DEDICATION OF THE ALTAR AND OF THE WALL
[p. 85] DEDICATION OF THE ALTAR AND OF THE WALL
Numbers 7:10 - 17; Nehemiah 12:27 - 43
JT I was thinking of the dedication of the wall in Nehemiah, and the dedication of the altar in Numbers. It will be observed that these scriptures include the important thought of princes in relation to the great things in mind. The first scripture is a type of the inauguration of the dispensation, and the second is a remnant period, but the princely thought is quite prominent in both. It is said, “princes shalt thou make them in all the earth” (Psalm 45:16), and I thought it would be appropriate to be drawn into the current of this thought, and the main subject, namely the dedication of the altar and the dedication of the wall. Numbers 7 contemplates the heavenly system set up, as it is said, “And it came to pass on the day that Moses had completed the setting up of the tabernacle, and had anointed it, and hallowed it, and all the furniture thereof and the altar and all its utensils, and had anointed them, and hallowed them, that the princes of Israel, the heads of their fathers’ houses, the princes of the tribes, they that were over them that had been numbered, offered” (Numbers 7:1,2). Who they are is very plainly stated. They are active in relation to a heavenly system in the antitype; that is, among ourselves, and one thing to be noted is that each one had his day, according to verse 10: “And the princes presented the dedication-gift of the altar on the day that it was anointed; and the princes presented their offering before the altar”. And in verse 11 it says, “each prince on his day”. So that whilst there are twelve of them, and they act together, for there is one gift and one offering, we may say, yet each one is seen offering, [p. 86] seen acting.
ANW Would you suggest for us the difference between anointing and hallowing and dedicating?
JT The anointing, of course, we all know alludes to the use of the oil as in Exodus 40. All the parts were anointed with oil, the altar and its utensils; then the hallowing accompanies the anointing, I would think, as a mental thought. The whole scene was mentally accepted; I mean, it is so regarded by those who have to do with it, involving the idea of holiness and separation. You had something to add to that?
ANW “Father, thy name be hallowed” (Luke 11:2). It is held sacred in the mind. Then would the dedication be the feeling of the princes in regard to it?
JT Yes; it is devoted formally to certain purposes. The altar is devoted. That is the idea of dedication, use in the service of God. We might go into a building set up for religious purposes here on earth now, and think it was hallowed, but it can only be so by the state of the persons who were regarding it. That implies the Spirit; what Christians are. That power does not belong to unconverted people however religious they may be.
WWM You spoke of the dedication of the altar in the beginning of this dispensation. Does that suggest the beginning of Acts?
JT Yes; things were taking form then, the Holy Spirit having come, confirming what we are saying, that you cannot have Christianity by mere natural, mental attitude or ceremony. It must involve the Spirit.
ANW Verse 88 says, “This was the dedication-gift of the altar, after it had been anointed”.
JT That confirms it. It was a very big affair, too. The dedication-gift is depicted in these verses beginning with verse 84, “Twelve silver dishes, twelve silver bowls, twelve cups of gold: each silver dish of a hundred and thirty shekels, and each bowl [p. 87] seventy: all the silver of the vessels was two thousand four hundred shekels according to the shekel of the sanctuary; twelve golden cups full of incense, each cup of ten shekels, according to the shekel of the sanctuary: all the gold of the cups, a hundred and twenty shekels. All the cattle for the burnt-offering was: twelve bullocks, twelve rams, twelve yearling lambs and their oblation; and twelve bucks of the goats for a sin-offering. And all the cattle for the sacrifice of the peace-offering was: twenty-four bullocks, sixty rams, sixty he-goats, sixty yearling lambs”. I think, viewing that antitypically, we can see what the force of these terms is, and that all imitations are just spurious or worse. The assumption of buildings and the like being hallowed is just false. There is no virtue in it at all.
CAM Referring to early Acts, would you say this wealth was acquired by the twelve during the life of the Lord? Where would all this wealth have been accumulated?
JT That is a good inquiry. We are told in Genesis 15 that Israel would come out of Egypt with great wealth, which would allude to just what you say: what we get in our exercises in an early sense in company with the Lord. That is what the disciples acquired, but that period could not be what is described here typically. It was before the Spirit came. This passage contemplates the Spirit having come.
CAM Yes; I noticed you said that. I thought when you said that it would be the Spirit making the wealth good. The altar was not very intelligently known by them until the end of the Lord’s life.
JT The Lord stressed it as He drew near to the close. He stressed the idea of suffering. He made His soul an offering for sin.
WFK What constitutes a prince? Is it one who has something to give to [p. 88] God?
JT It is just what our brother suggested. What the disciples were as in company with the Lord, and what Israel was in the type as it came out of Egypt. It came out with great property, great wealth.
WFK Would Barnabas be one, a prince?
JT Just so; the twelve all had that character. The wealth had to be put together. It is viewed as one in this chapter.
WFK Have you any thought as to why there are twelve?
JT The princes stand in relation to the system as representing intelligence and wealth. It is the heavenly system that we are in connection with. These men are called princes right through. They adorn and support the thing in this sense in a princely way, so that the whole divine system takes character in this sense by what they do. We are not impoverished persons. Christianity is set up in wealth.
GVD Would the crowd of names in Acts 1 suggest something of princely wealth?
JT I think that is good. Names would indicate that. We are all living, all distinguishable. You will notice here that paragraphs are carefully pointed out, beginning with verse 10, referring to the first prince. He is spoken of at the beginning of this paragraph and at the end of it. “And he that presented his offering the first day was Nahshon the son of Amminadab, of the tribe of Judah”. And then we are told in verse 17, “This was the offering of Nahshon the son of Amminadab”. And so with every paragraph. Each prince is designated by his name, and his father’s name and what he offered, so that he, on his day, is on everybody’s mind. Each of them has a great place, and then they are all seen together and the volume of their offerings is all viewed as one.
FSC Have you any thought as to why the order of the names is changed from chapter 1? They are all named one by one there, but the order is changed here.
JT It says, “The princes of Israel, the heads of their fathers’ houses, the princes of the tribes, they that were over them that had been numbered, offered”. What is the allusion you make to chapter 1? What is the first name mentioned in chapter 1?
FSC Reuben.
JT That is because Reuben is the first-born. We begin here with Judah.
FNW The order here corresponds with the order of the encampments in chapter 2.
JT That is right. It is a sovereign matter, whereas the other is evidently by birth just as the names on the shoulder-pieces and on the breastplate. So that we are in the presence of divine ordering and selection. The princes are all viewed in that light, which will be the eternal position.
CAM In some sense these princes all seem to be equally wealthy, at least in the gift.
JT That is the wonderful thing, that it is so. I suppose it would be by arrangement, but it is to bring out in the antitype that each prince has his gift. There is no distinction except sovereignly, that they are sovereignly situated, hence Judah has the first place; but all the others are just as well to do as far as their gifts are concerned.
CAM Would that have to do with what the prince is Godward, because when it comes to what a prince does in conflict there might be quite a distinction?
JT If he is left to himself, if it is an optional matter, which, of course, God recognises, too — what you bring. God will recognise you in what you bring, as in 1 Corinthians, the gifts or collection; Paul made provision for what they would give and brought the first day of the week into it, and then in 2 Corinthians there is much enlargement on what was done, but here it is not that, as if God were to say, You are all to look alike and give alike. You have plenty to [p. 90] do it with. Therefore, every prince — take Nahshon — he not only comes under the eye of heaven in what he is doing, but of all the congregation. It is a wonderful day, and this prince has every heart and mind for that day, so that he will be known for ever.
CAM Sonship underlies it. In that sense we are all equal.
JT Quite so; sonship does underlie it. The principle was there before they left Egypt — Israel is My son.
Ques May I ask if this offering is tribal or household-wise — the offering as offered by the princes?
JT It is the tribe. You will notice what is said. “The princes of Israel, the heads of their fathers’ houses, the princes of the tribes”. Of course, the household necessarily enters into the tribe, but the tribes are outstanding, so that it says, “And he that presented his offering the first day was Nahshon the son of Amminadab, of the tribe of Judah”. It is a tribal thing, but the household necessarily enters into the tribe.
Ques How does that stand in relation to the various cities or assemblies or localities?
JT I think that is what is in mind — the idea of leadership prevailing everywhere in the assembly, so that Nahshon is a sort of leading man and he is before us a whole day, and we are reminded he belongs to the tribe of Judah, and it is on account of the sovereignty of God. It is not Reuben, but Judah. That is what we learn on that day. It is a twelve-day matter. They are all in it, I suppose. How long it took, I do not know, but it was a daily matter for each prince.
WFK And then at the end the aggregate is taken up. Would that be assembly service?
JT It is to show how real the unity was; that their offerings were alike.
ANW Does the precise similarity in what they [p. 91] offered denote that in the princehood there is no rivalry?
JT That is what is meant. We are in the presence of the divine system which is an eternal thing, a heavenly thing, and God is parading His princes, the production of His own work. Each one is seen by himself and then their offerings are all seen as united as one.
JTJr Does the measure of the sanctuary coming in here show that the thing is all according to the divine requirement?
JT I think that is what is meant. What preceded it necessarily enters into this. Numbers is the tabernacle in the wilderness, but it is, nevertheless, a heavenly system. It is as real as if it were in heaven; but it is in the wilderness. It has the innate power of holding itself free from defilement. It is as heavenly in the wilderness as it is in heaven, but it requires more power down here to keep out the evil. That is why the princes are so prominent, because they have wealth enough to do that spiritually.
ABP Would you suggest what is typified in the basons and the bowls and the offerings themselves? There is no moral issue to be settled here. It seems a sort of abstract setting.
JT Apparently they are all ready. It must have been either by corporate agreement or by great spiritual unity that they are all alike. I would think that in eternity it would appear that we are all alike, because we are constituted alike, not by formal agreement. It is because of what we are. It would bring out the uniformity of God’s work, without any formal agreement on the part of those who are the subjects of it.
CAM I was struck by the reference you made to Psalm 45:16 “Princes shalt thou make them in all the earth”. The next verse says, “Therefore shall [p. 92] the peoples praise thee for ever and ever”. That is as near eternity as can be.
JT Just so; the time of merging comes in; the flesh and blood period comes in, and then what it is as merged in its final relation. It is the outcome of the perfect work of God, all done on the principle of pattern.
FNW Does the special vow of the Nazarite come into this?
JT Very likely. The teaching is certainly cumulative, and this chapter must be the outcome of the previous one, even as to the numbering and as to the position of the princes. It must work out from the facts presented in the earlier part of the book, so that the work of God is magnified. “What hath God wrought?” (Numbers 23:23). God is parading this matter of His princes; they are all brought forward and it is made sure that the one mentioned in each is named at the end of it, and it is really his work; it is his product. Why is it that he had the same as the others? That is left open. That has to work out in the work of God. We do not agree with one another as to how we are to appear eternally. It is God’s doing. But we agree with one another on general principles; we love one another.
JTJr Would this be what Balaam saw? There was no iniquity in Jacob or Israel.
JT Just so. He saw them dwelling in tents. It was what he saw, the individual dwellings — that it was a question of the work of God in each, but they were all in one set of tents.
ABP If I understood what you had in mind, what is given represents the greatness of the work of God in the person, but the offerings represent a personal appreciation of the work of Christ, not as related to any particular moral issue but what it was in its own greatness.
JT I would say that, so that each prince would [p. 93] have the same apprehension of any given phase of Christ. They all had the same opportunity. They met with Him. “The men who have assembled with us all the time in which the Lord Jesus came in and went out among us” (Acts 1:21). So that they all had the same opportunities, and I believe God is saying they did not have a special personal understanding with each other that they were to have the same mind about the Lord, but in result it was so. It was not their design, but it was God’s design, so that the product is here.
APT Regimentation seems to be the order of the day now. I was wondering if this chapter indicates the divine way. Would that be right?
JT Tell us more, please.
APT I was only struck with the suggestion that we will all be like Christ. It will be as a result of God’s work in us, not in a regimental way that men have in their minds, but it will be all God’s sovereignty. I do not know how to express it, but these twelve men here were alike in everything they did, but it evidently had divine approval.
JT That is what is meant in the antitype. However much or little you have taken in of Christ, you have exactly the same opportunities as others, and God is the Potter, so to speak. He is the great Former of all, and He has a scheme in His mind. He is going to make that scheme work out through your exercises, so that His pattern is perfect at the end, because it is said of Christ that we are to be conformed to His image. There is a real change to His image, and He is to be the Firstborn among many brethren. They are all made according to pattern. The greatness of God is seen in the fact that He works out His pattern through your exercises and mine. He reaches His end. I believe that is the parade here. It is a field day. “What hath God wrought!” We get that later, but these princes excel as examples of His workmanship.
AC This chapter speaks largely of the dignity of the princes. Levites are often mentioned, but is there any distinction between what is levitical and princely?
JT The levitical part is in the first paragraph. You will notice that, the giving of the princes — of waggons and bullocks. They did not specify what they were to be used for, but it says “they presented them before the tabernacle. And Jehovah spoke to Moses, saying, Take it of them, and they shall be for the performance of the service of the tent of meeting, and thou shalt give them unto the Levites, to each according to his service. And Moses took the waggons and the oxen, and gave them to the Levites. Two waggons and four oxen he gave to the sons of Gershon, according to their service; and four waggons and eight oxen he gave to the sons of Merari, according to their service, — under the hand of Ithamar the son of Aaron the priest. But unto the sons of Kohath he gave none, for the service of the sanctuary was upon them: they bore what they carried upon the shoulder” (verses 3 - 9). That is all a settled matter by itself before we come to verse 10. It is a question of levitical service and how God is providing for them according to the work. The princes’ offerings fitted exactly with that. God is taking on the princes’ gift of oxen and waggons for His priests to use.
AC There is a merging, and the thing in itself is of such unique dignity that when it comes to the place the princes have in the chapter there is a climax reached.
JT The waggons and the oxen did not have to be held in reserve until some need arose. Heaven immediately specifies their use, showing the gift of the princes was in accord with the mind of heaven, meaning it was all in love. Everything we [p. 95] have is useful and useable and should not be held in reserve.
JAP Are all saints looked at as princes? Psalm 113:7,8 says, “He raiseth up the poor out of the dust; from the dunghill he lifteth up the needy, to set him among nobles, among the nobles of his people”. We have been raised from the dunghill.
JT That is the thought. They are looked at here as in the heavenly system to bring out what God has wrought. The dunghill will all have gone out of sight when we enter into heavenly places. Like Peter, a fisherman, see what God has made out of him.
RWS “Being seen by them during forty days” (Acts 1:3). Would the impressions gathered up then, seeing Him, be co-ordinated by the Holy Spirit coming down?
JT I think so. It was to confirm the pattern. The Lord coming in in the forty days would be a highly finishing process. That is, it was Himself in a spiritual sense, so that if He took five hundred brethren, He would make them what they had never been before in that appearing. They would be impressed all at the same time by what Christ is, as you might say — glorious. So that it is into “the same image from glory to glory” (2 Corinthians 3:18).
RWS I was interested in your stressing the point of the Holy Spirit. Sometimes we speak about the way the disciples are spoken of in the Scriptures toward the end, not very favourably, as in Luke, and I wondered if after the impression of the forty days, the Spirit would take that on and make them princes.
JT I think He would. The matter is all one. We might say the Lord made the twelve apostles while He was down here, but they really are included in the gifts He received above. “He that descended is the same who has also ascended up above all the heavens, that he might fill all things; and he has given some apostles, and some prophets” (Ephesians 4:10,11). He received as Man gifts for men, all in relation to men. Now you cannot say the twelve were not included, and, of course, historically, they would gather what the heavenly part is by the Spirit having come, and even by the appearances of the Lord during the forty days, but it is all one thing. Therefore, the twelve would be included in the list alluded to in Ephesians 4:11, “And he has given some apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists, and some shepherds and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints; with a view to the work of the ministry, with a view to the edifying of the body of Christ; until we all arrive ...” It is all one thing. It took years to do it, but it is all one thing. It is all a heavenly matter. They have all come out of heaven. Christianity has come out of heaven and is going back into heaven. I believe that enters into this chapter.
JTJr In regard to our unity which you were speaking about, we have that thought in Ephesians 4:3: “using diligence to keep the unity of the Spirit in the uniting bond of peace”. It is a secret matter, the working out of unity in the princes. There is no jealousy or ill feeling, but love is behind the whole matter.
JT That is the way to get at it, and the divine pattern is there, and it will be worked out. There will be no discrepancy whatever.
APT In the selection of one to take Judas’ place, evidently there was no discrepancy with him.
JT Apparently not. He fitted in, but they were all immersed in the heavenly pattern. It is not simply what they learned here below, but the effect of the heavenly hue being put on them. So that they are all from the same source.
ANW While Matthew and John accompanied [p. 97] the Lord in His life of flesh and blood, they evidently received their ministry at Pentecost.
JT Really they all did. Their real ministry was after the Spirit came down. Peter was a leader. “First Peter”. He shows how perfect He was in His work. The Lord went up, we are told, far above all the heavens. We are not told that in Acts. It is Paul who tells us that to bring out what this matter is; this matter of gift and princes, that it is not simply what they acquired in the company of Christ here below. They come out of heaven. The Holy Spirit brings the whole matter down, and they are immersed in it.
CAM That heavenly light in Paul’s soul lights up that quotation from the Psalms about His having gone up there as Man, there for men, and when that heavenly light leaves its height all the whole scheme opens up with glory.
JT Just so, so that the allusion to heaven in Acts enters into all this. First, the sound from heaven, and the Spirit coming out in power, breathing, and then the light from heaven, and then the voice from heaven. All that is in keeping with what we are saying. The heavenly thing embraced all that was at Pentecost. Paul came in later, but it is the same matter. He mentioned them all together in 1 Corinthians 15. He came in last himself, he says, but it is all the same thing. The idea of rivalry and ambition being shut out — even although it may be there, God will wear it down so that it will never come into the pattern. It would mar the pattern. Someone was writing the other day that the Lord is taking on fresh workmen, as if the work was enlarging. But He is going to unify all that He is doing, so that the model is right.
ABP The large place that is given to the peace-offering has some relation to that.
JT I would think that. The first thing mentioned after the full vessels is, “one young bullock, one ram, one yearling lamb, for a burnt-offering”; the second is, “one buck of the goats for a sin-offering”; and the third is, “and for a sacrifice of peace-offering, two oxen, five rams, five he-goats, five yearling lambs”. That, I think, would bring out the fellowship side. Now, John says, “that which we have seen and heard we report to you, that ye also may have fellowship with us; and our fellowship is indeed with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ” (1 John 1:3). Well, now, I think these peace-offerings mean — there was a lot of that at the beginning, not only the idea of the burnt-offering, and the sin-offering, but this peace-offering. The brethren were all together, we are told; first in one place, and then they were all together, in principle. The end of Acts 2 shows they were all together, which would mean these peace-offerings, and God having part in it. So that we are all getting together, and getting to be like one another. You do not want to have anything very different from others if you love them. You want to be like them and they like you, and all like Christ and all like God. It is a unifying idea all the way through.
JTJr I suppose when Paul went up to Jerusalem and spent fifteen days with Peter that was what was in mind.
JT He would see what Peter thought and would take it on. It is that sort of thing all the time, and these meetings are intended for that in our case, that we should be like each other.
CAM Before we go to heaven there will be that kind of union among the saints all over the world.
JT That is what the Lord is aiming at, and the pressure abroad and the discipline we are going through, specific things, are all to that end. There is a lot of elimination needed and it is going on. [p. 99] It is a making process.
JAP It is a remarkable thing that the first division was over an altar. The tribes of Reuben and Gad built an altar of grand appearance which was over against the other altar. It really divided the brethren.
JT Do you mean it was a partisan thing?
JAP If we are all looking at one altar, we will be right.
JT Therefore the dimensions are specifically given. There is so much made here of the dedication of the altar. It is the place we gather and where we sacrifice.
ABP There was no re-dedication of the altar. In the book of Ezra when it was set on its base it functioned immediately without any re-dedication. That would be in line with the unity of the matter, the same thing going through. It is not re-established.
JT Yes, indeed.
JH In John 17:23 the Lord says, “That they may be perfected into one”, would that be the thought of unity? “That the world may know that thou hast sent me”.
JT Just so. John 17 enters into all this most beautifully, and especially the glories there. The glories that the Lord manifests, the one that He is going to enter into, that He had been in before, and the one that is being given Him, and the one that He is giving others Himself. Glories are like degrees, but affecting us, unifying us, similarising us, that we rejoice in others’ glory.
FNW The testimony went out by the kings of Midian, “As thou art, so were they; each one resembled the sons of a king” (Judges 8:18). There was similarity on princely lines.
JT That is good.
FSC Do you think the vessels refer to Christ down here?
JT They are different sizes, one of different [p. 100] metal even, so that they deserve very special consideration as to what they allude to. It is not that silver is of any less value than gold here. They are metals of precious importance, silver alluding to a certain feature such as redemption, and gold to what is of God, but they are both really alike. Silver and gold are of the same value. They must allude to what there was in relation to these princes — what an apprehension each had of each vessel; so that the likeness of each, the correspondence between them would be derived from all they had inwardly as vessels. Vessels must denote what was in the offerers’ mind. The mind has a great deal to do with all this in the antitype. It is what is working in our minds; the ideas we have.
WWM Would you say we have Mary of Bethany brought in at the end of the Lord’s pathway in John, to show what this offering really was? She had it in her heart. She would carry the feelings of what would correspond with the princes.
JT There is no box mentioned. She was the box. I believe that is the idea. There is a box mentioned in the other gospels, but not in John, and yet she kept it, so that she must have had power to keep out corruption; “love our Lord Jesus Christ in incorruption” (Ephesians 6:24). Judas was there. He is over against her, very opposed to a vessel containing anything that referred to Christ.
TEH Would you help me in relation to Peter and John? Peter said, “Look on us” (Acts 3:4). Is that the ornamental side of the truth in the person?
JT I would think that. There is something there to be looked at. It fits into what we are saying. They were in the hands, of course, of Christ, but they were heavenly. The heavenly side is not so much stressed until Paul comes, but it was there, and it was there in Peter and John.
ABP We are told in Acts 2:47 that the Lord added “those that were to be saved”. But when we come to Paul he was an elect vessel (Acts 9:15). It is a vessel and in view of apostleship.
JT Just so. One would find that in Paul. For instance he says, “Known and read of all men” (2 Corinthians 3:2). What was that? It was what was in him. It was readable in him. It was in him, the place the Corinthians had in his heart. That is the sort of thing, what a vessel has, whether there is love for God or for Christ, or the Spirit, or for the brethren.
FSC It says they were both “full of fine flour mingled with oil for an oblation”.
JT That would be Christ as He was anointed here, but, I would say, inclusive of what He is above, because He received from the Father above, and shed forth the Holy Spirit. It is Christ’s humanity and the power of His Spirit. Whether we apprehend that, is a question, because His life was taken from the earth. That is a thought that has to be understood, and whether you can carry that sort of thing in your vessel — a life that was unique. There never was any like it and there never will be any like it. It is the uniqueness of Christ as a Man down here. It is the meat-offering, but it is more than that. It is unique in that there was none like it before and there never will be any like it. Whereas what He is now in heaven, we will all be like Him. We are made like Him. He is the Model for us all. It is not after the pattern of what He was here below in the mere personal sense; it is what He is up there. “We know that if it is manifested we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is” (1 John 3:2).
RDG “Even as he is, we also are in this world” (1 John 4:17).
JT It is not what [p. 102] He was down here. It is what He is, so that He is coming to change our bodies of humiliation and make them like His body of glory. That is the thing to have before us. That is not what He was down here. It is what He is up there.
APT “He receives of mine and shall announce it to you” (John 16:15). Is that what He is now?
JT It is what He is now up there. There was a perfect knowledge when the Spirit came down of what the Lord was there and the position He held up there. It is a heavenly Christ we are dealing with. It is not what He was, but what He is.
JH The eunuch is linked up with a heavenly man. Philip “announced the glad tidings of Jesus to him” (Acts 8:35).
JT He could not have told you, perhaps, as you could tell us now, but that was the truth.
FNW How far does the thought of redemption enter into our services in heaven eternally?
JT That is a matter to be considered, too. People often think, Well, we will always be telling what He has done for us, and how different we are to what we used to be, but there will be nothing of that. What we may say in regard to remembrance will come out in the judgment-seat of Christ, but after that it is what we are according to divine counsel. It is new creation. That is the eternal state of things.
ANW “In whom we have redemption”. It is there; (Ephesians 1:7).
JT How far that will be carried is a question, but I am certain that most Christians think that will be our theme. Whereas, the eternal position goes beyond that, what God had in His mind before the world was.
APT The apostle puts it in Ephesians 1, just to make the picture complete, “in whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of offences”. It is not so much to dwell on that side.
JT That comes in after verse 5 of Ephesians 1. If you look at it you will see he is dealing with counsel first, and then redemption is brought in.
[p. 103] ANW Would you say that redemption enters into the foundation of the eternal realm?
JT It does while we are in time; while there is opposition. They overcame by the blood of the Lamb. All that is most essential, but whether there is not something beyond that when all that is settled is a question.
APT Ephesians 1:3 - 6 says, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenlies in Christ; according as he has chosen us in him before the world’s foundation, that we should be holy and blameless before him in love; having marked us out beforehand for adoption through Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he has taken us into favour in the Beloved”.
JT That is the fixed state of things. Redemption comes in after that. In verse 7 it says, “in whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of offences, according to the riches of his grace; which he has caused to abound towards us in all wisdom and intelligence”. That is the thought; that redemption will be always in evidence while it is needed, but there is such a thing as new creation, and that is what we are looking on to — a new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.
CAM The expression you have used as to a dip into time helps. It is not many of us that know much about the idea of One that was before the dip into time, in connection with the saints.
JT We must not assume for a moment that God started in new plans after sin came in and was settled. He is carrying out His first plans all the time. They were interfered with.
ANW Being here in the place of favour you can dismiss it?
JT That requires great attention and care lest [p. 104] you might belittle the foundational side of the position, the work of Christ, but we must make room for new creation.
Now, as regards Nehemiah we have no time now. It was only just to link up the idea of fellowship in the walls, and how the princes were there again in remnant times. The idea continues in the two choirs, that they are jubilant in spite of the depression there must have been. They are jubilant. Those choirs are all singing and the singing was heard afar off, we are told in verse 43, “And that day they offered great sacrifices, and rejoiced for God had made them rejoice with great joy; and also the women and the children rejoiced. And the joy of Jerusalem was heard even afar off”. It is to show what remnant times can be.
WFK What have you to say about the dedication of the wall?
JT That is fellowship. We are in it, but we rejoice in it, and it is so strong you can walk on it and sing on it — two choirs.
CAM What the assembly has today shows that it is not worn out. Time has not had a wearing effect on it.
JT Some of us were saying the other day that every church had its day as well as every prince. Each has its day. The book of Revelation gives us seven assemblies and I believe Philadelphia would indicate there was nothing worn out at all. The same ideas are there. The Lord contemplates something He has pleasure in and that He loves. It is having its day now.
RWS Does that link on with the musical instruments in verse 36? “With the musical instruments of David the man of God; and Ezra the scribe before them”.
JT These men were equal. Ezra was equal to any priest. The quality was there. He was leader [p. 105] of the first choir. Nehemiah was hardly officially a priest, but he was a great spiritual man, a great prince, and he had to do with the second choir, but, he says, “after them”. Ezra was before but he was after, showing he was a humble sort of man, but he was filling the thing out.
JTJr You need both of these servants: those who go on before, the scribe in the word of God, and those who are behind and look after the saints.
JT Just so; a man that is content to be that, to come in behind.
ABP That helps us to understand that if a man says things about himself it is not because of his ego.
JT Quite so. He was a great man not in the world or government, but a great man spiritually. See what he is doing; he is in the whole matter, and Ezra has the official place as a priest, a thoroughly pedigreed priest and leader. He is ornamenting the whole position. It is not so great as it was in Aaron s day in the quality and character of it, but in Nehemiah you have a great man. He is not exactly an official, but he is coming in and filling the thing out. So that it is a wonderfully good time, and you may say he is in it.
Ques The princes give colour to the occasion?
JT That is the idea. It is the same idea in Numbers 7.
Rem In John 11:1 it says “the village of Mary and Martha her sister”. They gave colour to the place.
JT Just so; they gave character to the place and all that happened. Well, you see here the musical instruments of David, the man of God, and there are people who can use these instruments, which means they are people like David or Asaph, and so it is now. It is our day. It is Philadelphia’s day. Every church has its day in Revelation. Well, how [p. 106] is our day shining? What is there in it? Does it answer to the mind of God?
JAP Is there a difference in the result of the two dedications? When the princes offered in Numbers 7, God spoke to Moses from off the mercy-seat, but here the joy is partly as the result of the dedication.
JT That comes in after the offering of the twelve princes. Well, what is the difference? Each is a man like Ezra, who is in this singing matter. He is an instructed man. He is like a scribe, instructed in the kingdom of the heavens. He brings out of his treasures things new and old. Ezra is able to do that and to join in the song and lead in it. Why should we not have a good time like that in these times? God made them rejoice. God can do that if we let Him. He will make the thing full. The noise was heard afar off. It does not say it was heard in heaven, but no doubt it was. It was heard by others.
JTJr They had to stand still in the prison gate. Every local meeting has its prison gate. You stand still there and think of them.
JT Quite so.