FORMATION IN EGYPT
[p. 418] FORMATION IN EGYPT
Exodus 7:1 - 7; Exodus 7:14 - 17; Exodus 8:16 - 24
JT What has been in view in these readings on Exodus is the formation that proceeds in the people, collaterally with the signs or plagues administered in Egypt. I thought we might tonight reach as far as the passage in chapter 8:22, where it says, “I will distinguish in that day the land of Goshen, in which my people dwell”. And then again in verse 23, “I will put a separation between my people and thy people”. There we have the formal distinction put upon the people of God as over against this world. Perhaps the Lord will help us to get on to that point in chapter 8. In chapter 7 we see the continuation of the subject of the ministers through whom the work of God was carried on.
Last evening we reached as far as the end of chapter 4, where we saw that Moses and Aaron collected the elders together and told them what God had said, and they worshipped, that is, their ministry was so far singularly effective, leading to worship. Then we have the steady refusal of Pharaoh to recognise the rights of God in His people in chapter 5, and in chapter 6 the Spirit of God returns to the subject of the ministers and the family whence they sprang; God would impress upon us the identity of the vessels. He intervened for the deliverance of His people. The importance of this as applied to Christ is very evident. It has application indeed generally; those whom God uses are all identified as belonging to the same family. The genealogy is given, beginning with chapter 6:14; it runs on down to Levi, then we get no more of the tribes — Levi being what is in the mind of the Spirit. Then from Levi we get Moses and Aaron; we have the names of their parents given to us in verse 20, Amram and Jochebed, the latter being the aunt of her husband; shewing the strong family [p. 419] relation between them. Then it goes on from Aaron to Eleazar, and from Eleazar to Phinehas, to whom the priesthood was given for ever. Permanent priesthood was established. Then we have in verse 26, “This is that Aaron and Moses”; and again in the end of verse 27, “This is that Moses and Aaron”; so that we might know clearly who they are and whence they sprang; they are of the family of Levi.
WH There is evidently great care taken that they might be known here.
JT Yes; it is very instructive that we should see the line whence the Lord Jesus, as you might say, sprang. I transfer it to Christ, for we should be clear as to His genealogy. Matthew and Luke go into that; they give us the genealogy of Christ. Then John gives us His divine genealogy.
RWG I am sure that is very important in speaking of the generation that Matthew and Luke give us. We might think it only referred to the Lord down here, but, as you say, John gives the divine generation.
JT That is where John becomes the backbone of the Scriptures. He establishes the divine side — the Person: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”, (John 1:1). So that Matthew gives the royal line, Luke the human line, and John formally states the eternal personality of Christ, that He is God.
LM Luke traces the Lord back to Adam, who was “son of God”. He seems to link that side with God.
JT Quite so. Christianity is not the outcome of human philosophy or learning. All the religions in the East are the product of man. But christianity is from God.
WH It is unique in that way; in it only is God truly known.
JT It will be well to have that clearly in mind in this inquiry, because in coming out of the world young [p. 420] people ought to see that they are of God. John proceeds to it immediately, “as many as received him, to them gave he the right to be children of God, to those that believe on his name; who have been born, not of blood, nor of flesh’s will, nor of man’s will, but of God”, (John 1:12). That is an immense thing to get hold of; it is stated of all who receive Christ.
RWG Their origin is of God. How little idea we have of that dignity.
JT You can get nothing simpler than John’s gospel, and nothing more profound. That he brings the saints on to the line of the divine generation at once is striking.
WH I suppose all that comes out in his gospel proceeds on that basis?
JT Yes. Then after the family is clearly set out in Exodus 6, we have the remarkable statement that Moses is to be God unto Pharaoh. “Jehovah said to Moses, See, I have made thee God to Pharaoh; and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet”. You see the advantage Moses had. He was sustained in that place, God having in mind that He should be represented here.
WH Do you carry that thought on in connection with the generation?
JT It applies directly and absolutely to Christ; He was God manifest in flesh. But it is a reminder to all who serve, in preaching or ministering, that God intends representation. In representatives of God there is moral power.
FI Does the bringing in of Aaron as a brother shew that the ministry, besides being representative of God, is set forth in the aspect of a brother.
JT Quite so; it says, “Aaron thy brother”. So that the mind of God comes out in a gracious, sympathetic manner. Nevertheless it is the mind of God, and stands in relation to one who is said to be God. Aaron,
it says, is to be “thy prophet”, the prophet of Moses — to support Moses in that place.
WH The authority was there all the same.
JT Even though it comes from the lips of a brother, it is the word of God — the prophetic word. For this you want authority — moral authority, not assumed or clerical. “If any one speak — as oracles of God”, (1 Peter 4:11). We are in a day of very great weakness, but it is well to have the right thing before us. Ministry involves representation of God, just as a commission from the king. A commissioned person is supposed to represent the king, and that should mark every minister.
Ques Does this passage suggest that authority can only be maintained according to God as it is carried out in a brotherly way?
JT What is seen in Moses and Aaron was perfectly blended in Christ. You have in Matthew such statements as, “I say unto you”. It was the last word; it was manifestly of God. He spoke the words of God; He represented God. Luke presents the gracious side in which He spoke them — the gracious words that proceeded out of His mouth. Well, that made it all the more serious to neglect what He said. They hated Him without a cause; there was nothing in His manner to cause resentment.
Rem Paul says, “By the grace of God I am what I am”, (1 Corinthians 15:10). He was so formed by the grace of God that what he said was in keeping with what he was.
JT It is said in Acts 14:1 that they (Paul and Barnabas) “so spake”, Paul was ‘the chief speaker’. It was not a matter of mere oratory, but of grace, and a great multitude believed. So the lame man in that chapter “heard Paul speaking” (verse 9); that is the first thing mentioned. That affected him. It was not only a question of words, but the kind of speaking — how they were spoken.
RW Would you say that would bring reproach on [p. 422] the minister? I was thinking of the scripture, “The reproaches of them that reproach thee have fallen upon me”, (Psalm 69:9). What marks you in representing God here?
JT You have taken on of His character; you combine grace and truth in your words. You see in Luke 4 how those present appreciated the grace — they marvelled at the words of grace; but when the Lord said, “I tell you of a truth” (verse 25), and spoke about Naaman the Syrian being the only leper that was cleansed, and the woman of Sarepta being the only widow to whom the prophet came, then the opposition came. It is the truth that arouses opposition, but it is imperative to disarm people of prejudice by a gracious manner.
JW The Lord Jesus was full of grace and truth.
Rem And in the same way we are exhorted to speak the truth in love.
GFG Why do you think that at this point in Exodus ages are mentioned?
JT I think to shew that God intends maturity in the servant. In those days of course eighty years did not mean the same as eighty years now. You could hardly expect God to take up men of eighty now in ministry; longevity was greater then, but the ages mentioned certainly shew that God intended maturity in the ministers. As 1 Timothy 3:6 says, “not a novice”. Of course God does take up young men. The Lord was young, and the apostles; so also all the great servants, but maturity is the point. The levitical age was thirty years, which means full manhood. It is very remarkable that the ages are given here. In verse 7 we have Moses as eighty years old, and Aaron eighty-three. Being brothers, this disparity of age, Moses being the leader, would always be a cause of exercise. God placed them thus at the outset.
WH It would shew His sovereignty.
JT Yes; the sovereignty of God always tests the [p. 423] flesh in us. Why should my brother be before me, being younger than I? This circumstance would help Aaron, as he took it from God.
Ques Is that why in Exodus 6:26 it says, “This is that Aaron and Moses”, and then in verse 27, “This is that Moses and Aaron”?
JT I think that in the first case God intended to emphasise the priestly side, which is largely the point of the book. But the second instance is to emphasise the authority of Moses. They must be rightly balanced.
WH The moral qualities were in the vessel, that were in keeping with it.
RKC Would what we have been speaking of be exemplified in Elihu? He says, “I am young, and ye are aged; wherefore I was timid, and feared to shew you what I know. I said, Let days speak, and multitude of years teach wisdom”, (Job 32:6,7).
JT Yes; Elihu listened until they had finished speaking. He said, “Let years (days) speak”. But years had spoken and spoken foolishly. God allows plenty of latitude; but if our words are not words of grace and truth, He must pass us by. If we do not represent Him, He will take up somebody else.
RKC You want to speak on God’s behalf.
JT Elihu further says, “I am full of matter”, (verse 18). He had something from God. All he says commends itself; he represents God. He is so in accord with the mind of God that God takes up the thread of his remarks and follows them through till the work is done in Job. You would like to leave off where God can take up the work — that He can go on where you have left off. That is the principle of ministry. People say, This one has one line and that one another line — which is true in a sense, but the lines should not clash. They should all support the one end — the truth of God. Thus “the unity of the faith” (Ephesians 4:13) is maintained.
FI How do you view what Jehovah says, “I will bring forth my hosts, my people” in connection with what you have been pointing out — the congregation and the assembly?
JT You are referring to chapter 7:4. It says, “I will lay my hand upon Egypt, and bring forth my hosts, my people, the children of Israel, out of the land of Egypt by great judgments”. It shews the dignity they had in the mind of God — “My hosts”. They were not to come out of Egypt as a mob; they were to go out in an orderly, military fashion as the hosts of Jehovah. That is a very fine thought. “Israel went out with a high hand in the sight of all the Egyptians”, (Numbers 33:3). They went out ‘harnessed’, it says — meaning in military array — six hundred thousand men (Exodus. 13:18).
JC Would the expression, “my people”, bring in covenant relations?
JT You have three relations here; “my hosts” is the military relation to God, then “my people” would be the covenant relation, and the “children of Israel” would refer to family or spiritual relation. That is how God takes account of us. Young people ought to see that God is not calling us out as a poor weak company; the idea is that we are called out in dignity. In verse 14 Jehovah says to Moses, “Pharaoh’s heart is hardened”. We have to note here that if the enemy is hardened by the judgments of God, His thought is that our hearts should be softened, leading up to the passover lamb; its presence in the house should make those in it tenderhearted. Then Jehovah goes on to say, “Go unto Pharaoh in the morning ... and take thy stand by the bank of the river in front of him”. You see how God places His testimony; it is not in a cringing, fearful way that we are to approach people with the gospel, but in boldness. Then, too, it is “in the morning”, as if there were some long exercises ahead. God says, “Take thy stand ... in front of him”.
Rem The apostle had that spirit when he said he was “not ashamed of the gospel”, (Romans 1:16). He was set up in the power and dignity of it.
JT So too, “God has not given us a spirit of cowardice, but of power, and of love, and of wise discretion”, (2 Timothy 1:7). Think of Moses standing up in front of this great monarch! What is Pharaoh going to do about it?
EBG I was wondering what was in your mind in relation to the softening. You said that as Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, ours should be softened.
JT Yes; it was intended that the heart of the people should be softened. In chapter 8 the land of Goshen is marked off; God is definitely acting on their behalf, saving them from the plagues. This should touch them. Then life appeared in that chapter. Regarded antitypically this would be in the people. God does not advertise Pharaoh about it at all. He usually advertises Pharaoh; that is a matter of grace. But this is something He is carrying on in relation to His own counsels. “Aaron stretched out his hand with his staff, and smote the dust of the earth, and there arose gnats on man and on beast”, (Exodus 8:17). They were small things, but most penetrating and effective. It is God’s testimony in life; that would be what the antitype means, in His people. It is “the finger of God”. The magicians could do nothing here. It is after life is introduced that we have this separation that God puts upon the people, (verse 23). It should be helpful to those amongst us who preach the gospel (and God would lay it upon us to preach it) that Moses was to stand in front of Pharaoh.
EBG So that there would be a consciousness of the dignity of the position; there would be great superiority over everything else, and really over oneself.
JT Yes; one is overcoming oneself. God had graciously brought Moses to it, although at first he was very weak-hearted (chapter 4:10 - 14).
[p. 426] Rem It sometimes takes a great deal of courage to speak to one individual.
JT Yes; here it is a great monarch. It comes home to you, that “the surpassingness of the power may be of God, and not from us”, (2 Corinthians 4:7). God had made Moses God to Pharaoh, and supported him in it. We can ever reckon on this support.
EBG Would this dignity be seen very fully when Paul stood before Agrippa and was given the opportunity of speaking? he was there in moral dignity, and really dominated the situation. I suppose Moses was the same here.
JT Paul so beautifully followed after the Lord. The Lord had stood before Pilate; He was superior. Pilate could make nothing of Him; there was a power there that he could not cope with — God was there: “Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above”. In the presence of Herod He never said a word. What Herod must have felt! The Lord would make him feel his despicableness. But He did speak to Pilate, regarding him as representing ‘the powers that be’.
EBG Is the thought that no one should preach without having the sense in their souls that God is with them, that they are to represent God, and that they can count on His support?
JT That is the idea — “How shall they preach unless they have been sent?” (Romans 10:15) Paul was able and free in his spirit before Agrippa and Festus. He says, “I am not mad, most excellent Festus, but utter words of truth and soberness”, (Acts 26:25). What moral dignity there was in that!
EBG Would the consciousness of that dignity be a great asset in relation to the proclamation?
JT It is good to have it before us, especially in open-air work. “Go, stand ... in front of him”. You feel you have got something greater than he [p. 427] has got.
RMcB How can our young brothers be brought to this?
JT Well, they begin with the next one to them. You begin by speaking to men individually. Really the first thing is confessing Christ. Indeed the first reference here is to warfare: “My hosts”. One begins in the army according to Numbers. You begin as a military man and become a Levite. The military man was to begin at the age of twenty, and the Levite at thirty; the military man develops into a Levite. The Levite’s service is bringing the truth home to people as gifted.
Ques I suppose the moment you confess the Lord, you are in the battle?
JT That is the idea.
SL Do we take advantage of the opportunities arising every day in our pathway?
JT We shall soon get on the platform if we do that. There will be power with us, and we shall know how to speak a word in season. We learn in that way how divine support comes. You get habituated to divine support, and that increases. You stand at the desk with more confidence.
HB It is a great thing to get habituated to divine support.
WH “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that announceth glad tidings”, (Isaiah 52:7).
JC Will you say a word as to the staff which Moses takes in his hands, and which is turned into a serpent.
JT It refers, I think to Moses’ experiences. The staff was turned into a serpent in his own experience. It is what he learned really as to the power of evil, and how God changes it into good. It became a serpent as he let it go on the ground; then he takes it by the tail and it becomes again a staff in his hand. That is to say, man, as let go by God, becomes entirely subject to satanic power. But as taken back again by God, that is, as in Christ, he is an instrument in His hand. That is an [p. 428] experience we are to have. Thus we are in God’s hand for service. It induces dependence, so that we are not independent. If I wrench myself away from the divine control I may preach the terms of the gospel, but there is no power, and I may come under the influence of Satan.
Ques In 2 Timothy 4:1,5 it speaks of preaching the word, and also of doing “the work of an evangelist”. I suppose the latter is not necessarily preaching?
JT It goes further than preaching the word.
WP In sending out the twelve the Lord, according to Mark’s account, told them to take a staff and sandals. The other evangelists leave that out.
JT I suppose it would refer to experience — dependence reached by experience; you lean on the staff. It was the symbol of Moses’ authority and power.
Ques Is that why the apostle says, “Who is sufficient for these things?” (2 Corinthians 2:16). Then almost immediately after he says, “Our sufficiency is of God”, (chapter 3:5).
JT That is it. Could there be anything greater than that one should be representative of God?
Rem There could be no greater honour in this world.
JT No. Paul says, “We are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God”, (2 Corinthians 5:20). What pleasure Paul afforded God in that service!
JW What a wonderful thing it is that divine support should be available to any of us!
JT Yes. “Having ... met with the help which is from God” — it is that kind of help, (Acts 26:22).
RMcB That is not burying the Egyptian in the sand!
JT No; there is nothing of that kind now; that is all left with God. I think this position is very fine; the [p. 429] Lord will take notice of it. Young brothers aspiring to preach can go out and stand before men with the sense of representing God.
JC And one is dependent on God for his message; Moses is told what he is to say.
JT Yes; it says at the end of verse 15, “Take in thy hand the staff that was turned into a serpent. And say unto him, Jehovah the God of the Hebrews has sent me to thee”. There is no effort to disguise the reproach attaching to the service. He is “the God of the Hebrews”. God is not ashamed of His people, so that I do not need to be ashamed of them. Moses says, He “has sent me to thee, saying, Let my people go, that they may serve me in the wilderness”. Now there is another thing; why should it be in the wilderness? Pharaoh would take notice of that. Why in the wilderness? It is to shut out Babylonish things. You cannot build a cathedral in the wilderness; you could not get the material for religious show out there. Pharaoh said, “The wilderness has hemmed them in”. He thought the people of God were dependent on worldly means, as he was. What are you going to do about an organ, and about the money to pay your ministers? All that belongs to the world, not to the wilderness. The wilderness affords nothing, but God says, That is where My service is to be carried on. Provision for this comes from heaven; “On the mount of Jehovah will be provided” (Genesis 22:14); this was in the wilderness. The pattern is of the heavenly things. It was up on the mount that Moses got all the materials; that is the idea. The wilderness is to shew that God is wholly independent of this world and its means. Missionary societies proceed on human lines — taking from the world; they have no idea of the wilderness — that the world affords nothing for the work and service of God. God has enough, but the worldling knows nothing about that.
EH Would the wilderness also imply separation?
[p. 430] JT It does; but the idea of it is that it is a barren place; Israel were dependent on God for everything there.
EBG Is that the thought of, ‘Heavenly springs shall there restore thee’?
JT Quite; hymn 76 is the unfolding of it: ‘In the desert God will teach thee What the God that thou hast found’.
Rem I suppose that for any one who takes part in the gospel it is well to have the consciousness in one’s self that the gospel is not merely to deliver souls from the consequences of their sins, but to bring them out of the world entirely into wilderness conditions.
JT And there you are living to God and drawing on Him; and there is newness of life. Even in Egypt He brings in this principle of life (chapter 8). The plague involving life is introduced abruptly — without being announced to Pharaoh. But in chapter 7 the plagues are announced. Moses says, “Thus saith Jehovah: In this shalt thou know that I am Jehovah — behold, I will smite with the staff that is in my hand upon the water which is in the river, and it shall be turned into blood. And the fish that is in the river shall die; and the river shall stink; and the Egyptians shall loathe to drink the water out of the river”, (Exodus 7:17,18). Verse 19 says, “And Jehovah said to Moses, Say unto Aaron, Take thy staff, and stretch out thy hand upon the waters of the Egyptians — upon their streams, upon their rivers, and upon their ponds, and upon all their reservoirs of water, that they may become blood; and there shall be blood throughout the land of Egypt, both in vessels of wood and in vessels of stone. And Moses and Aaron did so, as Jehovah had commanded”. Now all that is most sweeping, as aiming at all the resources of refreshment — that on which the world depends, on which it is kept going. It is not only ‘the river’, the Nile itself, but ‘all the waters’; today it would be all the resources of [p. 431] learning, enlightenment and entertainment. All these things are affected by death. As applied to our own time, it is the principle of apostasy allowed judicially. It is a terrible thing. There is no water at all to drink; no springs from God. Men do not realise this, but it is already effective, although not yet as it will be later (Revelation 16). All the resources of learning, refreshment and enlightenment that the world relies on are being affected.
GFG What different vessels (verse 19), these would be from the vessels God was using!
JT Yes. Vessels of wood would be more temporary things, and stone what men regard as permanent institutions; no doubt those that are regarded as permanent being ancient.
JC Would Revelation 16 be a direct reference to that, as to what will come in?
JT It is the same thing there, only at the present time there is a certain element of grace. Revelation contemplates penal judgments. The plagues of Egypt are a picture of how God is acting against the world today, in order to take His people out of it; but what is in view is the ultimate destruction of it, and that we get in Revelation. But there is an element of grace in all these judgments. They are ‘plagues’ to the Egyptians, but ‘signs’ to the people of God. They should form us, as we have said.
WH God was waiting in wondrous grace.
JT Quite so; God advertises Pharaoh; that is grace. There should always be an element of grace in announcing judgment, but the book of Revelation is final; it is not to get the people of God out of the world there, but to wipe this world out altogether, so as to make room for the display of God’s world.
Ques You said the judgment in Revelation is final. Is that why heaven is in accord when the judgments are poured out?
JT That is right; heaven is exultant over the overthrow of Babylon, that God’s kingdom has begun, and that the marriage of the Lamb has come (chapter 19).
RWG You made a remark about these ‘gnats’, that they represent what is according to God’s purpose.
JT I think so, they represent life. As you will observe, there is no advertisement of the thing. In chapter 8:16 Jehovah says to Moses, “Say unto Aaron, Stretch out thy staff, and smite the dust of the earth, and it shall become gnats throughout the land of Egypt. And they did so”. It is a marvellous testimony to the power of God, that dust itself should become living. What else are we? we are dust and ashes. Later on we have the ashes, but here it is simply dust. “Dust thou art”, (Genesis 3:19). Abraham says, “dust and ashes”, (Genesis 18:27), but this is what we are as made of clay. It becomes life; in the most penetrating form it is felt by man and beast. It is the power of life; it is John’s gospel, we may say.
RWG “That believing ye might have life in his name”, (John 20:31).
Ques Do you mean that up to this point God had been letting Pharaoh know what was coming in?
JT Yes; but then He works silently and effects life, and men soon realise that there are these creatures; they are small but felt. Life is an irrefutable testimony to the power of God.
Rem And Pharaoh does not ask for their removal.
JT It is unique among the plagues, both in its introduction and effect, also that it is not said to terminate. The magicians speak with feeling; they say, “This is the finger of God!” — God was working. Then in the next paragraph you have distinction put upon the people of God; they are distinguished now. Spiritually we can understand all this. The people of God are distinguished, as made to live.
Ques Would that mean that up to a point the people of God are involved in measure in all the ruin in the world? The ‘separation’ was not put on the people earlier.
JT Life makes the difference. In the end of verse 17 it says, “all the dust of the land became gnats”, which would mean, spiritually, all those that accept the judgment of God. Men in the flesh would never say that they are dust, but the believer accepts it.
JW But people say it at their funeral services.
JT Yes; they may say it, but they seldom mean it. It is just the formal recital of a burial service. But God said to Adam, “Dust thou art”, (Genesis 3:19).
WMcC “An hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they that have heard shall live”, (John 5:25).
JT That is what is going on now. The believer is made to live by the voice of the Son of God.
GFG Do we get special support on that line? “He knoweth our frame; he remembereth that we are dust”, (Psalm 103:14).
JT Yes; it is a very humbling thing; however good or beautiful I may think I am, I am only dust. But in accepting that, believing on Christ, I am made to live. “As we have borne the image of the one made of dust, we shall bear also the image of the heavenly one”, (1 Corinthians 15:49). That is not dust.
RMcB What do ‘the magicians’ refer to?
JT They are spoken of in 2 Timothy — “Jannes and Jambres”. Doubtless they had names — like the midwives. They “withstood Moses”, but their principle was imitation. But here they give this up. They say, “This is the finger of God”. So, as Paul says, they were exposed, “their folly shall be completely manifest to all”, (2 Timothy 3:8,9).
JC Why should Aaron stretch out his staff?
JT I suppose it was to shew that in these plagues God was not acting without sympathy or feeling. All was tempered with grace and consideration, even for Pharaoh.