⬇ EPUB

RIGHTEOUSNESS (1)

JT I am thinking of righteousness as set out in Abel, Noah and Abraham. We might look at Abel this morning. The thoughts of righteousness and unrighteousness appearing so early, not formally between God and men but between two brethren, open up a wide range of enquiry. It is found throughout the Scriptures and so has a great place among the people of God, especially in John’s first epistle. I thought that we might perhaps look into this subject on two occasions as linked with Abel, and then look at Noah for the third, and at Abraham for the two following ones. These three men are seen outstandingly in relation to this subject.

Ques With the three men mentioned would the outstanding points be: with Abel, his works were righteous; with Noah, he was a preacher of righteousness; and with Abraham he is viewed as the righteous one?

JT That is what is in mind. In Abraham we get righteousness by faith, which we shall come to as we proceed. With Abel and Noah, it is practical righteousness. Noah, as we have noted, preached righteousness.

HH How would you define the word ‘righteousness’?

JT It is a question of what is right, whether on God’s side or man’s side or between brother and brother. The word is, of course, derived from the word ‘right’. With God there are sovereign rights — we have no such rights. Men have not and, of course,

^[p. 392] they did not apply to Abel. But his works were righteous; he was practically righteous.

Ques Does “in process of time” suggest a period of exercise with these two brothers?

JT Yes, “in process of time”; we cannot say just how long the time was. We cannot say how old Adam was when these two were born, though we do know how old he was when Seth was born. It is a considerable time clearly. It brought out something in Cain: “And in process of time it came to pass that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering to Jehovah. And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock, and of their fat”. Well, the enquiry in mind is, What was the motive in Cain’s movement? Why did the movement to bring something to God start with Cain? Evidently it did start with him. But John’s comment by the Spirit would show that the movement was not right.

AEJA Would you say that both of these brothers seemed to have the sense in their souls that it was right to bring something to God?

JT Yes, but Cain was not governed by available light; whereas Abel was governed by the light God afforded. “At the end of days” — as the note reads — means that he was here for a purpose. It is the same idea with Enoch, he was kept down here for a purpose. He was the seventh from Adam and lived for a period necessary for a purpose, and that purpose was that he should become educated in the ways of God. Here the idea would be similar — “the end of days” suggesting a period of time necessary for this development. Notice John’s comment when he begins to speak about Cain; note the use of the word ‘message’: “For this is the message which ye have heard from the beginning, that we should love one another: not as Cain was of the wicked one, and slew his brother; and on account of what slew he him? because his works were wicked, and those of his brother righteous” (1 John 3:11,12). All this would mean that there is a history behind the actual incident of bringing the fruit of the ground; it is the idea of works and that they were wicked. It says Cain was wicked, he was of the wicked one: “not as Cain was of the wicked one, and slew his brother”. “Of” would infer a development from the wicked one.

LES Would this verse in John link with the previous verse which speaks of the children of the devil? They are not righteous, they are “of the devil”.

JT Yes. The idea of righteousness comes in in verse 7, “Children, let no man lead you astray; he that practises righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous”. The “he” there is John’s way of using the pronoun without indicating whether the reference is to God as such or to Christ.

HH The thought of the end of days would suggest the exercises of such days in connection with divine interests on earth.

JT We might work it out that way. The result in the one man is the fruits of unrighteousness. Referring again to 1 John 3:7. “he that practises righteousness is righteous”; and in verse 4, “Every one that practices sin practices also lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness”. The Authorised Version reads, “Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law; for sin is the transgression of the law”. That is not the truth. It is not the transgression of the law, but sin is lawlessness.

HH ‘Practise’ is the positive idea — you are doing it — practising righteousness.

JT So that “Every one that practises sin practises also lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness”. Then to go back to 1 John 2:29, “If ye know that he is righteous, know that every one who practises righteousness is begotten of him”. That is progenitive — what comes from God, begotten of God;

the “he” there is clearly God, whereas the “he” in verse 7 may be Christ or God. It is well to look at these passages, they show what sides these men were on. What side was Cain on? The question of righteousness was already working in the world as also the question of unrighteousness and lawlessness. Cain was attached to the lawless. John says, “not as Cain was of the wicked one, and slew his brother”. We get the key to the whole matter by John’s remarks that Cain was of the wicked one. So the thing is traced to its source.

Ques Would Abel be the positive line linked with God’s dispensation which is in faith and with those who have not gone in the way of Cain?

JT All this works out regarding what is current. It is a challenging thought. Wickedness, as David says, proceeds from the wicked, it has its origin; whereas Abel was of the righteous, which John’s epistle develops as a characteristic idea.

DR Verse 10 brings in the thought of generation: “In this are manifest the children of God and the children of the devil. Whoever does not practise righteousness is not of God, and he who does not love his brother”.

JT That is the way it works out from 1 John 2:29: “every one who practices righteousness is begotten of him”; and then in chapter 3:4, “Every one that practises sin practises also lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness”. That is, we cannot escape. No one can escape who is sinful. But we also have this word: “Whoever has been begotten of God does not practise sin, because his seed abides in him, and he cannot sin, because he has been begotten of God” (verse 9). We have to accept that too. But then, “Whoever does not practise righteousness is not of God, and he who does not love his brother”; and then there is this “message” bringing in Cain and Abel.

LES The footnote is helpful in this connection regarding verse 4; it reads, “To translate this ‘sin is the transgression of the law’, as in A.V., is wrong, and gives a false definition of sin, for sin was in the world and death as a consequence, before the giving of the law: see Romans 5:13; chapter 7:13. The Greek reads ‘sin is lawlessness’, that is, the absence of the principle of law (not the law) or, in other words, of the control of God over the soul. I ought to have no will of my own, but be in obedience. The statement is reciprocal, and may be read ‘lawlessness is sin’”.

JT We get it in our subject. Cain was of the devil, of the lawless one; and then in contrast we have the children of God, which Christians are characteristically. They are born of God and do not sin. This has to be understood for it is an abstract thought.

Ques Was Abel constituted righteous? Romans 5:19 says, “For as indeed by the disobedience of the one man the many have been constituted sinners, so also by the obedience of the one the many will be constituted righteous”.

JT Yes. We need a little patience to get the needed passages rightly as the basis of our subject. Romans 5:12 - 19 says, “For this cause, even as by one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death; and thus death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (for until law sin was in the world; but sin is not put to account when there is no law; but death reigned from Adam until Moses, even upon those who had not sinned in the likeness of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him to come. But shall not the act of favour be as the offence? For if by the offence of one the many have died, much rather has the grace of God, and the free gift in grace, which is by the one man Jesus Christ, abounded unto the many ... For if by the offence of the one death reigned by the one, much rather shall those who ^[p. 396] receive the abundance of grace, and of the free gift of righteousness, reign in life by the one Jesus Christ:) so then as it was by one offence towards all men to condemnation, so by one righteousness towards all men for justification of life. For as indeed by the disobedience of the one man the many have been constituted sinners, so also by the obedience of the one the many will be constituted righteous”. This is not sin as traced to the devil exactly; it is in Adam, the one sin of Adam affecting all that follow. Whereas John is saying that Cain was of the wicked one, not tracing the guilt back to his father but to the devil, showing that the devil had got in. So that it is not simply the government of God on Adam, but the thing called ‘sin’ is working out in unrighteousness in one who is of the devil.

Ques Would it be right to say that the righteousness of Romans 5 is on a judicial basis whereas that of John’s first epistle is on the line of generation?

JT Exactly. Cain is spoken of in John as of the wicked one, the devil; not as ‘son of Adam’, but “of the wicked one”. All this shows what the present situation is — what sin is. Sin is lawlessness beginning with the devil.

HH There was sin in Satan before the garden of Eden, but “by one man sin entered into the world”.

JT That is the difference — that “one man” was Adam. But John makes it something anterior to Adam. This terrible thing we have to deal with is of the devil, of the wicked one.

LES In Revelation 20:2 the devil is referred to under four names: “And he laid hold of the dragon, the ancient serpent who is the devil and Satan”.

JT Yes, he is called “the ancient serpent” there. The names ‘Satan’ and ‘devil’ are attached to him later in the history of the truth. He is just the serpent here in Genesis — one of the animals. And John calls him “the wicked one”. John is reserved by the Lord ^[p. 397] to work out certain moral things that we have to do with. He shows in his epistle how these things work out in ourselves.

Ques I was wondering about this process of time, whether Cain did not learn from Abel what was required. Abel knew what to offer and probably Cain copied at least the idea of offering.

JT Cain is mentioned first. There was ample opportunity for him to get the divine thought; “In process of time” implies this. He assumed that his product would do for God. We have to deal with these matters; God is saying to us that this record is for us, that it is for us to have the whole knowledge of it. God put these things on record through Moses for us to look into, and to weigh over what transpired between these two brothers. Christendom is the terrible development of what we have here in Cain, and we have to do with it. Much blood is being shed. Abel’s was the first blood shed and it is righteous blood. It speaks.

LES Have you in mind in pressing these matters home to us that we might go beneath the surface and get to the roots, to the true judgment of the matter?

JT That is what John tells us. He says (1 John 2:18), “Little children, it is the last hour”. It is a good thing to classify ourselves, “Little children” is ground most of us can take. “Little children, it is the last hour, and, according as ye have heard that antichrist comes” — antichrist is what is against Christ; the devil against the spirit of Christ in Christians — “even now there have come many antichrists, whence we know that it is the last hour. They went out from among us, but they were not of us”. That is Christendom as it is. They went out to have a free hand. They showed themselves before the apostles were taken away — “for if they had been of us, they would have surely remained with us, but that they might be made manifest that none are of ^[p. 398] us. And ye have the unction from the holy one, and ye know all things” (verses 18 - 20). Notice there the Holy Spirit, especially as helping our minds. We have “the unction from the holy one”, He arms us, as it were, to contend with all this. Then to go to verse 24: “As for you let that which ye have heard from the beginning abide in you: if what ye have heard from the beginning abides in you, ye also shall abide in the Son and in the Father. And this is the promise which he has promised us, life eternal. These things have I written to you concerning those who lead you astray: and yourselves, the unction which ye have received from him abides in you, and ye have not need that any one should teach you; but as the same unction teaches you as to all things, and is true and is not a lie, and even as it has taught you, ye shall abide in him” (verses 24 - 27). These are the weapons or armour that we have. The battle is on, so to speak, but it is against the children of the devil. The little children in verse 18, the third gradation of the family, are not to lose interest; they have the unction that they may understand. The young especially must look into these matters.

AEH Chapter 4 speaks of the spirits. We are told to prove them.

JT To prove them — that is what one thought. We are in the last days, it is the last hour. Christianity involves the last hour, which is a critical idea. It is not a year or a century. I think it involves a crisis.

HH What we are considering goes right through from Genesis to Revelation: good and evil are there — righteousness and unrighteousness.

Rem We get the wickedness of Cain with Joab; he slew a man more righteous than himself.

JT In the history of David you would expect to find Genesis working out. We have five books of Moses and we also have five books of the Psalms. You get the working out of righteousness in those five ^[p. 399] books of Psalms written or collected by David; you get in this way things put to the test in David.

Rem We get righteousness in Solomon’s reign in that way.

JT It is the administration of it, but David had gone over the matter, he had judged it all. He says, Wickedness proceeds from the wicked. In his own family, in Absalom and Adonijah, wickedness manifested itself.

HH Have we not to face the question of righteousness in self-judgment in a practical and moral sense?

JT Yes. That is why David is allowed to become a model for us in practical righteousness and self-judgment, seen not so much in the chronological and historical books as in the Psalms. The testimony to righteousness is seen throughout the Scriptures.

HH David was a king set up by God Himself — a man after His own heart, but this man broke down and as a consequence repentance is set out in him in a marked way. I have to judge myself so as to preclude unrighteousness.

JT So in the Psalms David works out practically what you get in Genesis — the roots are thus laid bare. What is recorded is that we might learn, like David, to judge ourselves. Take the incident which is recorded in 2 Samuel 12: in the Psalms we get the real root of that.

LES The moral working out of the thing in David’s soul provides a basis for peace. “But the fruit of righteousness in peace is sown for them that make peace”, (James 3:18).

JT Yes. Peace is worked out in Solomon. God kept Solomon right so that the full fruit of David administratively might be seen by us.

HH The working out of peace is seen in Solomon, the son of the man who judged himself of every evil thing.

JT In measure the truth seen in the first ^[p. 400] five books of Moses is worked out in the five books of the Psalms in David; they are in a sense his contribution. Psalm 51 is in the second book.

HH In Psalm 51 God is waiting for the confession of the murder of the true Urijah; that is the ground on which Jerusalem will be saved. And the principle remains now — self-judgment marks the righteousness expressed in the assembly.

JT That is why righteousness comes into Matthew’s gospel so much. It is the assembly gospel, things are judged in the assembly. If a brother fails to hear the assembly there is no hope. This is the only way of peace when a troubler appears, the assembly requires that we deal with a brother who trespasses.

Ques Why does David leave certain things to Solomon and tell him that he can deal with them as he is a wise man?

JT He knew that God would be with Solomon, who was a sequence to himself, as the assembly is the sequence to Christ. He was the righteous One down here and the assembly is righteous characteristically. In Matthew’s gospel great prominence is given to righteousness.

Rem In Matthew 5 we get those who hunger and thirst after righteousness, and in Matthew 3 the Lord says, “thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness”. Notice, all righteousness.

AEJA You mentioned that David’s experiences were set down that we might get help. In Psalm 51:13 he says, “I will teach transgressors thy ways, and sinners shall return unto thee”.

JT He also says in that psalm, “My tongue shall sing aloud of thy righteousness”. So James 5:20 tells us, “he that brings back a sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death and shall cover a multitude of sins”. It is the business of the assembly to follow up sin and deal with it, because ^[p. 401] we are in the last days and as remarked the assembly is, in a sense, to Christ what Solomon was to David.

DR In what is before us the Lord is tracing sin to its source; the blood of Abel is speaking to the present generation.

JT We get that also in Luke 11:51, “From the blood of Abel to the blood of Zacharias”; and again in Hebrews 11:4, “and by it, having died, he yet speaks”. Well, have we knowledge of that speaking? It is the voice of Abel. It has, however, a second place, it is not so great a voice as Christ’s blood. Christ’s blood speaks better things. Nevertheless Abel’s blood speaks; it speaks of judgment but Christ’s blood speaks of forgiveness.

AEJA Is the thought here that there was light meted to these two brothers, Cain and Abel, and that it was not answered to in Cain, but it was in Abel? “By faith Abel offered to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained testimony of being righteous”.

JT Yes. The righteousness of God is set out on the principle of faith to faith: “as God has dealt to each a measure of faith”, (Romans 12:3). This speaks of Christians. Cain is never viewed as having had faith.

AEJA Every true believer has some measure of faith.

JT Yes. But it is not given to all. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by a report. Apparently Cain never gained that at all, he was of the wicked one. We have to accept this statement which John makes, “Not as Cain was of the wicked one”, he was of him.

DR What bearing would the meaning of Abel’s name have on all this?

JT Abel means breath, or vanity. This is obscure, but it may indicate growth in the knowledge of the parents. As to Seth it says, “and she bore a son, and called his name Seth”. His name was given intelligently: it means appointed.

^[p. 402] Rem In the last words of David we have reference to the everlasting covenant, and he says his house is not so before God.

JT I think you see what is subjectively wrought out there. “Although my house be not so before God”, he admits that, but for all that he himself holds the truth; it is held at least objectively. You cannot rely on your own works or on those of your family, but you can have the truth in your soul. 2 Samuel 22 is the same as Psalm 18 only that David begins the psalm: “I will love thee, O Jehovah, my strength”. Then 2 Samuel 23 begins, “Now these are the last words of David: David the son of Jesse saith, And the man who was raised up on high, The anointed of the God of Jacob, And the sweet psalmist of Israel saith” — it is a pronouncement, like Balaam’s prophetic pronouncements — “The Spirit of Jehovah spoke by me, And his word was on my tongue ... The ruler among men shall be just, Ruling in the fear of God; And he shall be as the light of the morning, like the rising of the sun, A morning without clouds; When, from the sunshine after rain, The green grass springeth from the earth”. Then, though a sad note, it is the note of a righteous man: “Although my house be not so before God, Yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant, Ordered in every way and sure; For this is all my salvation, and every desire, Although he make it not to grow”. Now I think that is what may be called objective truth that is strenuously held. The Spirit of God represents David’s view of things at the same time that his house was not right before God; God’s covenant is certain and sure although he had to wait for it. Although there may be nothing in my house which is witness to it, yet faith knows it is sure.

AEH In assembly exercises we should work things out so that we may understand and be able to say what is so and what is not ^[p. 403] so.

JT We can say what is so even though we may have to own that it is not so with my house; but it is so with me. As regards my own soul I can say it is so. That is what David is saying, and I believe he got special honour in the testimony because of it.

HH Things are to be measured by what is in the sanctuary, what is in Christ. We need to know the nature of the situation without and what is going on.

JT John’s epistle works that out. There are abstract thoughts expressed such as, “every one begotten of God does not sin”; but then the apostle also says, “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:8,9). So John’s epistle has the character of the Psalms. The remnant will work out their redemption in Christ. Therefore what God is saying to us is that we should be transparent and simple and, if necessary, make confession and not keep anything back. The more you confess and the more transparent you are about everything, the freer you are in your soul. So David can say, “Yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant, Ordered in every way and sure”.

HH I do not believe there is a more testing point than that.

JT The child of God is over against antichrist. John’s epistle works that out.

Rem The second epistle speaks of the deceiver and the antichrist and over against that there should be transparency among us.

JT David is a model as working it out; he in measure works out the books of Moses in the Psalms. So we have the record of his failure in 2 Samuel 12 but David works it out, he goes into the matter himself in his own history, in Psalm 51. He is a model for us as dealing with evil. I must never lower the standard,

^[p. 404] even if I am guilty. Let me go to the depths of the thing with God, and see that God has His rights; see that Christ too has His rights and that His people have their rights. David is fully recovered, for he has gone to the root of the matter and God has gone to the root of the matter with David. God acted for him in answer to his confession and prayer.

LES Coming back to Genesis 4, what is meant by verse 7, “If thou doest well, will not thy countenance look up with confidence? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door”?

JT God is now fortifying Cain against the wicked one. God has to say to him as He has to say to Christendom through the gospel. He wills not that any perish, even a Cain, and so Jehovah says, “Why art thou angry?” What grace! Beautiful that God should consider him so, knowing what was going to happen! And that is our business — to keep on preaching the gospel day and night, as it were. God is doing it here: “Why art thou angry, and why is thy countenance fallen? If thou doest well, will not thy countenance look up with confidence? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door; and unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him”. It is something like the epistle to the Hebrews. What God is saying to the Jews should be connected with the epistle of James, which bears on the whole twelve tribes; it is grace, and we are entitled to carry the ministry of grace today to Christendom. Cain was yet formally in relation to God.

HH Hebrews enhances the last days — God is speaking “in Son”.

JT Is it not beautiful to see Jehovah noticing Cain’s countenance? “Why is thy countenance fallen? If thou doest well, will not thy countenance look up with confidence? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door”. God is speaking to Cain as if He would save him; God is not willing that any ^[p. 405] should perish, but Cain is going to perish, he is going to slay his brother.

DR God is reasoning with Cain, pointing to the door, but Cain refuses and slays his brother.

JT Hebrews warns the Jewish professors against apostasy for which there is no forgiveness. The writer is urging them to mix the word with faith: “To-day if ye will hear his voice!” That is the appeal in Hebrews.

LES “Behold then the goodness and severity of God: upon them who have fallen, severity; upon thee goodness of God, if thou shalt abide in goodness, since otherwise thou also wilt be cut away” (Romans 11:22).

JT So God comes down to this man standing at the crossroad, fully aware that he is an intended murderer but preaching grace to him. The sin-offering is at the very door: “If thou doest well, will not thy countenance look up with confidence? and if thou doest not well, sin (or, ‘a sin-offering’ ) lieth at the door; and unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him”. I believe that refers to Abel. Cain has not done the murder yet, Abel is still alive. Do not kill him, God would say, he will be subject to you. James 5:6 says, “ye have condemned, ye have killed the just; he does not resist you”. Abel will not resist. God is opening the door to Cain, saying, so to speak, You can get through Cain, your brother will be subject to you. He is a righteous man. A righteous man is a very easy man to live with either as a husband, father or brother. God is saying to Cain that his brother will be subject to him. The spirit of Christ will not resist, it is subject; and that is the testimony of God at the present time. So the persons preaching the gospel are like Abel — righteous men — and righteous men will not be quarrelsome. It is a question of what the man is. God can say this of Abel, that he is subject, “not as Cain was of the wicked one”; the gospel is not on that line, but on the line of the Spirit of Christ.

AEJA This place is taken on by faith; Hebrews refers to the leader and completer of faith — Jesus.

JT “Looking steadfastly on Jesus”. I have been very much impressed with the grace of God in coming down to lawless people. He is giving Cain great scope for recovery; He would say, ‘Your brother is easy to get along with, do not murder him’. James says, “Ye have condemned, ye have killed the just; he does not resist you”. It is the testimony at the present time in having to do with lawless people.

LES It would appear in the younger brethren coming before tribunals.

JT You mean what spirit they are of?

AEJA No spirit of self-vindication or of murder is in them.

JT No; the preaching and the preacher would contend that he is easy to get along with. A righteous man is not hard to get along with, but evidently it is with Cain toward his brother as it was with Esau towards Jacob, he could not endure him. God says to Cain, You can endure him, he will be subject, as a true Christian will always be.

← Previous Article 27 of 31 Next →