READINGS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS (4)
[p. 39] READINGS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS (4)
JT In dwelling on chapter 5 it is important to bear in mind that chapter 4 emphasises the “principle of faith”. The principle of faith is seen throughout the book, we know, but chapter 4 seems to emphasise it as coming in after the mercy-seat. There is a point or two in chapter 4 to which it might be well to refer. It says in verses 13 - 17, “For it was not by law that the promise was to Abraham, or to his seed, that he should be heir of the world, but by righteousness of faith. For if they which are of law be heirs, faith is made vain, and the promise made of no effect. For law works wrath; but where no law is neither is there transgression. Therefore it is on the principle of faith, that it might be according to grace, in order to the promise being sure to all the seed, not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of Abraham’s faith, who is father of us all, (according as it is written, I have made thee father of many nations)”. It seems to me that we should pay especial attention to chapter 4 in that way; it is a sort of pivotal chapter from our side — from the side of apprehension and appropriation. The light of chapter 3 being so wonderful, and then the blessings flowing therefrom in chapter 5 being also so wonderful, it is of great importance that attention should be paid to chapter 4 as showing how things are appropriated.
BTF You were pointing out the importance of Abraham finding.
JT That is how chapter 4 begins. “What shall we say then that Abraham our father ... has found?” Being the father of believers, his history is dwelt upon in chapter 4.
Rem Abraham is “the father of all them that believe”, and the “father of many nations”. He comes in upon the principle of faith, “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness”.
JT “Father of many nations” is really in the light of resurrection. God said, when he appeared to Abram, “I am the Almighty God”; and changed Abram’s name in the light of that revelation. Abraham could be a progenitor through the power of God only. He believed in the power of God. He believed not only that God could justify, but that He could quicken the dead.
Rem Two great points come out in chapter 4, righteousness reckoned in the light of a God who raises the dead and transgressions covered as shown in David.
BTF There is faith as exercised, and there is the “principle of faith”. Perhaps you would say a word regarding those two.
JT The principle of faith is that on which God has set things; it is the ground on which divine blessings are administered now. It is the principle on which justification is based. It is, “on the principle of faith, to faith”. But we have another thought added here. “Therefore it is on the principle of faith, that it might be according to grace”. It is on that principle as established by God that it might be according to grace, for law is not of faith.
Rem So there is a contrast suggested, when the principle of faith comes in, with what had been before, that is, law. “For the law was given by Moses: grace and truth subsists through Jesus Christ”. I suppose in the Old Testament these principles were enunciated. We have a proof of it in Habakkuk 2:4: “the just shall live by his faith”. But it waited for the manifestation of the mercy-seat; now [p. 41] we see that God would bring in everything on that basis.
JT Grace and truth subsisting in Christ gives, one might say, the character of the present dispensation. “For the law was given by Moses: grace and truth subsists through Jesus Christ”. Grace and truth go together in the Person of Christ — they form one idea in the mind of God. The verb is in the singular in order to emphasise that there is one indissoluble idea set forth in Christ — that of grace and truth, not truth alone but grace and truth.
Rem There is a suggestion here in Abraham and David being brought in that, really, there was no change in the actings of God. He acted with Abraham and David on the ground of grace as His sovereign prerogative, notwithstanding that in David’s day the law existed. His workings were always on that line. None in Old Testament times were brought into blessing on the basis of the law; all were brought in on the principle of grace and truth.
BTF Would you say that where there is faith in the soul there is the accepting of things which cannot be substantiated other than by the Word of God?
JT That is the point. We know the definition given in Hebrews 11:1, “Now faith is the substantiating of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen”.
BTF When you touch on the principle of faith, it leads on to things that are not seen; but are substantiated by God’s word.
JT In that way the support of faith is not evident; the natural mind is incapable of understanding what faith lays hold of.
WLP We see more than faith in Stephen’s case.
JT It developed to sight.
Rem That was in the power of the Holy Spirit. “But being full of the Holy Spirit, having fixed his [p. 42] eyes on heaven, he saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God” (Acts 7:55).
JT Abraham here is a great model for believers. Indeed, inasmuch as he is formally called our father, it is well that he should be studied in that regard.
WB Is his faith in the end of chapter 4 what you would call advanced faith?
JT The faith of Genesis 15 is the faith that believes in the God who justifies; regarding which it says here, “And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness”. Genesis 17 is an advance on that. God not only justifies but quickens. So in chapter 4:17 we have, “The God whom he believed, who quickens the dead”. I need not only to be justified, but quickened. So that Genesis 17 is an advance on chapter 15.
Rem It is interesting to see that in Hebrews 11 there is still another advance. There it is connected with Isaac. “By faith Abraham ... offered up Isaac ... accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure”. He reckoned God was able to give Isaac back to him from the dead.
JT It is a great thing, in that way, to have a right model; if Scripture sets one before us as in Abraham, we should study the model. It helps us in the history of our souls to see how faith worked in a man of like passions as ourselves.
Rem I think the Lord emphasises that when He calls attention to Himself, “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad”. That, I think, is further light as to the principle of faith. Abraham could not naturally see Christ; but in the light of the revelation from God he embraced it, he exulted in it. He was really in the light of the world to come.
WB Does faith here in the end of this chapter embrace the world to come?
[p. 43] Rem F.E.R. used to tell us that this was in view of the world to come.
WB I was thinking of the expression we find here, “that he should be heir of the world”.
JT Faith would scarcely stop short of the full, divine thought, however imperfectly he might apprehend the full bearing of the world to come. Each man of faith had it in some sense before him, otherwise he must have been living in the world of sight, which was not so.
CAM In that sense faith would imply another world.
JT I think so. Faith looks on to a world that is “not seen as yet”, but which will ultimately come into display.
Ques Is that also true of those saints before Abraham, those who had faith?
JT I think so. It is said of Enoch that he prophesied saying, “Behold, the Lord has come amidst his holy myriads, to execute judgment against all” (Jude 14,15).
Ques What then was the difference between them and Abraham?
JT One difference is that before the flood there was no call out of the world. Abraham was called out of it so that he is, strictly, the father of all believers, because believers are essentially called ones, called out of the world. And of Abraham it is said that he looked for things, that is, he got impressions in his soul and looked for their verification or accomplishment.
ANW Do you think it would suggest that the world had reached a stage of darkness which had not been before?
JT I think that Satan had not acquired the place in the world before the flood that he did afterwards. Also that through the introduction of the element of government in Noah a place opened up to [p. 44] Satan in that relation; hence the political development which followed: first, centralisation as seen in Babel; then, imperial power as seen in Nimrod. All this, and other things, developed idolatry, of which we hear nothing before the flood. Satan evidently acquired greater power after the flood, he intruded himself into the minds of men and idolatry developed. So Abram was a worshipper of idols; but God has His own thoughts. It says, “The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia”, where he was still in his own surroundings, and said, “Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred”. The political idea is put first — that of patriotism — he is to leave his country; then his kindred, and then, “Come into the land which I shall shew thee”. It is a call; and we Christians, in that way, are the children of Abraham because we have faith according to his faith.
ANW We feel that our faith is severely tested today. It is in just such a day that God would look for faith.
Rem I think it helps on that line to see that no empire has ever succeeded which has not been backed by the religious power. No doubt the principle of idolatry supported the governing powers in Abraham’s country; in breaking from his country he had to break from his religion. I think it may be seen all through that the political power is allied, for its support, with the spiritual power of evil; so it takes all that is in a man to separate from the world; politically, socially and religiously. I was struck by a remark made, that faith is in view of the world to come. I believe, in some form or other, faith has always the world to come in view.
JT “The God of glory” — in what those words convey, the world that God has in mind is all bound up. In Genesis 14 we have two groups of kings fighting one with another; and there is “Abram the Hebrew”, as it says, set over against them. These two groups would undoubtedly represent the political interests of the world — the contending interests, as we have it today — but there is a third party, that is, “Abram the Hebrew”. I suppose, the word ‘Hebrew’ there does not signify what it did in Saul’s mouth (1 Samuel 13:3); that was the natural way of looking at them for Jacob’s name had long been changed; but in Genesis it is, “Abram the Hebrew”, possibly alluding to the fact that he was not of that country; he was distinctly apart, but was marked by brotherly affections. “And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his trained servants, born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued them unto Dan” (Genesis 14:14). There was an institution at the command of that man of faith and by itself; but it was on the principle of faith, it would not be employed in worldly political interests, not on either side; but to rescue a brother.
Rem The only intervention was to rescue a brother.
CAM You would say the world to come comes into view in Melchisedec.
JT The thought of the world to come follows on that incident. Melchisedec comes in and blesses Abram. We know, from the setting of Scripture, that the title “Most High God” and “Melchisedec” refer to the millennial day.
ANW Where would Abram have stood in regard of chapter 13 of Romans?
JT You remember, he recognised the king of Sodom. I think he was very deferential to the rulers of the land. He did not revolt against them in any way. He waited God’s time. It was said to him that, “The iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full” (Genesis 15:16). He humbly waited, but he had the light in his soul of the inheritance. When Lot separated [p. 46] from him the Lord said to him, “Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art northward, and southward, and eastward, and westward: for all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it” (Genesis 13:14,15). He had the light of the inheritance in his soul; but he recognised the king of Sodom and also the sons of Heth in a later period. He was deferential to the rights of each.
Ques How far does Romans 5 bring a believer?
JT I think it shows what is available — the great things which accrue to the believer — to the one that has the faith outlined in chapter 4. After so much has been said about Abraham’s faith, it is said, “Now it was not written on his account alone that it was reckoned to him, but on ours also, to whom, believing on him who has raised from among the dead Jesus our Lord, who has been delivered for our offences and has been raised for our justification, it will be reckoned. Therefore having been justified on the principle of faith, we have peace towards God through our Lord Jesus Christ”. Then the Spirit of God gives an outline of the great things that accrue to us, the blessings that are available at the present time.
Ques After Romans 7 do we come back to chapter 5?
JT Chapter 5 is from God’s side. It sets before us objectively what is available. Of course, the apostle speaks as if he were in the gain of it and enjoyed it individually, yet he speaks in the plural, showing it is characteristically true of christians to enjoy these things; but they are presented as the great result of the gospel, and as available to every believer.
BTF The thought in justification is that it is before God, is it not? Not before men; it has in view the manifestation.
[p. 47] JT Clearly. It is a question of being justified in view of another sphere. It is “the God of glory” who has established a new world and it is a question of my being suited for it. But, in regard of responsibility here, you have forgiveness and the consciousness of it; but, even as to that, you cannot show any one you have it. You have the witness of the Spirit that you are forgiven; but what you are concerned about is that you should have a place in that world in the presence of God.
Rem Referring to our brother’s question, as to how far Romans 5 brings a believer, I suppose it includes reconciliation. It brings us to the point where the prodigal son is kissed.
JT It is Luke 15 in that sense, because “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit”. Just as the father impressed upon the son the love he had for him, so the Spirit impresses upon our hearts the love God has for us.
Rem Luke 15 really helps to unfold this chapter.
JT Take verse 11: it says, “And not only that, but we are making our boast in God, through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom now we have received the reconciliation”. I was thinking of the expression, the reconciliation. It is presented as an element of the testimony to be received in this chapter. I apprehend I am to be reconciled according to Corinthians; but here “the reconciliation” is presented as an element of the testimony because it refers to man being before God in Christ to God’s pleasure; that is the reconciliation.
ANW Is it forgiveness in Luke 15?
JT The prodigal said, “I have sinned against heaven and before thee”. He acknowledged his sins. Now the kiss of the father undoubtedly involved forgiveness, without it being said; but there was more than that. He says, to his servants, “Bring out the best robe and clothe him in it, and put a ring on [p. 48] his hand and sandals on his feet; and bring the fatted calf and kill it, and let us eat and make merry: for this my son was dead and has come to life, was lost and has been found. And they began to make merry”. I have no doubt that that is the reconciliation. It is not only that the Jews will have God’s laws put into their hearts, and written in their minds; but the christian is after the heavenly. Reconciliation involves the second Man. “The first man out of the earth, made of dust; the second man, out of heaven” (1 Corinthians 15:47). While there will be a representation of Christ in the Jew on the earth in the millennium, he does not fully answer to what God had in His mind about man. He had Christ in mind and Christ is said to be, “the second man, out of heaven”. You have to go the full length to get the divine thought. The Jew is not out of heaven: he is not even intended for it; although there will be in that nation a representation of Christ, that is, God’s laws put into their hearts and written in their minds, and therefore they will love God and their neighbour; but the second Man is out of heaven. “As we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly” (verse 49). That is the full, divine thought as regards the mind of God.
Rem Verse 10 of this chapter gives us reconciliation as individually presented, “reconciled to God by the death of his Son”; but in verse 11 we reach the point of 2 Corinthians 5, “the ministry of reconciliation”. But it is not developed here as it is in that epistle.
JT I see the full bearing of the truth of the gospel presented in this chapter for our appropriation. It is, so to say, hung up for our view. It is in Christ. So we get a list of things all hung up before us and to be appropriated.
JS You are brought on to a sort of vantage ground here.
ANW [p. 49] You cannot go beyond this.
JT As regards the gospel. But you have not the ministry of the church here. You have the ministries of the gospel and the church in Colossians. As far as the ministry of the gospel goes, you cannot exceed what is presented in this chapter. The second half of the chapter is also part of the gospel, that is, “eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord”. The second half also enlarges upon the much more, the excess of things: what was in Christ in contrast to what was brought in through Adam.
Rem Really, there is reached a climax here. You cannot, in a way, go beyond it. You reach reconciliation. Then, there is a turning back, as it were, and a taking the truth up on another line, that is, the life line!
JT In 2 Samuel 8 you have lines for life and death. David measured with two lines for death and one full line for life. Now, I think, this chapter is the life line. The law would be the lines to death — that would measure us all for death; but this chapter (Christ having died for us, and living now) is the life line for us — the “much more”. It is not only that I shall live; I shall reign in life by the One, Jesus Christ. “Much rather shall those who receive the abundance of grace ... reign in life by the one Jesus Christ”.
JS The two lines are here clearly: “death passed upon all men” and “reign in life by the one”.
CAM It says, “being enemies, we have been reconciled to God”. It is not in the sense that we are reconciled enemies, is it?
JT It is that grace has abounded over enmity, and now being reconciled we are saved by Christ’s life. You would not deny you were an enemy once. Romans shows that the man who was an enemy is now reconciled. The epistle shows how things have taken place on earth. The idea of new creation [p. 50] scarcely enters into Romans. It rather shows God’s greatness, and how He has triumphed; that in spite of our being enemies, we have been reconciled to Himself.
ANW But it was not the same prodigal son.
JT We know that from the epistles; but Luke 15 is to establish what God is in Christ, and it corresponds with the early part of Romans. It is the grace side — how grace acts; how God can rise above all the rebellion of man’s heart. It is the “much more” line. This epistle shows how great God is morally. Notwithstanding what I have been, God reconciles me. He justifies the ungodly, “in due time Christ died for the ungodly”. “While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him”. That thought is carried all through — the triumph of grace. This chapter shows what God is; that is the first great feature of the gospel. After this it is a question of what one is in oneself; then, one learns very bitterly what is there.
Rem Up to the end of verse 11 it is what man has done — the apples on the tree. After this it becomes a question of the tree itself — the root and the nature that produces the fruit.
TH Why is the new covenant not mentioned?
JT It is involved in the love of God being shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, and “God commends his love to us”. Why should He commend His love, seeing it is so great in itself? Yet He does. All these things are to show the moral greatness of God. It is not simply His power in raising Jesus from the dead but His moral greatness; He commends His love to us.
ANW And it was, “while we were yet sinners”.
JT I think it is very affecting in that God should go to the pains of commending His love to [p. 51] us.
WB How do you apply reconciliation in the millennium? You do not get a new man there.
JT God’s laws will be put into their minds, and written in their hearts, they will love God and their neighbour; but they come short of, “the second man, out of heaven”. Therefore, there is no idea of that continuing eternally. God triumphs in it as regards His promises, but the national idea does not continue. Finally it is simply — God and men.
Rem Israel entering into the world to come is regarded as new; but short of the heavenly Man. So it is Israel without guile. Jesus said of Nathanael, “Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile” (John 1:47).
JT They do not go inside the veil. It is a provisional state of things, God showing that He can retain a nation like Israel here on earth. He does not have to destroy the nation. According to Ezekiel 36, He says, “I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean ...”, so that they can become morally according to Christ, and yet they come short of Luke 15. But mark, the elder son might have gone in, but he was angry and would not go in. The Jews could have gone in on the day of Pentecost, but there was only one day of Pentecost. It is not simply that the Holy Spirit comes upon us, as in the millennium; according to our chapter He sheds abroad in our hearts the love of God.
HL Has faith no place with the Jew then?
JT In Leviticus 16, which rightly fits in with Romans, we have one bullock and two goats. There is only one bullock — meaning that there is only one for christians, and nothing for sight. Whereas there were two goats. The blood of the bullock and of one goat was carried into the holiest of all; but the other goat is seen going into the wilderness bearing the confessed sins of the people — they see the goat go away. The Jews will see Christ when He returns without their sins. When they see Him they [p. 52] will know their sins have been borne away; but we do not wait for that. We have the Holy Spirit who witnesses to us that our sins and iniquities are remembered no more. The Jew will be blessed on the principle of sight; but the Lord says, “Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed”. There can be no doubt that the remnant in Revelation will have a measure of reconciliation; but they will not have the best robe on, although they learn a heavenly song, nor will they have the enjoyment of things we now have. The remnant will cling to certain hopes; but they will not have the Spirit, as we, therefore they do not go within, nor do they get the best robe; but He shall appear to those that look for Him, without sin for salvation. They look for Him and see Him.
Rem They will appreciate chapters 9 - 11 of this book as seeing the link in the ways of God. They will glean a great deal from the New Testament, no doubt.
Ques At the end of the millennium, when the Lord delivers up the kingdom to God, what becomes of the Jew?
JT We might be free to say this: they merge with the men who are alluded to in Revelation 21:3, “the tabernacle of God is with men”.
Rem There is a significant verse in Ephesians 3, “of whom every family in the heavens and on earth is named”. It leaves a wide scope for even the eternal day. Romans, as often pointed out, treats of God’s ways on the earth, hence, the nation of Israel is taken account of there, but not in Colossians or Ephesians.
CAM One of the difficulties in one’s own mind is as to how things are taken care of at the time of transition — when “the heavens will pass away with a rushing noise, and the elements, burning with heat, shall be dissolved, and the earth and the works in it shall be burnt up” — how it is that men, who have [p. 53] been accustomed to live in flesh and blood condition here, shall be taken care of and changed to participate in what is wholly spiritual, that is, in the eternal state?
JT That is undisclosed. But we can well understand how God can change them as He will us when the Lord comes. The knowledge of God in our souls settles all such difficulties.
BTF “As sin has reigned in the power of death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord”.
JT The great question of life was intended by God to be settled and the second part of this chapter shows how it is abundantly settled — not only do we live; but we “reign in life by the one Jesus Christ”. Grace also reigns through righteousness, “even as sin has reigned in the power of death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord”. In that way God shows His complete victory.
Ques Would that be connected with those in the millennium?
JT It looks on to it, but this epistle up to chapter 8 is for christians; it is what we hold on the principle of faith. It will not be enjoyed in the millennium as we have it. No matter what we have, it is the best.
Ques Will eternal life be the same to the Jew as it is to us?
JT The indwelling Spirit necessarily constitutes a difference with us. The Spirit is the power by which we enjoy eternal life. Whereas, they will enjoy it as death is removed from them. We enjoy it in spite of the fact that death remains here.
JS “Even as sin has reigned in the power of death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord”. Reigning here is in the sense of complete victory.