THE ASSEMBLY (4)
THE ASSEMBLY (4)
JT It may be remarked at this particular juncture that there is considerable exercise amongst the brethren as to the types of the assembly which we are considering, but particularly as to Rebecca, in Genesis 24, because that chapter affords so very much about the Spirit. It has attracted great attention on the part of the brethren in Great Britain and elsewhere, but especially in Great Britain. Much has been said of it that is very illuminating if we could all follow it, and much was said at our last reading when that chapter was considered. But much has been said since then, touching on the truth unfolded in the type, the chief servant of Abraham’s house being the leading personage in the chapter, along with Rebecca and Isaac, and being regarded as a type of the Holy Spirit. It has been noticed from time to time in looking into it that the name of the servant is not given; that is, he is spoken of as the chief servant of Abraham’s house. Much has been said as to him, because the Lord seems to have in mind that we should have the Holy Spirit before us, especially as viewed in this type in relation to Isaac and Rebecca. It is not suggested that we now go back to what was considered at the last reading, because there would be no need for that. I think it was fairly well dealt with, and there is hardly time to revert to what we had then. But I mention all this to lead up to the truth that is now before us, so that the brethren may see that the truth of the Holy Spirit is involved in it, implying, as the type shows, that He is spoken to. The servant spoke to Rebecca and Rebecca spoke to him. So that the inference is clear that those of us who form the assembly are being spoken to; the Spirit of God is speaking to us, and it is our privilege to speak to Him, and profit from all that enters [p. 568] into that.
RWS Does the stress on the thought of the well and water here in chapter 29 involve that we are still in the realm of the Spirit in this type?
JT Well, I think another reference may be made; that is, to John 7 where rivers of water are said to flow out of the believer. And added to that is Numbers 21 where we have the great type of a well, referring to the Spirit, so that there is much in the idea of wells and water. In John 7 rivers of living water flow out of the believer. The matter of wells and water, which comes in very aptly in Genesis 24, comes also into this 29th chapter which we are considering now in relation to Rachel and Leah. Reference to wells is found in both chapters.
AR There is a condition in this chapter which is not in chapter 24; it says that there was a great stone at the mouth of this well and it had to be removed. I wondered if that may be like a hindrance with many as regards the Spirit.
JT That is a very suggestive remark, that there is such a hindrance as that. The stone has to be removed from the well’s mouth, and Jacob did that; he rendered that service.
AR It involves a spiritual man to do that?
JT Well, quite so.
WAT It awaited the gathering of all the flocks before this stone could be removed. It says, “We cannot until all the flocks are gathered together”, verse 8. Would that suggest the bringing in of the assembly before the Spirit is available? The stone was not removed for the flocks which appertained to Israel; it awaited the coming in of the assembly.
JT Perhaps you would enlarge a little on your thought. You have spoken of that recently.
WAT I was just asking as to it. The truth about the Spirit did not come out under the old economy as we know it today. But we have the truth of the Spirit,
[p. 569] so that it really awaited the coming in of the believers under the new economy — those of the assembly.
JT Well, that might be amplified by reference to John 7: 39; the word there is, “the Spirit was not yet, because Jesus had not yet been glorified”. But now He is glorified, and the Spirit has come.
ANW But is it not with peculiar design that the Lord should say, right in the middle of His remark, “... as the scripture has said”? Verse 38 reads: “He that believes on me, as the scripture has said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water”. That statement put right in the middle of His remark gives great force to the Old Testament scriptures which must have been in His mind.
JT Very good; “... as the scripture has said”.
RWS In the allusion to the stone on the mouth of the well in our chapter it says, in verse 3, that when all the flocks were gathered together they rolled the stone from the mouth of the well, but in verse 10 Jacob, without waiting for all the flocks, went near and rolled the stone away. Jacob apparently did it alone. I wondered if that might indicate a good lead which others might follow.
JT Well, that is good. It has just been remarked that a spiritual person is required. Of course, it is not wise to enlarge on any one; it is rather wise to stress the spiritual side. Whether there are few or many who are engaged in the service, the spiritual should be stressed. And a meeting like this, of course, affords opportunity for that, whether we can join in, as it were, and roll away the stone, which would suggest anything that may be stopping the ministry.
ETM It appears that Jacob moved the stone before the fixed time according to the custom?
JT It was when he saw Rachel. It says in verse 10: “And it came to pass when Jacob saw Rachel the daughter of Laban his mother’s brother, and the sheep of Laban his mother’s brother, that Jacob went near, and rolled the stone from the mouth of the well, and watered the sheep of Laban his mother’s brother”. That is the solution of the whole matter; that is to say, it is the idea of the relation that existed between Jacob and Rachel just as it also existed between Isaac and Rebecca. It is the same kind of relation. It is a question of the previous relationship in both types.
CAM It says in verse 8, “they roll the stone from the mouth of the well”, as if that was a sort of methodical thing that happened all the time. But this move by Jacob seems to be prompted by love.
JT Just so; the relationship between Jacob and Rachel and Leah on the one hand, and Isaac and Rebecca on the other, is a great point in each of these two types; especially in the case of Rebecca because Abraham calls his servant to swear to him that he will not take any wife for his son except of his own relations.
CAM It would seem that Jacob’s move in regard to the well was, in type, because of love for the assembly.
JT So that the question comes up immediately as to where we are. I think we can rightly assume that we are here this afternoon because of spiritual links between us, and that these links centre in the assembly. And, of course, that is what God is aiming at in view of the final display of the assembly.
JHE Nearness is implied. Joseph could say to his brethren, “Come near to me, I pray you”, Genesis 45: 4. And here “Jacob went near, and rolled the stone from the mouth of the well”.
JT Quite so. And then another thing is that Rachel was a shepherdess; that is, the matter of shepherding enters into the subject.
CAM Would that mean that spiritual moves or spiritual help with regard to the ministry would involve considering for all the saints? Is it not evident that [p. 571] there has been wonderful patience in waiting upon the saints to lay hold of these spiritual things?
JT And the question arises as to whether the brethren are shepherding or are being shepherded. The spirit of shepherding comes into this whole matter, and it comes into the assembly, too.
VCL Does the frequent use of the word ‘brother’, which is mentioned some six or seven times in the chapter, bring in the idea of the unity which is to mark us as understanding the truth which these types represent?
JT Quite so. It was mentioned, in prayer, that, “one is your instructor, and all ye are brethren”, Matthew 23: 8. So that the Master in heaven is the great Shepherd of the sheep. It is the ministry that the Lord is carrying on now to gather His people together, and the question is whether we are being gathered, whether we are submissive to the Lord’s ordering and principles.
Ques Would it seem as if there was unity there? It says, “They roll the stone ...”. verse 8.
JT Well, it is a general thought: “And they said, We cannot until all the flocks are gathered together, and they roll the stone from the mouth of the well, and we water the sheep”. That is a general principle which we might apply to a meeting like this; it refers to what is customary. There are well-known times for special meetings, but then that is not all. Although the principle was there in verse 8, the stone was rolled away when Rachel appeared; that is to say, when one who represents the spiritual family appeared. And Jacob was the leader in this; he was looking for a wife, and when he saw Rachel, he rolled away the stone. He was actuated by love.
RWS Before Rachel came there was a sort of spiritual etiquette in the way Jacob greeted the persons at the well. There seems to be mutual respect. Jacob says, in verse 4, “My brethren, whence are ye? And [p. 572] they said, Of Haran are we. And he said to them, Do ye know Laban the son of Nahor? And they said, We do know him. And he said to them, Is he well? And they said, He is well”. I wondered if that was not a delightful atmosphere preceding the introduction of Rachel.
JT Very good; although they were not of the spiritual family. Jacob was of that family, as was Rachel and Leah and Isaac and Rebecca. The generalities are, of course, very important, but the specific things are the things to stress at a time like this. The specific thing is the relations of the spiritual family, and that leading on to the idea of union.
AR In 1 Corinthians 12 the apostle Paul says, “in the power of one Spirit we have all been baptised into one body”. But then, after the relationship has been established, he suggests the idea that we drink into the one Spirit. In our chapter the spiritual relationship exists, but Jacob works out the idea of drinking.
JT Well, just so, we are made to drink into one Spirit; that is to say, it is the divine action that effects it. And, of course, the action of making us drink into one Spirit enters into meetings such as we are in now, all having in mind the great matter of union. We should keep before us that there is such a thing as union with Christ, and it begins with the family relationship.
Ques Is there anything in the fact that this is in the land of the children of the East?
JT Well, that is a distant idea. The prophetic word helps as to that, because it says that Jacob fled into the country of Syria and for a wife he kept sheep. All these things tend to help us as to this great subject before us. It is a great matter to have the prophetic word in our minds.
ABP Would Rachel in any sense be typical of what the Lord found in the disciples before the thought of the assembly was [p. 573] introduced?
JT Well, I suppose so. The gospel of John would show how they came into it. It says that the Lord loved Lazarus, and Mary, and Martha. They represent the spiritual family, not that others did not, but they did particularly.
ABP It is striking that in John 11 there is the removal of a stone, and reticence on the part of Martha that it should be done. The circumstances are not similar, but there is a stone covering the grave of Lazarus and, when the Lord Jesus said to remove it, Martha demurred.
JT Just so.
JHE Jacob says, “Behold, it is yet high day; it is not time that the cattle should be gathered together; water the sheep, and go, feed them”. In Acts 19 Paul raises the question about the Spirit, “Did ye receive the Holy Spirit when ye had believed?” Having received the Spirit, the school of Tyrannus follows, where they are fed.
JT Well, that is very good, I am sure, but this passage brings in the climax leading up to the family relationship, for spiritual relationship leading on to union is in mind. So that we have, “And it came to pass when Jacob saw Rachel the daughter of Laban his mother’s brother, and the sheep of Laban his mother’s brother, that Jacob went near, and rolled the stone from the mouth of the well”. That is, it is not the general principle here, it is a specific case.
ANW There were various flocks there, but this is “her father’s sheep”. Whether the others got the benefit or not we do not know, but the service was for “her father’s sheep”. It says, “While he was still speaking to them, Rachel came with her father’s sheep”.
JT We have Jacob to begin with, then we have Rachel, then we have the father and the brother; so that the spiritual family is in mind; and presently we have the idea of union introduced. And that is the [p. 574] point for us now, as to whether or not we understand it.
AR Do you have in mind what Jacob said to Laban, in verse 21? “Give me my wife”. Actually, she was not yet his wife.
JT Quite so; the idea of union was in mind.
AR Is it the same idea as in Revelation 19? “His wife has made herself ready”.
JT Quite so.
FNW Are you regarding Rachel as a type of the assembly?
JT No; we are coming to that; we must have an adjustment before we come to that, which is very often the case. But Rachel is now in mind; she was in Jacob’s mind. Leah was to come in, too; Leah was in her father’s mind. We have to wait for that, for Leah really is a type of the assembly, but she is a type of the gentiles; whereas Rachel is a type of the Jewish christians at the beginning of the dispensation. There are very few of them now.
EAL In Genesis 24 we are told that Isaac led Rebecca into his mother Sarah’s tent; and he took Rebecca, and she became his wife, and he loved her. He loved her after she became his wife. Jacob seems to have failed in that, because we are told that he hated Leah.
JT Well, quite so; there is a great discrepancy, which we shall come to, and probably the Lord will give us light as we come to it, because Rachel was in Jacob’s mind, whereas Leah was in her father’s mind. There is a discrepancy, and these things have to be reconciled. Very often there are such things amongst the brethren and they have to be reconciled, and it requires grace to reconcile them; in fact, it requires the prophetic word to reconcile them. In this case the book of Hosea gives us that prophetic word.
JAP Whom does Laban represent?
JT Well, he is the father of both, he is the father [p. 575] of Leah as well as Rachel; but Leah comes in first, because God would have the gentiles prominent in this type. Rebecca came in as a great type in the 24th chapter, but now we must have the gentiles. The apostle says, “This salvation of God has been sent to the nations”. The Jews faltered in taking on their great privileges, and God turned to the gentiles, and the passage quoted further states: “... they also will hear it”, Acts 28: 28.
VCL Do the gentiles come into the place of the firstborn? It says, in verse 26, “It is not so done in our place, to give the younger before the firstborn”. I wondered if Leah, representing the gentiles, came into the place of the firstborn.
JT Well now, that raises another question, because “the assembly of the firstborn who are registered in heaven” is found in the book of Hebrews. It is a great principle. “Ye have come to Mount Zion; and to ... the universal gathering; and to the assembly of the firstborn who are registered in heaven”, Hebrews 12: 22. But I doubt that it is the point to link up the firstborn with Leah, because it is only a question here of the father’s advantage and what would accrue to him; he would have his eldest daughter married first. But God had other thoughts in His mind, and we have other thoughts in our minds, too; that is to say, we know something about the assembly of the firstborn who are registered in heaven. And this passage will lead to that. Jacob was thinking about Rachel, whereas the person to be united to Jacob at first was Leah, and we want to fix that in our minds, and see what Leah stands for.
CAM The apostle Paul had great affection for the Jewish brethren, and yet, in Romans 11, he alludes to putting the gentiles first, finding that that was God’s mind. Would that connect with this?
JT Well, it does connect with it, and that whole [p. 576] great parenthesis in Romans 9, Romans 10 and Romans 11 connects with it. Paul could say, “For I have wished, I myself, to be a curse from the Christ for my brethren”, Romans 9: 3. But then that was historical; he came to the idea of gentiles in Acts 28. We have already quoted that; “this salvation of God has been sent to the nations”. And that is the position we are in today; that is to say, the type before us now is Leah, and that refers to the gentiles. So the question is now whether we can take that in and put it together in the spiritual sense.
AR Peter needed to get adjusted as regards the gentiles before he went to Cornelius.
JT Quite so; Peter did not want to go to the gentiles; the Lord corrected him. “I have sent them”, the Spirit of God said, of the gentiles, to Peter in Acts 10: 20. The Spirit of God had to take the matter up, and He constantly has to take matters up with us.
AR So the sheet coming down, with what was in it, was to help Peter. “What God has cleansed, do not thou make common”. That was for Peter.
ABP Would it seem then that Jacob becomes a figure of the responsible element, like the apostles at Jerusalem; they finally discovered that the great thought was the assembly, the nations? In Acts 15 James stood up and confirmed what Peter had done with respect to the gentiles by bringing in the ministry of the prophets.
JT Quite so, so that that chapter is the great council of the church, the council of the assembly, and it was the solution of a great difficulty that had arisen; the Jewish difficulty. We are always suffering from that sort of thing, so that the word is, “Wherefore I judge”; someone has to state the case as to where the Spirit of God is leading us.
ETM In the calling of the elders at Miletus, Paul was concerned as to the shepherding of the assembly of God, which He had purchased with the blood of His own.
[p. 577] JT Well, that is the idea; that is what enters into the moment, the idea of shepherding. But now we have come on to the idea of union, and the person that was to be united to Jacob was Leah, not Rachel. Rachel would come in, but she comes in later; she comes in as the Jewish remnant in the millennium, whereas now we are dealing with Leah, who is a type of the assembly among the gentiles. We here are nearly all from the gentiles and it is very important to keep that in mind.
TNW Is the word of Paul applicable here, that this is a great mystery, in connection with his saying, “I speak as to Christ, and as to the assembly”? We are not able to understand everything easily.
JT It is not great in the sense that we do not understand it, because God has wonderfully opened up the truth as to the assembly for us.
RWS Why does the type involve that Rachel should be more loved than Leah, and Leah actually hated? Why is there that admixture in the type?
JT Well, these are facts that come in here which we can easily follow and understand. Leah was hated, and God saw that she was hated; God took account of that, and therefore He gave her children and she became the fruitful mother of children; whereas Rachel was not a mother of children. Of course, God came in specially for her later, so that it is God in both cases.
RWS But Leah is the greater type here, is she not, involving the great thought of union? That is in your mind, is it not?
JT She is; Rachel is a great type, too, but with her it is rather a question of the Jewish remnant in the millennium. I think that is in mind in Rachel, whereas Leah represents the gentile position.
ANW That explains why she is less beautiful than Rachel.
JT So she is; she is tender eyed, it says. Apparently she was defective as to her beauty; and the gentiles had [p. 578] that defect when God took them up; they were not as attractive as the Jews. The Jews were better educated and had great advantages which Paul speaks of in Romans 9: 4, 5, but at the same time God made up the defect. He made up the defect in Leah, and He made up the defect of barrenness in Rachel. And the great point, dear brethren, is the making up of defects. Paul comes in and makes up defects, whatever they may be.
DMacd There is no thought of defect in the words: “... having no spot, or wrinkle, or any of such things”.
JT Quite so; that is an Ephesian thought.
AMacD And does Leah rise to the thought of being united? In verse 34 she says, “Now this time will my husband be united to me”.
JT Well, quite so, but union and being united are two distinct thoughts. I think being united goes before union; union is the prime thought that we come into, union with Christ.
ANW Do you mean that unity involves the unified state of the brethren, and union means our attachment to Christ?
JT And that we all belong to a spiritual family. We are not Jews and gentiles, we all belong to a spiritual family. And on that principle we can be united to Christ.
JAP “The two shall be one flesh”.
JT That is it, exactly.
ABP Would it be right to say that this matter is set out objectively in perfect pattern in Isaac and Rebecca, whereas in Jacob’s history we see the devious way in which we are led because of what we are? We do not arrive at it quickly, but must go through experience to reach it. Is it more the subjective working out of the thing in us?
JT Just so, I would say that. But what has been said about unity coming before union is very important,
[p. 579] and let us inquire into it, whether we are united to the brethren, and whether we are capable, spiritually, of being united to Christ.
WAT It says, in verse 22, that Laban gathered all the men of the place together. Would that show the unity of which you speak? All the men were there.
JT Laban gathered all the men of the place together and made a feast. Well, the outcome was very distressing. And we do not want to forget Laban’s conduct.
CAM John 10 speaks of one flock, and one shepherd; that would be unity, would it not? And it would be prior, of course, to the great matter of union.
AR Kinship must come first.
JT It is seen in Isaac and Rebecca first. Abraham caused his servant to swear that the wife for Isaac must be of that kindred.
AR And you have stressed the idea that the brethren must come first, before we get the truth of the assembly.
JT Then we come to the idea of kindred, that we are fit to be united to Christ, and that is an eternal thought. We are to be united to Christ eternally.
SJM Would Ephesians 2 help? It speaks of the middle wall of enclosure being broken down, making of twain one new man.
JT Well, that is the idea. Ephesians has that in mind; Jew and gentile are brought into oneness, one new man.
JAP In Ephesians 4 it is unity: “... until we all arrive at the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God”, etc., and then chapter 5 brings in what we have been speaking of; being united to Christ.
JT That is all in Ephesians; quite so.
Ques Is union in mind in the marriage supper of the Lamb?
JT Union involves that we are kindred to Christ;
[p. 580] the same order as the Lord Jesus Himself, which implies redemption and being built up in the truth by the ministry of the Spirit, so that we are fit for heaven and fit to be the Lamb’s wife, the bride of Christ. We are fit for that. So that the matter is shown to John: “I will show thee the bride, the Lamb’s wife”. We have to be shown these things.
WWM Do you think that we must bow to divine sovereignty to understand things properly?
JT Quite so.
TEH When Leah was brought in it caused strife. The apostle Paul suggests that he had great combat for the Colossian saints who would be gentiles. Would that be the Leah side? The beauty of Leah at Colosse may not have been discovered immediately by the apostle, as they apparently were not known to him at first.
JT Well, the great point for us is Ephesians. That is the prime thought we are leading up to. The Spirit of God is leading in that direction, that we might be united to Christ and be fit for union.
JHE Would the naming of Leah’s sons show what we have been speaking about? Their names mean, Seeing, Hearing, United, and Praise.
JT Very good.
Scripture may confirm itself, but does not necessarily repeat. One scripture is enough to establish any point, as John 10: 35 shows. Some would make the Old Testament secondary, or a matter of detail, but the New Testament constantly insists on the equality of the Old Testament with itself.