In the past chapters we have seen the eternal purpose of God, the expression of Christ, the expression of the church, the practicality of the church, and the oneness of the church. After the oneness, we must see the ground of the church.
First of all, we must see the meaning of the term, “the ground of the church.” When we say the ground, we do not mean the foundation. I am afraid that many people confuse these two words. The ground of the church is not the foundation.
Suppose we have a piece of land upon which we wish to put a house. This lot or site is what we call the ground. The ground is the very site where the building is placed. It is upon this piece of land that the foundation is laid and the building is erected. Most every building has a foundation, and the main part of the foundation of most buildings is underneath the ground. So there is the ground, and there is the foundation. The ground is the site upon which the house is built, and the foundation is the base of the house. These are two separate things.
First Corinthians 3:9 tells us that Christ is the only foundation. This means that Christ is the base of the building of the church. He is the foundation upon which the church is built. But if Christ is only the foundation, what is the ground? The ground must be the very place where we build the church with Christ as the foundation.
Suppose I place a vase upon a table. Then the table becomes the ground to hold the vase. But if I hold the vase in the air, it does not have a ground. If I put the vase upon a brother’s head, his head becomes the ground. If I hold it in my hand, then my hand becomes the ground. But neither his head nor my hand is the proper ground. The vase must be on the table; then it is on the proper ground, the place where it belongs.
It is possible to have the right thing on the wrong ground. It is something right, but on the wrong ground. We must have the right thing, but we must also have the right thing on the right ground.
We know that in Jerusalem, a temple was built according to the design revealed by God and with all the materials designated by God. Therefore, Jerusalem was the ground of the temple. Then one day the people of Israel were carried away to Egypt, Syria, and Babylon. Suppose they built a temple in the same design and with the same materials in these three places. The temple would be right, but it would be on the wrong ground. Then there would be four temples in the same design, with the same materials, and even with the same measurements. It seems as if they are all right. But each would have a different ground. The three temples outside of Jerusalem would be the same as that in Jerusalem, but they would be on the wrong ground.
Now suppose the temple in Jerusalem, which was the one on the proper and unique ground, was destroyed, and the one built in its place in the recovery was somewhat smaller; it was not exactly the same as the original. But in Babylon a big temple was built exactly the same as the original one in Jerusalem. In other words, in Babylon there was a temple up to standard, but in Jerusalem the temple was below standard. In this kind of situation, to which temple should we go?
When we read Ezra and Nehemiah, we see the poor condition existing among those who returned to Jerusalem. Some of them even took heathen wives. There was very little spirituality among them. But Daniel was in Babylon, and he was a spiritual giant. Why should anyone go to Jerusalem to be with those poor, pitiful ones who took heathen wives? It seems that it would be much better to stay in Babylon with Daniel.
What would you do? Would you stay in Babylon with the spiritual prophet Daniel, or would you go back to Jerusalem with those poor ones? We all need clear discernment in this matter. There was real spirituality with Daniel, but Daniel was not in Babylon for Babylon. He opened his window toward Jerusalem and prayed three times a day (Dan. 6:10). He was so desirous to go back, but under God’s sovereignty he had to stay. He had to stay not for Babylon, but for Jerusalem.
We also know that God’s glory was not in Babylon. His presence, in a sense, was there with some person or persons, but His glory was not there. It was not until the destroyed temple was built in Jerusalem, even though it was not up to standard, that the glory of God filled it (Hag. 2:7, 9). The glory was not in Babylon, but in Jerusalem with a poor group of people. This was entirely due to the ground.
Do you think that when the temple was rebuilt on the proper ground and the glory of God manifested that it was due to the spiritual situation? Had the people’s condition changed? No, it had not changed. It was still the same. But because a building was erected on the proper ground, even though it was under the standard, the Shekinah glory of God was manifested. This was not because the spirituality of the people had been greatly improved. That did not bring in God’s glory. It was simply due to the fact that they came back and rebuilt the temple on the proper ground. Though their situation and condition were poor, yet their standing and their ground were right. God honored the ground they took and upon which they built.
It was only a little over 400 years following the return of the captives that the Lord Jesus was born. Was He born with the group that stayed with Daniel? No, the Lord Jesus was born to the poor returned group in Israel. When we read the four Gospels, we see how poor and pitiful the state of the Lord’s people was in Israel when the Lord was born. But the Lord Jesus came to this earth the first time through them. Why? Simply because they were on the right ground.
Suppose that not one of the scattered Israelites had returned to Jerusalem. Instead, they all remained in Babylon, with some in Syria and Egypt. If so, could the Lord Jesus be born in the land of Israel? No, He could not come because the ground would not be available.
Home | First | Prev | Next