READINGS IN MATTHEW'S GOSPEL (1)
READINGS IN MATTHEW’S GOSPEL (1)
Matthew 1: 1 - 25; Matthew 2: 1 - 12
JT The brethren will be aware that it has been decided, under God, as we trust, to look into the gospel of Matthew in this series of readings. What underlies this proposal is largely, that the heavenly position of the assembly has been much stressed, and rightly, for it is heavenly, it is the thought now to balance this by considering the assembly as here on earth. The vessel that was seen by Peter in Acts 10, came down from heaven as a great sheet bound by the four corners. It was let down to earth, but was received up again into heaven and remained there. The sheet being bound by the four corners would mean that it was secure; what was in the sheet was also secure, and the creatures were cleansed, as the second voice declared. Whilst the assembly is heavenly yet its members are historically earthly. All have been born upon earth, and further, they have been born of God on earth, and Matthew has in mind that these things have an important bearing on us.
Pentecost contemplates a large number of persons being converted. We have no such numbers later, and although, it is said, that the number of the men had become five thousand, the Scripture tells us, that the result of one day’s work was three thousand converts. Acts 2: 41. It is believed that Matthew has all this in mind. The stability and reliability of what is of God in christianity is in mind and also the distinction attached to it, even as to the personnel and their ancestry; whence they came and how they were here for God, running on through the generations under the [p. 2] head of fourteen. There are three fourteens of generations. The greatness of the personnel and their ancestry is in mind, so that God is not ashamed of His people from Matthew’s point of view. He is not ashamed to be called their God.
It is thought that the Lord will help us to look into things from this standpoint, but especially to see the character of the persons that are in mind and mentioned with such evident accuracy under the formal heads of three fourteens. So that we may well repeat Solomon’s word: “Thy people which thou hast chosen, a great people”, 1 Kings 3: 8. They are not great in the human or outward sense, but they are according to God; not only because they are going to be in heaven, but because of their present stability and reliability. These generations were stable. Men who are mentioned in the list were of the highest character whom God honoured and used. The genealogy therefore runs down through them to the Christ. So that the Lord’s own genealogy is honourable in that sense, especially in Joseph the husband of Mary being so distinguished. We have here, “Book of the generation of Jesus Christ, Son of David, Son of Abraham”.
ANW Would the Lord’s own words at the end of the gospel confirm what you say? He says, “All power has been given me in heaven and upon earth”, chapter 28: 18. And then in verse 20, “And behold, I am with you all the days, until the completion of the age”.
JT That would be in view of all this, I would say. He is with us in view of all that is actually stated in Matthew. He is here in the assembly. He is not spoken of as having gone up to heaven, according to Matthew’s account. He is here where the saints are. He is the great Person that is in mind, and to reach Him is the end in view — the Christ, as He is called, chapter 1: 17: “From the carrying away of Babylon unto the Christ”. He is [p. 3] no less a Person than the Christ and these are His generations.
JS Would verse 1 be a sort of key to the book?
JT “Book of the generation of Jesus Christ, Son of David, Son of Abraham”. If the word key may be used it would be just that. He is not presented as Son of God — the point is not that. He is the Son of David and the Son of Abraham; but He is the Christ. That is the point according to this gospel.
WFK Why is Adam left out of this gospel?
JT He is not great enough. He is discredited almost at the outset. In Genesis, however, we have, “This is the book of Adam’s generations”, but clearly God must directly choose Christ’s generation. There were persons of great distinction prior to Abraham but God is not thinking of them here. In Matthew, certain ones are rejected from the line of the kings because their parents were not suitable; although they were in the line of David they are left out as unsuitable. God did not see that it would honour the line to leave them in. I think, if we see that God is making a careful selection of these generations, and that He has His own mind in making up the list, then we shall see that the persons are great and suitable from His point of view.
ABP What is the purpose of four women being mentioned in the list?
JT They are great by reason of the work of God in them even though there may be discrediting things about them, as there are about all of us. The discrediting things that have happened in our lives do not set aside the greatness that we have from God’s point of view. I believe that John supports Matthew in that sense, showing that we are children of God, the right having been given to us to take that place as believing on His name, “who have been born, not of blood, nor of flesh’s will, nor of man’s will, but of God”. It is a question of family distinction or glory which is granted [p. 4] to the saints of this dispensation. Thus it is said, “See what love the Father has given to us, that we should be called the children of God”, 1 John 3: 1.
ABP Would Judah’s admission that Tamar was more righteous that he show that she was qualified to have her name in this line?
JT Quite so. It shows that she is a fit person to be in this noble lineage. Ruth also, and Rahab, had distinguished themselves as subjects of the work of God. Solomon’s mother was distinguished in that she had been the wife of Urias.
TEH These two great fathers in the genealogy had distinguished sons — Isaac and Solomon. Do they help to enhance the greatness of Abraham and David? Solomon said, “For I was a son unto my father, tender and an only one in the sight of my mother”, Proverbs 4: 3. And Isaac was the outcome of a great man like Abraham.
JT Very good! Solomon was a son unto his father and Isaac went up to mount Moriah doing the will of his father. These two sons bring out, typically, the unique character of our Lord’s sonship.
AR Royalty seems to take the lead in this gospel — Son of David — and then it says, later, “David the king”, and then, “Joseph, son of David”.
JT That is to bring out the distinction in the line — “David the king”. It is a question of the king — royalty.
AR Do you think that royalty should mark us in administrative matters in the assembly?
JT We shall see, as we proceed in Matthew, that Jerusalem is the city of the great King and how much is said of the kingdom. Royalty, and rule as flowing out of it, are God’s thought, not Bolshevism, or Communism, which are satanic.
FHL You spoke of John supporting this line in Matthew. Revelation 22: 16 says, “I am the root and offspring of David”.
[p. 5] JT The root is the greater of the two for the root refers to Deity, and hence it establishes just what we are saying, for the root is Christ. The personnel are in mind, who they are, and their origin, and the chief amongst them is the Christ, and He is God. Emmanuel, one of the names given to Christ here, is, “God with us”.
CAM Would you say a word as to the expression used in the prophet Isaiah and quoted in Acts 8: 33; “who shall declare his generation?”
JT That is the passage that the eunuch was reading; Isaiah 53. It is not to be ignored that he was reading such a chapter as that, and that he was a great man, a great personage with the queen. And the magi were great persons, too, as seen in Matthew 2.
CAM Would it be right to say that there is an answer to that question in that with which we are occupied?
JT “Who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living”, Isaiah 53: 8. The quotation in Acts 8 is from the Septuagint. There is no doubt that the Holy Spirit as here would adjust our minds as to all difficult passages, and clarify everything for us; at the same time we are to bear in mind that there is no attempt to clarify the inscrutable. “No one knows the Son but the Father, nor does anyone know the Father, but the Son”, Matthew 11: 27. There is the inscrutable which we cannot compass. At the same time the Holy Spirit, as I said, is here to clarify everything that a creature should know, and Christ’s generation mentioned in Isaiah 53 is not what is before us in Matthew 1. That is connected with Christ’s life which was taken from the earth. Christ’s life as here in the flesh was unique. No one but Himself had part in it; what He has now is a risen glorified life. What He had in flesh and blood was laid down in death and it seems to me it may be regarded as without generation:
[p. 6] what He took on in resurrection was life in a wholly new condition.
CN Will you tell us why these generations finish with the Christ?
JT Well, it is a question of the Christ. The Samaritan woman said, “Is not He the Christ?” as if she were a person who would find out. She asked a question, but the Lord had told her who He was: “I who speak to thee am he”. So that there are those who find things out by inquiry in the temple of God as it says, “... and to inquire of him in his temple”, Psalm 27: 4. We find things out by inquiry in the temple of God.
ABP Does the name Jesus involve mystery?
JT Well, that is a proper question to bring up, because the word in verse 21 is, “Thou shalt call his name Jesus”. We have already been speaking about the brethren and what we are called, that is, “children of God”! But here it says, “And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus”. Joseph is to give the name. And then it goes on to say, “... for he shall save his people from their sins”. Thus the idea of saviour is involved in the name Jesus. Then the last verse says, that Joseph “knew her not until she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus”. And then there is another word which is to be noted, in verse 23: “Behold the virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which is, bring interpreted, ‘God with us’”. So that what is said under the heading of name is remarkable, both as to Emmanuel and as to Jesus. There is a footnote, referring to the name Joshua, in Exodus 17: 9, which reads, ‘Jah the Saviour, called Jesus in Greek: see Hebrews 4: 8’. So that I think we may say that there is mystery in the name.
EAR You were alluding elsewhere to the fact that there were three persons who visited Abraham in the [p. 7] manifestation in Genesis 18, and one of them was none other than Jesus. Would the name in that way convey the great mystery of the incarnation?
JT Just so; John 1: 3 and Colossians 1: 16 show that He is the active One in the Godhead. As to what was said of Matthew at the beginning of the meeting, it is not simply that we are to be with Him in heaven, but He is with us here; in Matthew it is “God with us”. God is here tonight with us.
CAM Philip preaching Jesus would satisfy the inquiry of the eunuch.
ANW So that the Christ is the anointed Man. Thus would Jesus involve the Godhead?
JT Well, just so. Some of us were speaking as to Philippians recently, and about the designation Christ Jesus: “For let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus”, chapter 2: 5. That is the anointed Man. But Jesus is the greater really, for it is Jah the Saviour. It implies Deity.
APT In Hebrews 13 it says, “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and today, and to the ages to come”, verse 8. Does that fit in with what you have been saying in regard to the inscrutability of His Person?
JT I think that is right: He is “the Same”. Psalm 102: 24 - 27.
FHL In Isaiah 9: 6, it says, “his name is called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace”. Would that enter into the illuminating of the name?
JT Just so; it is the name, and hence the striking allusion in the baptismal formula in the end of this gospel — the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. It is the question of the name of the three Persons. It is one name.
JTJr Is the Christ the same as the Messiah or does it go [p. 8] further?
JT The two names are equivalent it the original. Messiah, of course, is the Hebrew, and Christ is the Greek.
JTJr I was thinking of what was made known to Daniel. It was the Messiah, alluding to the coming in of the Messiah to change everything for the Jews, Daniel 9: 25, 26. It is not an allusion to a personal name, but rather to His office.
JT It is the Messiah, the Prince, and means the Anointed, and the Head and Ruler.
SM The woman of John 4 says, “I know that Messias is coming, who is called Christ”.
JT She had that understanding.
JTJr The prophet Isaiah speaks of Immanuel. Is that more personal?
JT Immanuel is “God with us”. The word El is God, and is a name of power that is much used in the Old Testament.
JTJr With further reference to the name Joshua in Exodus 17: that name comes in in regard to conflict. What would you say as to that?
JT I suppose it would be symbolical in that chapter. It is the great conflict called the battle of Rephidim. It is said, “For the hand is on the throne of Jah; Jehovah will have war with Amalek from generation to generation!” The word generation is not to be overlooked because we are dealing with generations here and the war is going on. It would be Amalek in the spiritual meaning, as alluding to the devil acting through the flesh. It is what the flesh is as representing Satan and the combat goes on. Hence it says in Ephesians, “Our struggle is not against blood and flesh, but against principalities, against authorities, against the universal lords of this darkness, against spiritual power of wickedness in the heavenlies”, chapter 6: 12. I think the passage in Exodus serves us well, not only as to the Lord’s name, but as to His [p. 9] military prowess, because Revelation 19 brings out how He is to wage war.
CN So that in Philippians 2 it says, “Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and granted him a name, that which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of heavenly and earthly and infernal beings, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to God the Father’s glory”. That involves His prowess in a military sense.
JT Quite so.
TNW Is the greatness of the position established by the record of the Lord’s ancestry going back to David and Abraham?
JT God has made a selection of these persons. Matthew gives us their names. They are all distinguished. The beginnings of the gospels afford much light as to the Lord’s Person. John begins with the greatest thought; that is, that He is God. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”. Then Luke says, “Wherefore the holy thing also which shall be born shall be called Son of God”, chapter 1: 35. And Mark says, “Beginning of the glad tidings of Jesus Christ, Son of God”. So that the gospels afford light as to the Lord’s Person. But Matthew is peculiar in that he makes so much of the ancestry of the Lord, who is said to be the Christ in the verses of which we have been speaking. Why should there be so much made of the persons, and why such a selection? Why should some be eliminated that might ordinarily have a place in the genealogy? I raise the question to confirm what we have already said. We are to ask questions. The Spirit of God makes much of questions, and these Bible readings open up the truth through questions and answers, but it is through the Holy Spirit having part in it all, and fitting us to have part in it, too, and the answers to our questions will come through Him. So, why the number of [p. 10] persons, forty-two persons? There were those that might have been numbered, but they are eliminated, because of the moral conditions that existed, especially because of their affinity with Jezebel. They refer to the supreme effort of the devil, in this dispensation, in a certain system that is running on to the end. Jezebel is the type of it. It is because of Jezebel having part with certain kings that they are left out of the genealogy. They are not fit to be in it, showing that God is making much of the personnel of the generations of Jesus Christ. We are to examine each one, whence he came and what marked him.
EAK Is it the thought to call attention to what is divinely selected, set over against a darkening background, in the references to the three divisions of fourteen generations each? Nationally, the position is declining, but the divine selection is maintained, would you say, bringing in the Christ, despite the decline?
JT Yes; the decline did not eliminate or in any way set aside the lowliness that existed when our Lord was born. Luke brings this out especially, and stresses the holiness of the persons who had to do with Him. The present is a time of lowliness and a day of small things, but the Christ makes up for all that. He is going to fill the universe; so that He can make up for any smallness that may attach to us because of outward circumstances. I think the address to Philadelphia is to be noted in that same sense; “thou hast a little power”. But the little is made up for by the Lord Jesus Himself in the place He has in the letter to Philadelphia. Love has a great place in that letter, too. Love makes up for the smallness.
JAP The apostle says that David fell asleep and saw corruption after he had ministered in his own generation to the will of God, but in speaking of the Lord Jesus he says, “he raised him from among the [p. 11] dead, no more to return to corruption”, Acts 13: 34. Is that what we are to come to?
JT Yes; the Person who has annulled death and brought life and incorruptibility to light.
WWM Would you say that the affection of the apostle for Israel is seen in Romans 9 as he speaks of his brethren? He goes on to say, “... whose are the fathers; and of whom, as according to flesh, is the Christ, who is over all, God blessed for ever”, verse 5. It would affect him as he considered these generations all down the line.
JT Quite so.
AAT You suggested that John’s presentation of the Lord as God is greater than what we are considering?
JT Yes. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”, John 1: 1. You cannot have anything greater than God. But that is John’s line. Matthew is dealing with what is down here, and what is capable, and distinguished enough for God to attach Himself to and attach His testimony to. And so we do not get the record of the Lord being translated in Matthew, because it is a question of what is down here. He is down here; and hence it is “God with us” in Matthew. Ephesians 2: 6 would say that we are to be up there, even as the Lord said, “that where I am ye also may be”, John 14: 3. But in Matthew the Lord is seen as down here where He is needed, where the power is needed: “There am I in the midst of them”, chapter 18: 20, and also, “Behold, I am with you all the days, until the completion of the age”, chapter 28: 20.
JTJr In Matthew 1 the Spirit of God proceeds with the generations until He comes to Joseph and Mary. It says, “Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ”, verse 16. It is very carefully worded.
JT Yes; it refers to this great Personage. We should note, that it is “of whom was born Jesus”. Luke tells us that the angel said, “The holy thing also which shall be born shall be called Son of God”. The stress is laid on Mary here as well as Joseph, but much more is made of Joseph, because it is a question of the male side and that he is the son of David.
CN Is it in your mind that the qualities that are seen in these generations should be seen now in the assembly?
JT Quite so; because we have the Person who can do things now in the Christ. We have reached the Christ. When we reach the full thought of christianity we must attribute the Spirit’s presence to Him for He has sent down the Spirit. That is really how the truth stands, that He has sent down the Spirit, so that everything is now under Him, the coming in of the Spirit and all that the Spirit does stands in relation to the Christ.
FNW In verse 17 it says, “... unto the Christ”. Would that be an assurance to us at the present time, that the chain of generations will carry on to the coming of the Lord; what is of God here will stand?
JT What we have been saying as to the generations is historical. If you have in mind what is effected through the gospel, then there would be something in that, but the force of what is before us now is the historical thing. The names and the number of these great forefathers are recorded and they extend to the Christ.
WFK Does Abraham come first because he is the father of us all according to faith?
JT Well, he comes first in the sense of genealogy, but David comes first in the sense of distinction: “Son of David, Son of Abraham”. Seemingly, the idea is that royalty is the leading feature because it is a question of persons. We might say that David could not be greater than Abraham, but then that is not the way it is put [p. 13] here. Christ is not said to be the root of Abraham; He is the root of David. The stress is laid on the king.
WFK The apostle says, in Romans 4, that Abraham is the father of us all.
JT That is true, but now we are dealing with distinctions. God is dealing with distinctions, and He is eliminating certain persons because they do not have distinction. Faith is not the subject here.
FHL What you said about Adam is remarkable, because he was great enough to have a book of his own generations.
JT That is the truth in chapter 5 of Genesis. There are about ten references to generations in Genesis and even Ishmael is mentioned, showing that God has family lines in His hand, but when it comes down to the generation of Jesus Christ, then we have real quality, and God is not ashamed of those persons.
JTJr One subdivision of the generations is from Abraham to David. Would you say that, in a certain sense, the summit in the ways of God was reached in David?
JT Yes; the summit in the way of distinction. The word summit has a right place in Matthew because there are seven mountains in this gospel, seven distinctions in the sense of mountains, and what we are talking of enters into the matter. The line is from Abraham to David, and from David to the carrying away of Babylon, and from the carrying away of Babylon to the Christ. These are the distinctions, but in result, the Christ must be first. Things are to be resolved in that way under the teaching of the Spirit in this wonderful gospel.
GVD Why is one of the divisions of the generations at the carrying away of Babylon, when things were at such a low ebb at that time?
JT Well, the quality was there nevertheless. In spite of the reproach and the carrying away of Babylon,
[p. 14] royalty was there. The royal line was there and it reached its full thought in the Christ.
ETP Would that link with Nehemiah, in that he established the position according to genealogy with those who returned from Babylon to Judea and Jerusalem?
JT Quite so; certain were not allowed to get their distinction until a priest should arise with Urim and Thummim, showing that priesthood enters into this matter. Certain ones were eliminated until the priest with Urim and Thummim should arise.
AR The royal line has really never been lost. Joseph is called the son of David. It extends right on to the end.
JT Quite so; so that in Romans. Paul’s leading epistle, it is the Christ: “come of David’s seed according to flesh, marked out Son of God in power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by resurrection of the dead”, chapter 1: 3, 4. That is where the Lord’s Person comes in.
EAK This would correspond with the seed royal that the enemy sought, through Athaliah, to destroy. And is the same thought carried on in Herod’s attack in Matthew 2? The enemy was acting in the same way against the royal seed.
JT Quite so; that is very good. Jezebel was a similar type of person; she destroyed the prophets, who represented the word of God; but Athaliah was aiming at the seed royal, and Matthew brings out the seed royal.
VCL Does the careful selection involved in these names prepare us for the selection of those that were fitted to be companions of the Christ as His apostles?
JT Quite so. Some of us were noticing, in the second book of Psalms, that there are female companions and male companions, and it is said of the Lord that He is anointed with the oil of gladness above [p. 15] His companions. All that points to what we are speaking about. The names are carefully selected; and He carefully selected His apostles. It is said by Luke, when the Supper was to be instituted, that the twelve apostles were with Him. I suppose the number twelve is to fit in with what we are speaking of in the sense of administrative power; but ancestry is the point here and it is a question of who the persons are. The distinctions which they have all come down to the Christ.
ABP You spoke earlier of Joseph being honoured. Did you have some particular qualities in Joseph in mind?
JT Well, I think it is good to bring that up now. It says, “Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ”. That is Joseph, but Mary is also distinguished in that Joseph is her husband. She has that distinction, and he is the son of David. Then it says, “Now the birth of Jesus Christ was thus: ...” and we are told that Mary was betrothed to Joseph and that he was a righteous man: “her husband, being a righteous man ...” That is one of the best things that you can attribute to a man, and so it is that Matthew makes more of righteousness than any of the other gospel writers. Hence Joseph is distinguished in this way. The idea of righteousness is carried down when the Lord is baptised, evidently to bring out that righteousness peculiarly marked Him, stressing the place it has in this gospel. When the Lord was baptised He said to John the baptist, “For thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness”, chapter 3: 15. All righteousness is an immense thought, and Joseph has the distinction of being a righteous man in the extraordinary circumstances mentioned. Thus the enemy had no advantage at a critical time in the testimony. This points, therefore, to the place that righteousness has in the economy of [p. 16] the assembly.
JTJr Joseph, doing what the angel enjoined him, at the end of chapter 1, is in keeping with his righteousness. It says, “But Joseph, having awoke up from his sleep, did as the angel of the Lord had enjoined him”, and then it says, “And he called his name Jesus”. He is a subject, righteous man.
FSC It says as to Mary that “she was found to be with child of the Holy Ghost”. And then Joseph is spoken of as a righteous man.
JT That is one of the things to be noted. What can be questioned about that? We are now considering the Messiah, and Mary has a peculiar place in relation to the Messiah. It is a question of the quality of the persons in the historical line through whom the Messiah came in, and this chapter is the one that treats of it. It is what may be called legal accuracy, not legal in the ordinary sense, but as proving unquestionably that Christ is the Messiah. It has to be established legally that He is the Messiah and this chapter is for that very purpose.
And then it says, in verse 24, “But Joseph, having awoke up from his sleep, did as the angel of the Lord had enjoined him, and took to him his wife, and knew her not until she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus”. Joseph did it; it shows that he knew what to do, which is to be noted. At a most critical time he knew what should be done and it all bore on this great point as to the Lord’s Messiah-ship. It is legally established before the whole universe that He is the Christ.
CAM Would you say that what had preceded was necessary? so that it was the right time for the Lord Jesus to be born.
JT Quite so. Everything was as accurate as it could possibly be. If the magi were astronomers they would understand this, because they were dealing with the heavens. We all know something of the accuracy [p. 17] of the movements of the heavenly bodies. Even if we only read it in books we know something, but the knowledge thus acquired is not equal to the accuracy that is found in this chapter as to the Messiah-ship of Jesus, the Christ, and as to the time that He should be born.
CAM Is Joseph, the reputed father of Jesus, the result of this royal line?
JT Quite so; there is not a hair’s breadth of inaccuracy about it, whatever men may say. There is not one king mentioned that should not be. The record is infinitely accurate. I use the word infinite, because it applies to an infinite Person, the Lord Jesus; it must be accurate, and it is accurate.
CAM It says, “Esrom begat Aram”. These men are alluded to in 1 Chronicles 2: 9, 10, but there is nothing outstanding recorded in Scripture as to them and some others in this line.
JT We have already been alluding to the descent from David down. There was a certain reduction in quality and distinction in the persons that were mentioned at the time of the carrying away of Babylon, but the line was really there, and it was really there as it was in David. The Messiah-ship of Christ is established indisputably, as remarked.
CAM In spite of the wickedness that Babylon represents in church history we have all the fragrance of Christ now with us spiritually. It is not lost.
JT It is not lost, and one is more than ever impressed by this meeting tonight of the greatness of Matthew’s gospel and all that enters into it. Accuracy was required and it was there.
ANW If we could inquire into the accuracy would we not find that those names that have been mentioned, such as Thamar, Rachab, and Ruth, are there in the same honourable way as the others? There was that which had discredited them, but that side is not in mind [p. 18] here.
JT God had to do with all this, and He made His selection of these men and women. They are there, and they are to be there. Accuracy required that they should be there.
APT In verse 22 the reference is not only to what was spoken by the prophet, but what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet. That makes it extremely accurate.
JT What we are saying must be so because the Old Testament scriptures said it would come to pass, and so it says, “Now all this came to pass that that might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord, through the prophet”. Everything is accurate.
JTJr The angel says, “Son of David”, verse 20. That is the proof of the line of David; it is established by what the angel says.
ANW Whether we go for proof of Matthew 1 to Chronicles, or to Micah for proof of Matthew 2, the thing is precise. He is born precisely where the prophet said the Christ should be born.
ABP Would the angel saying, “Son of David” to Joseph indicate that the genealogical register in heaven is in perfect synchrony with that on earth?
JT Quite so; things must agree, because the teaching of the book runs on to: “All power has been given me in heaven and upon earth”, chapter 28: 18. There must be perfect agreement between heaven and earth in all this matter.
JS And His star coming in in chapter 2 is to confirm all this, is it not?
JT That is good; I think the magi help us out a little in the matter of personnel. Chapter 2 was suggested for our consideration to see the kind of men that were used. It is said, “Behold magi from the east arrived at Jerusalem, saying, Where is the king of the Jews that has been born?” Well, how did they know? They say, “We have seen his star in the east, and have come to do him homage”. There is no question about it. What has happened in the East has the same accuracy as what has happened in the West. It is what happened in relation to Christ.
WFK Do you think His star was different from other stars?
JT Certainly; it is His star. It is distinctive. The magi were undoubtedly divinely helped in their understanding of the star. They say definitely, that it is the star of the King of the Jews that has been born. Can any astronomer today tell us of it as having seen it?
WFK I thought they might know it as being different from other stars.
JT Well, just so; they knew it was the very star. It must be the greatest star of all. How did they know that it was His? That they knew clearly shows that these men were godly and had guidance from God.
FHL Does this link on with Balaam’s prophecy as to the Star that would come out of Jacob? “There cometh a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel”, Numbers 24: 17.
JT There is no indication that the magi knew that scripture and that they discerned this star from what Balaam said. I would think that it was divinely given to them to know whose star this was, because they have not question about it. The light the magi had would be in keeping with Job who also does not formally refer to Scripture.
EAK Is there a suggestion of the assembly emerging early in this gospel? Heavenly light is given to the gentiles, whereas Jerusalem is thoroughly out of accord with the mind of heaven concerning this glorious Person?
JT I think it would help us, when we get to the end of this gospel, as to the place the gentiles have in the final message, chapter 28: 19. I think the magi here are intended to link on with the gentiles, according to [p. 20] what you might call the appendix to Matthew. There is an appendix to John and there is an appendix to Matthew; and the appendix to Matthew treats of the gentiles. The allusion would be to Christ in relation to the gentiles in the millennium. The completion of the service is not recorded in the New Testament. It is not recorded that the message sent, according to chapter 28, was ever fulfilled. Instead of the message to the eleven being fulfilled by them, it is Paul that brings the message to the gentiles. So that this commission to go to the gentiles, at the end of Matthew, is still to be fulfilled, and I believe the magi afford a link as to them. According to what we have been saying, they are distinguished already. Cornelius also was distinguished before Peter met him.
ANW The text shows that the magi were in touch with God; they were divinely instructed, and they got a divine answer.
CAM Do the magi connect with the wise men of Daniel?
JT It says, in Daniel 11: 33, “They that are wise among the people shall instruct the many”. The footnote refers to the wise as the Maschilim. It is a question of the wise understanding, and I believe that the wise men have that character. It is a question of what God can link Himself with, and that God is not ashamed of them. He need not be ashamed of the magi here. They are not great astronomers or navigators, as far as we know. It is a question of their relations with God, and they know the star of the King of the Jews, for they are instructed as to this. It says, “And being divinely instructed in a dream not to return to Herod, they departed into their own country another way”. They are a link, you might say, with Rahab. She sent the spies out by another way. Another way suggests a principle which comes into our position. It is not the, world’s way, or man’s way, but [p. 21] the divine way.
ABP You are suggesting that the last few verses of Matthew’s gospel relate more to the completion of the age than to the present dispensation?
JT Yes; I think the appendix in Matthew 28 is more or less mysterious as John’s appendix is mysterious, but we can see that it runs into the millennium. There will be a message then such as is indicated in the end of Matthew 28, and I believe it will link on with the gentiles, and God will not be ashamed of them. His work will go on in them as it will go on among the Jews.
ABP It is very interesting that this passage should be so extensively used to support the idea of missionary travelling in the present dispensation.
JT If it is only by history we can tell that there is not much result from missionary work, for Asia is still unchristianised.
TEH It says in the last chapter of Daniel that many shall be purified, and be made white, and be refined; but the wicked shall do wickedly; and none of the wicked shall understand, but the wise shall understand.
JT Yes; they are called Maschilim, as already mentioned, and they link on with the magi and with the book of Job. What Job had is in measure in keeping with what the magi had. The line runs down among the gentiles, because God is the God of the gentiles, also, it says.
CN Will you say a word on the effect on the wise men, as recorded here, when they saw the star and “the little child with Mary, his mother”.
JT “And they having heard the king went their way; and lo, the star which they had seen in the east went before them until it came and stood over the place where the little child was. And when they saw the star they rejoiced with exceeding great joy. And having come into the house they saw the little child with Mary his mother, and falling down did [p. 22] him homage. And having opened their treasures, they offered to him gifts, gold, and frankincense, and myrrh. And being divinely instructed in a dream not to return to Herod, they departed into their own country another way”, verses 10 - 12. They departed to the country of the Gentiles but they were worshippers of God, they were worshippers of Christ.
FNW Is there a suggestion of how the heavenly city will afford light to the Gentiles, and what will develop according to Revelation 21?
JT Quite so. “Her shining was like a most precious stone”. And then, later, it says, “And the nations shall walk by its light; and the kings of the earth bring their glory to it”.