GENERATIONS IN THE BOOK OF GENESIS (2)
[p. 390] GENERATIONS IN THE BOOK OF GENESIS (2)
JT The generations mentioned in the book of Genesis have been mentioned, the word translated “generation” having reference to origin, and what develops from the root or basic thought. We read part of chapter 2 this morning and dwelt upon the generation — or history — of the heavens and the earth, to see how that chapter is the counterpart of chapter 1, indicating the idea of fulness, an idea that runs through Scripture. We dwelt at length on the idea of intelligence in Man being able to name the lower order of creatures, and then being able to name Eve, or the woman, which led us into a wide field inclusive of the epistle to the Ephesians, where intelligence is stressed, especially in him to whom the mystery of the assembly was committed, and who calls attention to himself as possessed of this great intelligence. Much was said, too, as to naming evil things, which leads us into chapters 3 and 4.
What may be said at the outset about this chapter is that it is “the book of Adam’s generations”, which is a more complete thought than we have in chapter 2, and enters definitely upon moral grounds rather than creatorial. On the moral line we have the thought of separation, and also of life, as over against chapter 4, which gives us a family also, but which is judged for moral reasons from the outset. Cain and his line as representative of the world are judged from the source, whereas chapter 5 stresses that Adam is retained as created, so that we have the line of life, the family of God in principle, which while taken up on moral grounds, is yet attached to the creatorial source: it is of God, as we get in the New Testament. The apostle says, “Of him are ye in Christ Jesus” (1 Corinthians 1: 30), that is, of God,
[p. 391] whereas the world is detached from God; they did not like to retain Him in their knowledge.
What will help us to begin with is the similarity of names on both lines, which tends to confusion and calls for discrimination — whether we meet an Enoch in the world, or an Enoch in the life line. Obviously the name, although the same literally, has a different bearing in each chapter. The same idea, that is, discipline or education, may be attached to Enoch in chapter 4 as in chapter 5, but it is a question of the stamp of the world in chapter 4, whereas in chapter 5 it is of God.
PL Is this moral line seen in the genealogy of Jesus in Luke’s gospel — “of Adam, of God”?
JT That line is through Seth to Adam. So that in christianity the line is maintained in relation to God, not simply God as revealed as Father, but God seen creatorially as in Genesis 1 — “For of him, and through him, and for him are all things” (Romans 11: 36).
Ques The writer in Hebrews 11 selects certain who were men of faith — is that a principle on which we move?
JT In that chapter we begin with God creatorially, so that faith links us with God, God in a creatorial sense — the Creator. It is a question of His word, so that the christian is set up in intelligence as to everything, and all is traced back to God. We are maintained in relation to God, who also is an absolute Being, and this is never to be lost sight of. The moral side begins in chapter 3, and properly links on with the first history, whereas in chapter 5 we begin another, and it is a book, so we are on more definite and firmer ground.
CAC I suppose the line in chapter 5 would be prominent at all periods of the divine working, and its moral characteristics would go through. I understood by your suggestion this morning that things have [p. 392] the divine origin, but they move on by development to a completed issue. Is it your thought that that marks these generations as a whole?
JT That helps. In chapter 5 we have a book. No doubt you have that in mind, that things are on record, as it were, and preserved. The principle of a book runs through Scripture, and I believe the continuance to a full issue, involving a book, lies in the thought of life, that is, life as it is found in chapter 3. We have life in the earlier chapters, but more in the creatorial sense. Life in chapter 3 would convey the moral thought, what is living in a moral sense where death prevails, so that it is the great principle running through, and we reach fulness in finality in the book of life.
GVS Enoch is spoken of as the “seventh from Adam”, but in chapter 4 there is one who comes in quickly bearing the same name. Would Satan bring in what imitates God’s work, but does the “seventh from Adam” suggest patient waiting for what is to be pleasing to God? In the scripture we read this morning there was no man found to till the ground. On the line of fulness are we to wait for that which will please God?
JT Yes, and the seventh alludes to a development through exercise. It is the seventh from Adam through Seth. The idea is in Adam, but Adam on moral grounds now, although on creatorial grounds too. That is maintained, but it is an Adam who has gone through things with God and reached the idea of life, because he calls his wife’s name Eve, meaning, not simply that she was living, but “the mother of all living”, the family idea of something continuing. So that we have in Adam the line maintained on moral grounds, but through life as in chapter 3, not as in chapters 1 and 2; the former in its amplification involves christianity. The Enoch of chapter 4 would be like the education of the world, as among the Greeks [p. 393] and early races of mankind, the Egyptians, which had its beginning in Babel; the idea of a development in independency of God, but it is in a family. Cain began with that idea; it is a family he has in mind. The race is seen detached from its source, and under a rival influence, setting itself up with all its ability in learning and arts and sciences, and so forth. The Enoch who is the first-born of that family would mean a person educated or schooled in relation to this world. We know what schooling means in this world, without it the world would not be what it is.
FSM Would the thought of the life line result finally in the Lamb’s book of life, and the issue of this development be found in the holy city?
JT That is right. Life is the essential thing and runs through and culminates in an issue according to God. Life as seen here involves preservation, presupposing corruption, so that we have death in each case in chapter 5 except Enoch. Notwithstanding the longevity of the persons mentioned, death comes in, and in spite of this, the mind of God is reached — in spite of death.
LES “I shall not die, but live, and declare the works of Jah. Jah hath chastened me sore; but he hath not given me over unto death” (Psalm 118: 17, 18).
HFN We have only two references in Scripture to “the book of the generations”, one in connection with Adam, and the other in the beginning of Matthew: “Book of the generation of Jesus Christ”. Is there a link between the two?
JT I think there is. Matthew 1 corresponds with what we are speaking of as to the issue of the word “generation”. However, it is on the royal line. Luke, taking the reverse way, reaches the source, but Matthew follows the matter down to a conclusion, that is, to One who will take up everything and carry it through — being a divine Person. Matthew has in mind finality in Christ, and the assembly is the complement of that;
[p. 394] not that the thought of complement is opened up in Matthew, but it is in Paul’s ministry. So the assembly really is the great terminus of what we are speaking of; Matthew bringing in the One who accomplishes everything.
Ques In Ephesians 4: 18 the apostle speaks of some who were “estranged from the life of God by reason of the ignorance which is in them”. Would you say that the moral characteristics of the life of God are developed in this chapter?
JT It is really God’s family without naming it as such. When we come to the New Testament we have two families, or lines, that is, the two seeds, as in 1 John 3, which contemplates the children of God and the children of the devil. Now, the children of God take on the characteristics of God here, and I apprehend the “life of God” in Ephesians is not His intrinsic or essential life, but what He is in a moral way, what He is as set out in Christ, so as to come within our range; and there are those who are alienated from it. Cain’s line was alienated from it, consciously without it, and so he set himself up and his family: “he called the name of the city after the name of his son Enoch”. The world is marked by that, and this explains the destruction of the firstborn in Egypt.
Ques Was the life of God set forth in perfection in Jesus, in those moral qualities that came out in perfection in His life here?
JT There would be what has come in in Christ. The things are here, and so the moral element enters into it, and it begins with these chapters. There is the line of the wicked one; the Lord said, “Ye are of the devil, as your father” (John 8: 44). John’s ministry goes to the root of things, even as to the serpent as we have seen. On the other side he would work out the great principle of life.
EuR Is the thought of likeness carried on here? It is referred to in connection with the creation of man, and here it says, “Adam ... begot a son in his likeness,
[p. 395] after his image, and called his name Seth”. Is that the moral line?
JT That is right. It is Adam set up in a moral sense that is in mind, so that we are on moral ground here, and life is developed on that ground, as I apprehend it. Seth is Adam’s image and likeness, and then Adam’s naming of his son accredits him with being on the same line. Eve had said of Cain that she had “acquired a man with Jehovah”, and no doubt she thought she had acquired the seed, but she missed the mark. She thought life was there, but it was not; whereas Seth says that Enoch is a dying man; death was upon him. It is the acceptance of that that shows he is formed morally, he accepts what has come in and is affected by it.
Ques Why is there no mention of death in connection with Cain’s line?
JT That is significant; it is not that it was not there, but God is not stressing that thought in relation to the world now. He is stressing death in relation to His people; the ministry is marked by pressing death upon us. So when God called out His people from the world into the wilderness, He set them around the tabernacle which was marked by death, for it was there constantly. It is the teaching of death that we are to learn from chapter 5. So that Seth began the thought, he recognised what his son was. Enoch was the seventh from Adam and that thought would enter into his constitution, so that he is translated, whilst fully accepting death. It is as fully accepting death that we enter into the sense of pleasing God.
PL Enoch can name things — the “holy myriads;” what is of God, and then the ungodly and their ungodliness. Does that answer to what you referred to?
JT It is as the seventh from Adam that he speaks thus, a person who has gone through things is speaking prophetically now. It is the teaching of death in chapter 5, but ignoring death in the world in chapter 4. The former is just God’s way. Death is there, and the [p. 396] point is that the saints should get an understanding of what it means. In the line of Shem later we do not have the thought of death; we have the years given, the longevity of the persons, but not that they die. In this chapter it is to stress the idea of the teaching of death, which thought is taken up in Romans, Colossians, and Ephesians.
HMS Mr. Darby remarked that ‘Death is the principle of christianity, but its power is resurrection’.
JT It is in the light of resurrection that we take it in. David said that the sword of Goliath was the best obtainable, and it alludes to death.
HFN Is any ministry of spiritual or permanent value in the house of God unless it leads us to face the great question of death?
JT That is good. Life is in view, but life out of death, and in going through it we have the sense of victory.
AMH It says, “It is better to go to the house of mourning than to go to the house of feasting: in that that is the end of all men, and the living taketh it to heart” (Ecclesiastes 7: 2).
PHH Are you saying in principle that it is life out of death? Would you say a little more what you mean as to the teaching of death in this chapter?
,J.T. Enoch is the “seventh from Adam”, and he represented what is in mind. He is one that does not enter into death literally, but obviously he entered into it in his spirit. That is, his name would signify he has learnt. Those who do not learn the lesson of death, do not learn from God at all, and so I think he represents the thought. We have life out of death in chapter 2; that is, the woman is out of death, but it is not a question of sin there, whereas in this chapter death is imposed as the penalty of sin, and no one is taught of God who does not accept it.
WSS Is the principle suggested in Genesis 3: 19, “For dust thou art; and unto dust shalt thou return”?
Then in verse 21 it says, “And Jehovah Elohim made Adam and his wife coats of skin, and clothed them”, as if He would clothe that idea.
JT That is the principle — man set up in the light of that; it is life in that sense. Adam arrived at it, but not by what he saw in the living creatures which he had named, although they were all living, nor by what he saw in himself. It is life lived on the principle of teaching or observation, hence the longevity of all these persons, and in each case some quality of God shines out. The life of God is seen, I believe, in the aggregate of these names rightly understood. It is morally the life of God, what Jesus was fully here, and that is what men are estranged from.
Ques Does Paul touch it in that way in 2 Corinthians 1: 9, where he says, “But we ourselves had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not have our trust in ourselves, but in God who raises the dead”?
JT I doubt if he could have met the situation at Corinth effectually without that. Not that I would undertake to judge the great servant, but it is the way things are put, showing the progress of the servant, what he goes through to meet the exigencies of the service.
PL “So that death works in us, but life in you” (2 Corinthians 4: 12).
JT Exactly. We see how far-reaching the thought is as we anticipate death in ourselves, but it is the sentence of death: “we ourselves had the sentence of death in ourselves”.
MWB Is the moral line of the work of God seen in 2 Corinthians 5: 5, where it says, “Now he that has wrought us for this very thing is God”?
JT That is right. I believe these names, one after another, have to do with the characteristics of the life of God, that is, seen in persons who are themselves dying — but not all. The fact that one of them does not die [p. 398] establishes the principle that life is out of death. Life is entered into through teaching, because Enoch represents the teaching as over against the world’s teaching which abhors death; it puts death as far away as it can.
Ques Is that what Agag meant, in saying, “Surely the bitterness of death is past” (1 Samuel 15: 32)? Samuel brought the matter home to him in using the sword.
JT Quite so; he hewed him in pieces with the sword.
CAC It is very cheering to see God conserving what is of Himself and showing that it is ultimately superior to all the power of death.
JT So that what is of Himself — the life of God — is seen in these names, that is, these characteristics taken on by persons who are learning. Seth is the exemplar; he is learning in the school of God, and he calls his son by a name that signifies he is a weak, mortal, person, and that calls forth the name of Jehovah: “Then people began to call on the name of Jehovah”. God is now coming into the scene among men, in testimony, by way of what man has learnt, and so it goes on to the seventh, when you get the complete thought, and he in whom it is expressed is raptured. It is all secured above, but before Enoch goes up he tells us about the holy myriads.
AJG Then why does the line go on beyond Enoch as far as Noah?
JT I think it is to show the result in a man who can do things in meeting conditions here below; there is no other to stem the tide of evil. With these earlier ones it is a question of learning things, but in Noah we have a man that can do things so that he was called Noah: “And he called his name Noah”. It seems as if the Spirit of God rests on that. He rests on Seth too: Adam “called his name Seth”. Eve called his name Seth in chapter 4, but it is Adam in this chapter. Attention is thus called to these, and I think Noah’s [p. 399] name, meaning rest, is an end reached here below. God has reached one in whom He can rest.
PL But the moral line and process is still preserved with him, and so the word, “the days of Noah” (Genesis 9: 29).
JT Quite so; we shall come to that later, please God, and how Noah is regarded in the New Testament. But I hope we are getting the thought of learning, of being established in the great instruction that there is in death, and how God is using it now.
Rem In Mark 9: 31, 32, the Lord taught His disciples saying, “The Son of man is delivered into men’s hands, and they shall kill him; and having been killed, after three days he shall rise again. But they understood not the saying, and feared to ask him”.
JT That is right, and it comes into John 6, the great chapter that presents Christ as food, as dead. He is food as having come down and laid down His life, and it is there that it says, “they shall be all taught of God” (verse 45).
WSS Referring to the end of chapter 4, where it says, “Then people began to call on the name of Jehovah;” it seems to suggest that what is said at the opening of this chapter — “This is the book of Adam’s generations” — was only possible in the light of that.
JT Quite so; it is on moral ground, and the names would indicate that it is progressive and culminates in this heavenly result in Enoch, and then in the result for service, for doing things, in Noah.
EuR Would the water and the blood in the last chapter of the first epistle of John be the teaching side of the death of Christ? Then the witness of the Spirit; “the victory over the world, our faith;” the world lying in the wicked one, and “we are of God” — would all that imply the two generations side by side?
JT Yes. Death is implied in those two elements, water and blood; that is, the Lord came in connection [p. 400] with them. Death is subdivided in that sense so as to make it more a means of teaching us. The Spirit is the witness; the Spirit testifies in a teaching way, not merely in statements, but in a teaching way to all these truths. Romans is, of course, the great fundamental book in which we get the teaching of the death of Christ, and then we have it applied in a deeper way in Colossians and Ephesians.
ROS The years of the lives of those mentioned in this chapter seem always to be counted after they had begotten the firstborn son. The firstborn son is “the firstfruits of my vigour”, Jacob said of Reuben. Does life count from the time one has brought the firstfruits before God?
JT I do not think much is made of the firstborn, save to mark the time, in chapter 5. None of these men makes anything of his firstborn as building up a system. It is a question of marking the time and the experience gone through, life being there; whereas with Cain it is a family matter, making everything of the firstborn and family and building it up with the arts and sciences.
HFN Would you help us in regard of the teaching of death in the three epistles, Romans, Colossians, and Ephesians? On a previous occasion we were considering the actual article of death. The Lord seems now to be calling our attention to the teaching of it. Would you help us as to how the teaching is developed?
JT It opens up in Romans to us. The teaching of it is based on baptism there, that is, our acceptance of death. It reigned, we are told, “from Adam until Moses” (Romans 5: 14). It is not the condensation of the thought, but the extendedness of it, as corresponding with the idea of a sea, and baptism is the figure by which we accept it, and in the acceptance of it we “walk in newness of life”. We are not said to be risen there, but in spite of wilderness conditions we are able to “walk in newness of life”. The acceptance of the teaching of Marah enters into this. “Newness of life” is in connection with the shining out of the Father — “the glory of the Father” — a very beautiful thought. “Christ has been raised up from among the dead by the glory of the Father” (Romans 6: 4), not simply by the power of God, but “by the glory of the Father”. The thought of the Father is introduced here in Romans to affect us, that is, God in that relation. So that “sin shall not have dominion over you, for ye are not under law but under grace” (Romans 6: 14), and God in the relation of Father is the very expression of grace. You “walk in newness of life” in that light, and, of course, following on that, the Spirit is life (Romans 8: 10), that is, life in the sense of power. Then, in Colossians 2: 12, we are raised “through faith of the working of God”. It is not the Father now, but a question of power. When we come to the Jordan it is a question of power, but it is the ark. Our being raised in Colossians is a matter of faith, not actuality; it is faith in the power of God that raised Christ. Then, in Ephesians 2: 1, it is “being dead in your offences and sins”. It is what we were, and God taking us out of it sovereignly and setting us down in heaven. In each case we have the thought of death.
PL In connection with this thought of the Father in Romans 8, would you say that those who can address the Father so intimately are those who in the end of the chapter can say, “For thy sake we are put to death all the day long”? (verse 36).
JT It is the Father in chapter 6 where Christ is raised; but in chapter 8 we apprehend God as our Father by the Spirit of sonship. The first is a matter of grace in the main, the second a matter of family relationship.
GM The sentence of death having been pronounced on Adam, how is it that it is the first righteous man, Abel, that dies?
JT [p. 402] There is a man who knows how to die. It is a question of glorifying God in death, and normally that is how every christian dies — whether in baptism or in actual death. What a great thing it is! Death is a penalty, but now it is faced by a man who has faith, and he glorified God in it; he is the first martyr.
GM Was it the type of man that God loved?
JT Quite so, and that man must be continued. He is continued in Seth, the man “appointed” instead of Abel, whom Cain slew. So we have the thought carried on to chapter 5 — the moral side, death in the sense of teaching.
Ques Is there any connection between the death of Abel and that of Stephen, the first martyr of this dispensation, who in dying called upon God?
JT Was ever God more glorified in death, outside of the death of Jesus, than in the death of Stephen? What glory shines! What a striking victory over death is seen in that martyr, as he kneeled down and prayed for his enemies! It is God glorified in death by a believer. What a great thing it is here that God has turned death into a means of teaching, a means of glorifying Himself, and the building up of a family with such fibre as this, so that one goes up without dying, the thing evidently verified in him! This great lesson is to be learned, gone through by us all.
LM He “begot sons and daughters” — would that suggest fruitfulness?
JT Yes, the thought of the family, involving potential material for God.
Ques Is the fact that “Enoch walked with God” emphasised, not so much that God walked with him? There was the apprehension on his side, that he could enter into it.
JT You have there the suggestion of life; he apprehended by faith what God was going on with and had part in it, this being the outcome of education. Education is a great thing with men in all countries,
[p. 403] but God had the means of education, from Genesis 3 onwards, maintaining the creatorial link between Himself and Adam. It is carried on to the moral side, and the great means of education negatively is death, “so that death works in us, but life in you”.
PL The sentence of divine government upon men in judgment, now becomes in blessing for the generation of faith, the lesson book of divine love.
JT I believe it is the greatest element of education in a negative way. It is carried on, of course, in the light of the positive; it is in the light of Christ risen and glorified that we learn through it. So, in the tabernacle in the wilderness, we have the great central thought of God in the ark, but all around the tabernacle was everything to remind us of death. What was it for but the education of the people of God?
JJ In 2 Corinthians 4: 10 we have the expression “always bearing about in the body the dying of Jesus”. May that not be connected with Psalm 116: 15, “Precious in the sight of Jehovah is the death of his saints”? I thought the expression from the psalm would apply morally now.
JT Quite so, and to take in those who sleep through Jesus. There is the idea of their going through death; it is through Him — the idea of instrumentality — that they fall asleep. We are to learn the lesson of death, and life shines in these men, such as Seth, Enosh, Cainan, Mahalaleel, Jared, and Enoch. I believe their names would indicate that the life of God was shining out through death, and it culminated in one who walked with God for three hundred years. Obviously the lesson was being learnt by him. God would roll in death upon him, so that he learned and was translated; he reaches the divine thought.
EuR Would it result in a person boasting in God? I was thinking of what the apostle says, “So that let no one boast in men; for all things are yours. Whether [p. 404] Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things coming, all are yours; and ye are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s” (1 Corinthians 3: 21 - 23).
JT It would, showing what triumph there is, that, although we are as sheep appointed for slaughter, we are more than conquerors through Him that loves us. Life is working out there, but death is there, for that chapter contemplates that we are just lined up for death like sheep.
JHT You referred to the tabernacle and death all around — would that be seen in the education of the people in Numbers 16: 41? We have the development of Cain’s world in the rebellion of Korah and his company, and as they died the whole assembly murmured against Moses and Aaron, and said, “Ye have killed the people of Jehovah”. Then, in chapter 17, the life line is seen — life out of death — in Aaron’s rod that budded. Would that bring the people to this judgment that they had the sentence of death in themselves: “Lo, we expire, we perish, we all perish” (Numbers 17: 12)? Then Jehovah emphasises the life line in Numbers 18: 1, “Thou and thy sons and thy father’s house with thee shall bear the iniquity of the sanctuary”.
JT Of course, the death of Korah’s company was retributive, and the murmuring was in unbelief, but the principle was there of death and life, and what comes out is the grace in Moses and Aaron; how Aaron ran in to the congregation and stood between the dead and the living. He was not among the dead, but among the living, so it is according to that principle, of one having gone through the thing himself. For he and Moses went through the thing themselves; they felt what happened, and Aaron stood between the dead and the living. Then, in chapter 17, as you say, that principle is established for ever; it is established in the priesthood, and the [p. 405] covenant of life is there. So that is what is needed, in that sense, in all these sorrowful things that are coming up, for while God is preserving us in a general way, there are many sorrowful things coming up, what is needed is this principle of life as in Aaron and Aaron’s rod. It is in persons who are taught of God, who know the lesson learned through death applied by God, so that we go through the thing ourselves. Then, although we may not have a personal part or responsibility in it, we go through the thing and stand between the dead and the living.
PL “Every morning doth he bring his judgment to light” (Zephaniah 3: 5). Would that be like the living rod taken out in the morning, after being laid up overnight before God?
JT In that great crisis in Israel in the wilderness the next day is stressed: “Even to-morrow will Jehovah make known”. It was so as regards Korah and his company, and as to the rods. We go through the thing; life is in the morning.
JC-S Would you think Enoch sets forth a man who has accepted death in every detail in regard of Cain’s world? We are often hampered in relation to the development of life in ourselves because we have not accepted death in connection with some principle of that world.
JT I am sure that is right. We can see what a difference there was from his namesake in Cain’s world; and even with Lemech — we have also two Lemechs. There are forceful men in both worlds; men who do things, violent men, as the name is said to imply. How different would be the one in God’s world, from the one in man’s world!
MWB In regard to Lemech in chapter 4, is there any allusion in verse 23 to moral recovery, or is it a vindication of his own action to preserve himself?
JT I think the latter part of chapter 4 includes a reference to the Jews in the last days, that is, the [p. 406] world we have to do with today as developed in them later. The world in a moral sense, as spoken of in the New Testament, stood generally in relation to the Jews. “Now is the judgment of this world” (John 12: 31), but then, the whole history of the public world is going to culminate in the Jew. I think it is God graciously keeping an eye on Cain. We have, of course, to discriminate as to the early part of the chapter which is simply man’s world as estranged from God, but then, it is a type of the Jew, as you bring it down to narrow limits. God has His eye on him, and He will not allow anyone to touch him, and I suppose Lemech’s remark, “For I have slain a man for my wound, and a youth for my bruise”, would allude to a certain confession that the Jew will make in a day to come.
MWB Is there any moral consequence in verse 25 immediately following that? The birth of Seth is referred to.
JT “And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son, and called his name Seth” — then there is an ellipsis, according to this version, as if she said more than that. “... For God has appointed me another seed instead of Abel, because Cain has slain him”. It would look as if Eve is being brought into the current of the truth, into the instruction; she is not left out. Then, in order to make the position of Seth clear in the life line, in the volume of God, Adam names him in chapter 5. I think chapter 4 brings Eve into the line of instruction; she has judged Cain, and it is happy that God brings in both Adam and Eve, in that way, on the line of learning, so that the whole matter is set out again in chapter 5.
PHH It says of Eve that she bore a son, but of Adam that he begot him. Would you understand by that there is power, as it were, to sustain this life line of which you are speaking? Would Adam in [p. 407] some sense represent Christ as the last Adam in this chapter?
JT I think that is right. In the latter we get the progenitive thought, and so in Matthew; it is what is begotten, whereas in Luke it is “of;” the source is in mind. So, Eve bore Seth and named him; Adam begot him and named him. The paternal side is the more dignified thought.
EuR Is this calling on the name of Jehovah the great thought of the recovery of man? The soul can take account of what is basic and see all that God is developing for His own pleasure. So we have the name of the Lord in 2 Timothy 2, and parallel with that, the thought of “in Christ Jesus”.
JT In chapter 5 God takes up things afresh, and so we have the sphere of operations and the life line developed in it.
PL Does the great assembly revival coincide with this calling on the name of Jehovah? Has the Lord deigned, in a way, to start afresh?
JT Yes. It is on moral ground, not simply that God has ordered the thing. Seth “called his name Enosh. Then people began to call on the name of Jehovah”. That is the covenant name, as we might say; the personal link is established in their calling upon it, and that is the basis of chapter 5.
SJBC So if in Seth we have a new head, in men calling on the name of Jehovah we have a new generation.
JT It is the idea of the kingdom, and the life line is developed in that connection.
Ques What is in mind in Methushelah being brought into this order of things?
JT He has a counterpart in Methushael of Cain’s world. He is the oldest man and he runs on almost to the year of the flood, the year of judgment, but evidently saved out of it; as if he comes into the line of this chapter. His longevity, and the fact that [p. 408] he does not come under the judgment of the deluge, is a testimony to God’s patience — a great thought in our dispensation, even as to persons who have no special traits of life.
JJ Is there any connection between him and the passage in Ephesians 6: 2, 3, where it says, “Honour thy father and thy mother, which is the first commandment with a promise, that it may well with thee, and that thou mayest be long-lived on the earth”? I thought perhaps he had such a good Ephesian father that he came into the blessing of that.
JT He certainly had an Ephesian father, but the sons of Ephesian fathers do not always do credit to their fathers. However, it is a question of God’s longsuffering. He is considered for, in that he dies before the deluge; that is, he dies on the principle of the chapter, not by the direct judgment of God in the deluge, which was brought in on the world of the ungodly. It is death in a teaching sense that he came into. So this chapter is wonderful in what there is in it in the way of teaching, and the culmination of it in Enoch and Noah.
PL Would there be some analogy to the revival of these last days — 2 Timothy — calling upon the name of the Lord, and the separation of the holy seed of God, all culminating in the rapture, in Enoch?
JT The Lord would keep our eye on that — the culmination of all these things. What is the thing going to end with that God has been working at all these centuries? It is going to culminate in something for His pleasure on the life line; life in persons who have been taught through death.
MWB With regard to your remarks earlier about the basic thought, and then the development, and now the issue, would it be right to say that as we learn God in the development of His ways, we are morally tutored for the issue and have the features proper [p. 409] to it?
JT Yes, and Lemech coming in, according to what his name means (overthrower, or wild man), and then so deliberately naming Noah, would show the result in him too, that his character would give fulness to it. It would be that energy that lays hold of what is needed, which is a great thing, that if one cannot meet it oneself, another can.
AMH Do you think the features of Methushelah and Lemech are much required at the end of the dispensation? Methushelah would suggest a people in the consciousness that the end is near, but then the answer is a forceful presentation of the truth.
JT That is the idea. Lemech would point to a certain energy or violence for good, culminating in peace or rest, corresponding somewhat to the Lord’s statement, “the kingdom of the heavens is taken by violence, and the violent seize on it” (Matthew 11: 12). He is able to name Noah and is very forceful about it, showing that he is an instructed man; he is saying the thing deliberately.
Ques Have you a sample of that energy in Phinehas the priest, in the way he moves in the plains of Moab?
JT Exactly.
CAC Does this come in with Paul speaking of himself in 2 Timothy as an apostle “according to promise of life”?
JT Quite so. There is energy and substance in it. It is what we are saying. He was an apostle according to it, showing that he was a man of energy, using weapons — “the arms of our warfare are not fleshly” he says (2 Corinthians 10: 4). He used violence in regard of all that was opposed to the knowledge of God.
CAC The promise suggests divine resource that can be laid hold of in view of the testimony of life at the end.
JT Lemech’s mention of Noah shows what such a one passes on prophetically. It strikes one forcibly [p. 410] that he is a man who has learnt; he is very deliberate in what he is doing. It is not simply that he begat Noah, but he names him and gives a reason: “This one shall comfort us concerning our work and concerning the toil of our hands, because of the ground which Jehovah has cursed”. He is a deliberate, thoughtful, instructed man, and he names Noah, and so we have the basis of the next chapters. Noah is a man that does things, but the result of what he does is what Lemech has in mind. Lemech, according to the meaning of his name, was a violent man who would strike through a thing, but it is with a view to this end, to bring in rest and peace among the people of God. Then he has a sense of the judgment of God upon the world, and now there is a man who can go over. How much that is needed!
MWB His very age is suggestive — seven hundred and seventy-seven.