders (1 Chr 15:11-15). This is the first and primary issue for all expediencies. There must be a law of God that they make profitable or helpful to fulfill. If in any way they compromise the command or outcome, or add anything to God’s intent and will (unlawful), they violate the proper order, interfering with God’s due administration of judgment.