THE WORK OF GOD (6)
[p. 349] THE WORK OF GOD (6)
Genesis 48:5; Genesis 48:8-15; Genesis 48:21,22; Genesis 50:22; Numbers 27:1-11
JT I should like that we might see how the great parental instinct of the patriarchs, as shown in the book of Genesis, culminated in Jacob and Joseph, and how the fruit of the seed sown by them is seen, in the book of Numbers, in these women who were directly descended from Joseph, through Machir. The parental feature of the truth is specially set out in Abraham, who passed it on when dwelling with Isaac and Jacob. The family of Jacob, however, although born of one father, had different mothers; consequently conditions arose that required adjustment, and Joseph was used of God to adjust those relations. So the sovereignty of God is seen coming in in connection with Jacob’s blessing, but in Joseph there is adjustment — a thing that is greatly needed today, because it is very evident that relationships are greatly deranged.
Ques When you speak of family relationships are you referring to the home circle, or to the assembly?
JT To the spiritual family; the saints being the family of God. John’s writings enlarge on the family side; showing that from the very outset of the gospel that was what was in view. Those who received Christ got the place of children; and what is said in connection with the prophecy of Caiaphas in chapter 11 brought to light the fact that the Lord died to “gather together into one the children of God who were scattered abroad”. So there must be this gathering together into one, in order that the true thought of the family may be seen.
EH Do you connect children more with the family, than sons?
JT [p. 350] I think both suggest the family, only that children bring in the thought of parentage more; the word refers to what we are down here. Sonship is connected with heaven and eternity. John scarcely speaks of it; it refers to our place with God outside of this world; it is developed in Paul’s ministry.
EH Position, I suppose, and dignity.
JT Yes. As receiving Christ we are given the right to take the place of children. It is an immense dignity that we have the title to take that place here.
Ques Do we see the sovereignty of God in Joseph’s sons being blessed here?
JT Yes; Jacob placed them in the family. They might have been regarded as in a lower position relatively, but Jacob says: “As Reuben and Simeon, they shall be mine”, Genesis 48: 5. All the patriarchs have to be viewed, not only as representing a believer in his exercises, but also as representing God — the fatherhood of God.
FHB Yes; and I think the fact that God has revealed Himself in the name of Father indicates His intention to have a family.
JT All that was set out in the patriarchs found a full answer in Christ — parental feeling, affection for the disciples, and so forth. The Father names all. Jacob places Joseph’s son on the same footing as Reuben and Simeon.
Rem “Of whom every family in heaven and earth is named”.
JT Yes, and then Joseph himself gets a special place, but in the next chapter he falls in with the other eleven, and Ephraim and Manasseh are not mentioned.
WH In chapter 48: 14, although he laid his hands upon the heads of Ephraim and Manasseh, yet in verse 15 he blessed Joseph. I suppose Joseph was blessed in [p. 351] them.
JT Yes. Joseph had one portion above his brethren.
Ques Is there a difference set forth in Reuben and Simeon in contrast to Ephraim and Manasseh? Why does he mention Reuben and Simeon?
JT Reuben and Simeon represent the family in its most privileged position; and these two sons of Joseph were given the same place. Jacob gave them a place according to his own thoughts. The Lord in His prayer to the Father recognises that all His were the Father’s. “All that is mine is thine, and all that is thine mine”, John 17: 10.
Ques Was not the wisdom of Jacob seen in naming Ephraim before Manasseh? As we see in Numbers 27, Zelophehad died and had no sons; so it would seem to be prophetic on Jacob’s part.
FHB I was wondering if bringing in Reuben and Simeon would illustrate that, according to the flesh, they would have had the first place — the firstborn ones; but Manasseh and Ephraim, according to the sovereignty of God, got that place: “as Reuben and Simeon, they shall be mine”.
JT I think in saying “Ephraim and Manasseh shall be mine, as Reuben and Simeon”, Jacob meant that he would give them the same place as his first-born and second-born sons. It is a help to see that each one in the family gets his place from the Father. The adjustment of the sons of Jacob comes in earlier. In order to come into the good of the family, according to what it is in the mind of God, adjustment is necessary. The saints need to be in the light of their place in the family of God, and all that interferes, even with the affections suited to the relationship, should be judged and removed. There are many in a state of alienation who have an unjudged murderous spirit. In that family an unjudged spirit of murder existed.
WJN You mean in Simeon and [p. 352] Levi?
JT I refer also to the attitude of the ten brothers toward Joseph.
Ques Had Joseph to go through special discipline on that account?
JT They would have put him to death were it not that they found it more convenient to sell him.
Rem It is noticeable occasionally, when a difficulty arises amongst the people of God, how judgment is swayed by natural relationships.
JT Well, that has to be dealt with. These ten men were cognisant of what their hearts had devised and determined upon; they took the garment of Joseph and sent it back to Jacob and said: Now, is this your son’s? They were entirely heartless about it; they knew how their father loved him. “Jacob loved Joseph”. Now, these ten sons had no feeling of sympathy with their father, knowing full well what a dreadful thing it would be to him to see the blood-stained garment of the one whom he loved, and for whom he had made this coat of many colours; they were perfectly heartless. But now they had to come back to right family feelings. When Joseph finally reaches the end, in the cup being found in Benjamin’s sack, they all come back to his house; Joseph was still there in the house — and they were prepared to do anything; but Joseph says: No, “the man in whose hand the cup has been found, he shall be my bondman; but as for you, go up in peace to your father”, Genesis 44: 17.
Then Judah, representing the true filial feeling, came near to him, and said, “Ah! my lord, let thy servant, I pray thee, speak a word in my lord’s ears ... My lord asked his servants, saying, Have ye a father, or a brother?” The root was touched; because that was where the error lay. They had sinned in regard to their father and their brother; and they were discovered. It was the grace of God that had done it for them too. Judah faces the [p. 353] thing; he judges it; he begins about their father and their brother, and we have a record of God’s feelings about Christ. God has been outraged in the death of Christ. I am sure God would bring about a true sense of what has been done in the family.
WJN In chapter 42 they confessed that they were guilty concerning their brother, and in chapter 44 they had to own their sin in regard to their father. The sin was both against their father and their brother.
FHB Primarily, this would set forth what has taken place in Israel, and the way of their recovery. They will be brought back in a future day.
JT “And they shall look on me whom they pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for an only son”, Zechariah 12: 10. The Son has been put to death, and the Father has been outraged. They brought the coat to Jacob, having dipped it in blood, and said to him: Is this now your son’s coat, or not? How terrible!
FHB “And at last he sent to them his son, saying, They will have respect for my son. But the husbandmen, seeing the son, said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him and possess his inheritance”, Matthew 21: 37, 38. That was an outrage to the Father who sent Him.
EM “We will not have this man to reign over us”.
FHB I think it is rather remarkable that the truth of the family (the “children of God”, and “brethren” ) has been brought out later than the truth of the assembly — the body of Christ, and the house of God.
JT Well, I think nothing can be more delightful than the Father’s affections, and the service of Joseph in bringing about adjustment is that we might enjoy them. That, I am sure, is what the Lord would do [p. 354] now.
EM And the assertion of His sovereignty is in connection with this.
GM I think it is very solemn to see that this adjustment should have to take place with those who are in relationship with the Father.
JT The public system of Christianity has really taken the place of the Judaism that sold Christ, and we are all outwardly connected with it. The adjusting ministry of Joseph is to deliver us from that, and bring us to recognise what an outrage has been done to the Father; that we might see what the Son is to the Father; and what our place is in connection with Christ. We can only reach the family on those lines. Saints set out with: “As many as received him, to them gave he the right to be children of God”, John 1: 12. That was their public position. “See what love the Father has given to us, that we should be called the children of God”, 1 John 3: 1. You will notice that it is not stated who called them that; the thought is they were recognised as the children of God.
Ques Do you not think that at the present moment the brother is a big test for us?
JT Yes. As loving God we want our brethren; but we want them on God’s terms.
Rem One feels that the present day is characterised by great spiritual weakness. We see how complete recovery came about here, however.
Rem It was Joseph who brought about the recovery of his brethren; they were greatly exercised through his dealings with them. Who brings about recovery now?
JT The Lord does it. It is remarkable how Joseph’s cup comes into it.
Ques Would He work through His people, or would He do it sovereignly?
JT Well, He does certain things [p. 355] mediately.
Ques Would you connect the cup with the Lord’s supper?
JT Well, it was Joseph’s cup. “The cup of the Lord” is a test.
Ques Is, it more the fellowship side?
JT Yes — the 10th chapter of 1 Corinthians. The surest way of helping others is to pursue the path indicated in 2 Timothy, because we have to leave many with the Lord. The Lord knows they are there, and the surest way of helping them is by being true to the fellowship. “The Lord knows those that are his; and, Let everyone who names the name of the Lord withdraw from iniquity”, 2 Timothy 2: 19.
FHB The flesh is just the same as it was in Joseph’s brethren, and if it is allowed at all, it will spoil the family relationships.
JT In Genesis 49 Jacob blesses each one in the family in his place; but in the last chapter we read, “When Joseph’s brethren saw that their father was dead, they said, If now Joseph should be hostile to us, and should indeed requite us all the evil that we did to him! And they sent a messenger to Joseph ... And Joseph said to them ... Fear not ... I will maintain you and your little ones. And he comforted them, and spoke consolingly to them”. So that they are now set up in confidence. That is the end reached in Joseph’s dealings with them.
FHB It must have been very painful to Joseph, after all, to see their want of confidence in him.
JT And then, after that we are told something about his private life, it says, “Joseph dwelt in Egypt, he and his father’s house”. This brings out what a father he was, not only as regards his own children, but down the line three generations. “The sons also of Machir, the son of Manasseh, were born on Joseph’s knees”. Abraham dwelt with the first and second generations; Hebrews 11: [p. 356] 9.
Ques How would this apply to the present time?
JT In caring for the young. Genesis is a seed plot in regard to the truth, and particularly in regard to family relationships. The crops that spring from this are seen in the books that follow.
The apostle Paul, in writing to the Thessalonians, says: “We ... have been gentle in the midst of you, as a nurse would cherish her own children — yearning over you”, 1 Thessalonians 2: 7, 8. When the skill of the nurse and the affection of the mother go together you may be sure of a good generation. I think the result of Joseph’s paternal care is seen in the daughters of Zelophehad (Numbers 27), because they were of the direct line of Machir. Joseph had the inheritance in view. “God will certainly visit you”, he says, “and bring you up out of this land unto the land that he swore unto Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob ... ye shall carry up my bones hence”.
FHB What is your thought in connection with the daughters of Zelophehad?
JT Well. Zelophehad was descended from Machir, the son of Manasseh, and the sons of Machir were born on Joseph’s knees. The parental influence would extend down the line.
FHB And the result is shown in their claiming the inheritance.
JT Yes; they were in accord with Joseph.
FHB “If children, then heirs”.
Rem This is, I suppose, the way the truth of the inheritance is carried on.
JT You will notice that it was in a public way they made their claim. They stood before Moses and Eleazar and the princes and the whole assembly, and they made it clear that their father had nothing to do with the band of Korah. He was not a partisan.
WJN Is it not remarkable that sisters claim it?
JT Those who belong to the family claim the inheritance.
[p. 357] Rem Making their claim in public before Moses and Eleazar and the princes and the whole assembly, would correspond with, “He that doeth good cometh to the light”.
FHB I suppose it would be always termed “good”, where there is a spiritual desire to claim the inheritance. The Lord will always acknowledge that, and make it good in souls, for it is pleasurable to Him. So He justified these women, They speak right, He says.
EH Then we should manifest to everybody by our life and ways that we have gone in for the inheritance; another scene occupies and engages our hearts.
JT The previous chapter shows it was accorded to them: “Unto these shall the land be divided for an inheritance”. It was available. They might have conveniently avoided this if they had no heart for it, by saying that their father had died; and indeed, how many excuses we can make; but it required faith and spiritual balance for these women to go forward and claim their inheritance as they did.
Ques Would this be the result of the enjoyment of right family conditions?
JT I think so. They knew what belonged to them as daughters of Zelophehad. How many convenient excuses can be made if we wish to stop short of this? We receive an inheritance among those that are sanctified by faith in Christ; Acts 26: 18. That is where the inheritance is for the moment; and any excuse (sometimes a very plausible one is given) may be brought forward for not claiming it. These women would have it.