READINGS IN MATTHEW'S GOSPEL (2)
READINGS IN MATTHEW’S GOSPEL (2)
JT It is thought that we should look further into what is said, in chapter two, of the magi as representing the gentiles. It is of note that the element which represents the gentiles should appear so early in the book. They are said to be “from the east” and had “come to do him homage”. They say, “Where is the king of the Jews that has been born? for we have seen his star in the east, and have come to do him homage”, verse 2. That there should be such an evidence of the work of God at this particular time is very noticeable. It should affect us in a worshipful sense — particularly we who are ourselves of the gentiles. They had come evidently with light and guidance from God, and with the means of service. It says in verse 11: “And having come into the house they saw the little child with Mary his mother, and falling down did 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 11, 12. They were governed by a principle in determining the other way; that is to say, they had guidance which was different from what is merely natural or what mere nature would suggest. It seems as if these thoughts should help us as proceeding to chapter 3; that we might have the principle of “another way” before us. It is a way that is different from what mere natural wisdom would dictate.
RWS Is “another way” the key to the book, in that sense? It comes in early in the book, and Jerusalem is discredited at once as moving on merely religious lines. It says, “But Herod the king having heard of it, was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him”, chapter 2: 3.
JT I think that your suggestion as to the key is [p. 24] good. We thus have the key of knowledge according to God and it is there so early in the book, to be found, as you might say, where it is needed. We are told in this book that the representatives of natural or human religion — that is, the scribes and the Pharisees — compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is become such, they make him twofold more a son of hell than themselves, which is a very striking thing as to what humanly accredited religion is and how utterly futile it is for guidance in the things of God.
WWM Would the magi coming to light represent the secret work of God in people not naturally religious?
JT Just so; and the magi came in unexpectedly, showing that God was operating in them.
ANW To return another way is divine instruction. There is a note on the word ‘instructed’ indicating that it was an answer after consultation. A star guided them to Bethlehem but they held a consultation as to how to return; so it says, “And being divinely instructed in a dream”.
JT They were instructed not to return to Herod; that is to say, the negative side was against Herod, or that element. But “another way” is, as you might say, left to ourselves, because it is a question of the work of God. The work of God in itself can be trusted.
AAT They were guided first by a star and then later instructed in a dream.
JT The word is, “Now Jesus having been born in Bethlehem of Judaea, in the days of Herod the king, behold magi from the east arrived at Jerusalem, saying, Where is the king of the Jews that has been born? for we have seen his star in the east”, verses l, 2. Now you are contrasting what they had seen with the instruction they received according to verse 12. That is, a star is contrasted with the instruction. The instruction is definite in a negative sense, whereas [p. 25] verse 2 speaks of what they saw. We can hardly say much as to guidance in verse 2. They are inquiring for the king that had been born, but the star did not appear in Jerusalem. They did not get the guidance from Jerusalem where they inquired for it. It is said in verse 10: “And when they saw the star they rejoiced”, but the star was outside of Jerusalem. It is said, “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”, verse 9. That is to say, the star reappeared there, evidently outside of Jerusalem. And then in verse 12, we have the instruction in a dream. It was negative instruction, that they were not to return to Herod, but then they were guided by the other way. They were instructed in a dream not to return to Herod, but they departed unto their own country another way. The guidance is in the star, and then in the other way, which is the work of God, a matter that we have to consider. Guidance is sometimes objective, but clearly here it would be subjective, because it is a question of what arose in their own minds, which was the work of God. The other way would have arisen in their own minds, and it proved to be right.
Ques Would the two milch kine in 1 Samuel 6 illustrate what is meant by the other way? They took the right way in connection with the return of the ark from the land of the Philistines, going contrary to nature in leaving their calves shut up at home.
JT That is very good; nature in the kine was governed in the same sense as we have it here with the magi. It is the understanding of what the work of God suggests. The kine arrived at the right spot, even though not possessed of the intelligence of men, and yet able to determine what to do in taking the right way.
ANW It was of God, I suppose, that the chief priests and the scribes should quote from the prophet [p. 26] Micah. The Scriptures were known by them in Jerusalem. Is that part of the divine design?
JT I would say that the importance of that would be that the scribes and the chief priests were the responsible persons in Jerusalem, and had among themselves the means of determining things in the Scriptures. They used what they had, and used it aright, but the magi worked on another principle in arriving at “another way”.
RWS The star is connected with the East and with the place where the little Child was; He is not connected with Jerusalem. And should we deduce from that, spiritually, that Jerusalem has no part in these divine operations? The magi did not return to it.
JT Just so; so that it says, “And they having heard the king went their way” (not his), “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”, verse 9. Now our hearts are directed to the little Child. We have the Person and He is with His mother. That is what we are told; “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”. She is there where she should be, but the little Child is the prime thought. It is for us now to see how it bears on us; how the Lord Jesus comes into our inquiry; and how the natural element, and even what is recognised as of God, has its place, but not properly linked up with the work of God. The work of God is a thing in a subjective sense that we have to trust. We can trust the Scriptures, of course, and the divine guidance that we get providentially we can trust, but mere nature we cannot trust. Its suggestions we cannot trust. Even the use of Scripture itself, by unspiritual persons, cannot be trusted. It may mislead us because it is in wrong hands. The Scriptures have to be in their own [p. 27] setting.
CN So they offered these gifts to Him, not to His mother.
JT That is a good point. Luke would follow that up, quoting the Lord as saying that His mother is not to be made much of unduly. A certain woman said, “Blessed is the womb that has borne thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked”. But the Lord said, “Yea rather, blessed are they who hear the word of God and keep it”, Luke 11: 27, 28. The Lord points to the hearers of the word of God instead of to His mother. The time comes when it is the word of God we have to trust.
JTJr We may have to do with divine things but not be spiritual. Mary had to do with the Child, but she later proved to be unspiritual.
JT Yes; the Lord had to say to her, “What have I to do with thee, woman?” John 2: 4.
APT The “little child” is mentioned eight times in this chapter. Would there be some spiritual touch to that?
JT I think “the little child” is a beautiful thought. It is not the Babe as in Luke. Luke would stress the very beginning, that He was a Babe. “Wherefore the holy thing also which shall be born shall be called Son of God”, Luke 1: 35. But the little Child in Matthew has a very peculiar touch. It suggests formation. I mean to say, the Lord was literally born and grew; He grew up into Boyhood and Manhood that was of God. Growth and formation are in mind in this chapter.
FHL Referring to the gifts made by the magi, would there not be further instruction in the way they were offered, the gold being first?
JT I would say that.
FHL It was remarkable for gentiles to have this appreciation.
JT You might say that they were in accord with [p. 28] the very earliest scriptures. In Genesis 2: 12 it says, “The gold of that land is good”. That is to say, the encircling of the river of God brings that out. They are in accord with that. They have something that can be offered, and which was acceptable, too. It is to be observed that it is offered to Him; the little Child, and not to the mother.
AR Why does it appear in Matthew that the little Child required more care than in Luke? It seems that He is more exposed.
JT You will notice the father is in evidence in the instruction. It is said in verse 13, “Now, they having departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appears in a dream to Joseph, saying, Arise, take to thee the little child and his mother, and flee into Egypt”. That is to say, Joseph now is in evidence and, you might say, of leading importance, instead of the mother, although the mother is also mentioned. But the father is of leading importance and this is in keeping with Matthew because he presents the line of David. Joseph is not simply the husband of Mary; he is the son of David, although it is important that he was the husband of Mary. But he is the son of David and throughout this chapter he is of importance. So that it says, “Take to thee the little child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be there until I shall tell thee; for Herod will seek the little child to destroy it”. So that the little Child now is entirely in evidence as the leading and prime thought for us.
CAM You have stressed in ministry on Luke’s gospel how all is guarded there in a priestly setting from all that would be unholy. Would you say that in Matthew, which has a royal setting, that protection is from violence? Herod slew all the boys under two years.
JT I think Matthew brings into prominence the royal line, but it is not simply the royal line, for there [p. 29] is power and protection in it as well. Joseph can be trusted as a protective element. So that the little Child is entrusted to him, but the mother also is there, because she is needed for the little Child at that particular juncture.
CAM Is it not remarkable that one so great and wonderful should be in a position which, outwardly, is almost precarious?
JT It seems almost precarious, but still not precarious. For what God is doing, however precarious it may seem, is always trustworthy.
CAM I am sure that is so. Outwardly it would look precarious, but in truth it was not.
FNW In view of these frequent references to the little Child, why is it the Son, when God speaks, both in chapter 2: 15 and in the end of chapter 3?
JT Because the time has come for sonship to come into view. We are in mind as those who need instruction as to this great truth, and the time had come, even though the Lord was still very young, for the Spirit of God to bring in the idea of the Son of God and it runs through this whole gospel. So the word is, “And he was there until the death of Herod, that that might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord, through the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son”. That word was needed to bring the full light to bear on the position. It is a question of the Son of God, as well as the little Child needing protection; the Son of God is there.
AR In order to understand sonship, we have to leave what Judaism represents.
SW Is it not significant that the incoming of this great Potentate, the Son of God, should be brought to light through the Gentiles?
JT It is remarkable, and it seems to me that the comments made for us should help us in pursuing the subject before us — the gospel of Matthew — because it [p. 30] is the Son of God and the Son of God in power. It is not the Son of God in heaven, but it is here where He is needed in power; hence, all the truth as to the Son of God bears on the assembly, because the assembly is in mind, as being next to Christ Himself, for protection.
SF Would the stone cut out without hands in Daniel 2 be typical of the power of the kingdom and in that way be a similar thought?
JT That is what we have to rely on now — the stone cut out without hands. It will break to pieces all that is of political importance. Of course, as long as the purpose of God needs these political systems they will remain, but when they are no longer required the stone cut out without hands will break them to pieces. That is the way the matter stands. It is very suggestive as to what we can rely upon now.
Ques Would Joseph be in full accord with the mind of heaven about the little Child?
JT Well, to be in full accord would be saying much. We have to go by the facts mentioned and not attribute to Joseph beyond what is really there. Matthew makes more of him than Luke does.
RWS Would you enlarge on your remark about the protection the assembly is afforded today?
JT I think we rely on the Son of God. I think that is the position. We are outwardly feeble, but the Lord says, “And behold, I am with you all the days, until the completion of the age”, Matthew 28: 20. That is the power and means of protection for the assembly. It is under the Lord’s hand for protection. That is the way I would look at it.
RWS Would the protection be of the assembly in localities as well as the general idea?
JT It would; the assembly as it is constituted now. It is not the assembly in heaven: it is the assembly here on earth, and the Son of God, too, is viewed as active here on earth. Matthew has these great facts before him,
[p. 31] and we are to have them before us; that we can count on the Son of God for protection.
JAP Is that what comes out in chapter 14? The Lord stilled the waves. The disciples were in the ship, and they said, “Truly thou art God’s Son”, verse 34.
JT Just so. That is before the full thought of sonship comes out in Matthew. Chapter 16 brings out the full thought of the sonship of Christ; but the idea of protection is there. “Truly thou art God’s Son”. It is not by revelation, but by observation; by things that were observable; that could be seen; in which the Son of God was active. The revelation is in chapter 16 which is the full thought, as remarked.
FHL The revelation of chapter 16 is followed by the words in chapter 17: “This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight: hear him”, verse 5. There are three representative men there, Peter, James and John.
JT That is good; and later in that chapter the Lord brings out sonship, referring to the kings of the earth, to illustrate what He has in mind.
WFK How does the Spirit come into this? The Lord Jesus said that the Spirit will guide us into all the truth.
JT That is another idea, of course, but it enters into this gospel. We get the Spirit in relation to the Lord Himself in the end of chapter 3: “And Jesus, having been baptised, went up straightway from the water, and lo, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him: and behold, a voice out of the heavens saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found me delight”. The Spirit identifies the Son, coming upon Him as He is baptised of John.
WFK Is the Spirit not a protective element? “There is he who restrains now until he be gone”, 2 Thessalonians 2: [p. 32] 7.
JT The Spirit is here as restraining what is evil, so in that sense His service is protective.
APT In the Lord’s address to Thyatira He says, “These things says the Son of God”, Revelation 2: 18. Would that fit in with the protective element in connection with that church?
JT Quite so; I believe that is what comes out in connection with that assembly. Rome had already acquired its power, but the address to Thyatira brings in the Son of God. “These things says the Son of God”. It is the Son of God that meets that situation and protects us in it.
APT It is encouraging to see how the truth is maintained in spite of the pharisaical religious element all around.
JT Hence God has graciously brought to light for us in recent times the full truth of the Son of God, and we can nestle in that and enjoy the sonship of Christ in our services; but at the same time He is in power. The Son of God is in power. He is the Christ. The idea of the Son of God is that He is placed over the house. In Hebrews 3: 6 He is said to be Son over God’s house.
AP-f Would the fire prepare us for companionship with the Son of God as seen in Daniel 3: 25?
JT The fourth person seen was like “a son of God” and he walked with the other three.
AP-f Is it not remarkable that the gentile monarch should have discerned this fourth Person?
JT It is remarkable indeed, as entering into Daniel. What a suggestion there is for protection for us in sufferings! Shadrach, Meshach and Abed-nego are in mind! They are the three. Daniel is out of sight. He is not in that picture. It is these three sufferers cast into the burning fiery furnace. And then the king sees one like unto a son of God. That is the thing to lay hold of. That is the power in which we [p. 33] can trust.
JTJr I suppose the myrrh these magi brought would have in mind that there would be suffering, for Christ suffered and He told His disciples that He would suffer. Then the apostles suffered and there has been suffering in the assembly down to the present time.
ANW Matthew 2: 23 says, “So that that should be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophets, He shall be called a Nazaraean”. ‘Prophets’ is in the plural: Does that imply the general trend of the prophetic word, that He should be in that despised position? It is through the prophets. Micah is referred to in verse 6, but when it is a question of, “He shall be called a Nazaraean”, it is through the prophets. You cannot exactly find that.
JT Just so.
SF Does the position in Nazareth compare with the position Paul presents as to the apostles in 1 Corinthians 4: 13 — the things that caused them reproach?
JT Just so. I am thankful for the reference to the Nazaraean. The prophet who speaks about Him is not so important as the fact that the general trend of the prophetic word calls attention to it. Of course, Luke would enlarge on that, because he enlarges on Nazareth.
WWM It says in Revelation 19: 10, “The spirit of prophecy is the testimony of Jesus”. That is what was here in that lowly Person.
JT Yes; the spirit of it, quite so.
RWS The prophets uniformly speak of His glory and the glory of the kingdom, but a spiritual mind selects a section which alludes to the reproach.
JT Quite so. Now we shall have to pass on to chapter 3. It ends with what we have already remarked; that is, the Spirit of God descending as a dove and coming upon Jesus. The Lord is spoken of earlier in chapter 3, but John is especially stressed, and the Lord is seen coming to be baptised by him. What is brought out is that He is fulfilling all righteousness. That is [p. 34] what we are to be impressed with in chapter 3. John is calling attention to Christ and what was needed to prepare the way for Him. It is for us to share in the light that John was given. That is to say, we are to fulfil all righteousness. And then the Spirit comes upon the Lord after that testimony. Jesus said in verse 15, “Suffer it now; for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness”. That is a large matter, but it is not too large for the assembly. It was not too large for Christ. John was to learn this great lesson. And therefore it says, “Then he suffers him”. That is to say, John is subject; and subjection is a great point in the matter of the work of God. Then we are told, “And Jesus, having been baptised, went up straightway from the water, and lo, the heavens were opened to him”. They were not opened to John, but to Jesus. “And he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him; and behold, a voice out of the heavens saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight”, verse 17.
JTJr While John was an able minister, which these verses would show, yet he had to be adjusted in regard to the fulfilment of all righteousness.
AR How extensive would ‘all righteousness’ be?
JT We have just spoken about that. The idea of all righteousness is not too great for the assembly. The assembly characteristically understands it. It was in the Lord’s mind in its entirety, so that it becomes a great subject as entering into this chapter. It is not only certain parts of it but all righteousness. The whole matter of righteousness enters into our position.
JS Was it the word John required for adjustment?
JT Just so. He was not ready for it at first.
ABP Would there be some suggestion in the Lord being seen in this gospel as called out of Egypt, at the Jordan, and tempted in the wilderness? Israel had faced these circumstances and had marked out a certain way, but “another way” is marked out now by Christ and would the assembly come into that?
JT I would think so. The idea of righteousness begins with Genesis 15 where the first mention of the word of God is found in the Scriptures. It is said of Abraham that he believed God and it was reckoned to him as righteousness. The thought of righteousness enters specially into Abraham’s position; and now the Lord brings it in in its fulness. John does not bring it in. He rather detracts from it at first, but the Lord brought it in in its entirety, as we have said.
FSC In what sense is the word “suffer” used here?
JT To bear with a thing. The Lord would say, in principle, ‘Bear with Me’. He would graciously put it that way to John — ‘Bear with Me, because I am urging righteousness’. It says, “Then comes Jesus from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptised of him; but John urgently forbad him”. So the Lord has to exercise His authority. John says, “I have need to be baptised of thee”, but then the Lord was doing something and John was questioning it, and so the Lord says, in verse 15, “Suffer it now; for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffers him”. That is to say, he bears with the Lord. John baptised the Lord because the Lord wished it. What was to come out was the idea of all righteousness.
RHS Is the Lord identifying Himself in His baptism here with those of Israel who had repented and confessed their sins, or is there a further thought in it?
JT I think the Lord identifies Himself graciously with the repentant remnant of Israel, but, as we have said, there is the idea of all righteousness.
TEH How extensive is the scripture, “The righteous requirement of the law should be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to flesh but according to Spirit”, Romans 8: [p. 36] 4?
JT Well, it goes to the full thought, I would say. Of course, the righteous requirement of the law would not be so great as ‘all righteousness’, but at the same time you can hardly limit the righteous requirement of the law in its application to the believer according to Romans.
TEH When I receive the Spirit of God I should immediately operate on the basis of fulfilling all righteousness?
JT That is the idea, I would say. The great place the Spirit of God has in Romans 8 emphasises that.
ABP Would you think that the idea of “another way” is brought out in 1 Corinthians 13; that love is the basis of working out everything?
JT Yes. The great place the Spirit has in Romans 8 is in keeping with the doctrine of Romans in which practical righteousness is worked out. The whole doctrine of Romans is a matter to be held in mind, too. The Spirit is mentioned as many as seventeen times in Romans 8, showing that practical righteousness is worked out in that way.
JAP Do you think that the disciples at Ephesus, in Acts 19, were on this line of fulfilling all righteousness when they were baptised to the name of the Lord Jesus?
JT Quite so; they submitted to the idea involved in the facts that Paul set before them.
CN “Thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness”. Does that imply some specific demonstration on the part of the Lord? ‘Thus’ would mean something concrete?
JT Yes. The plural shows that the Lord is linking John with Himself. The Lord is not saying, ‘It becometh Me’; He brings John into it; so that we must bring all the saints into this great matter of righteousness.
APT Is there significance in the fact that the voice says, “This is my beloved Son”? In Mark it is, “Thou art my beloved Son”.
JT [p. 37] I think the idea is to bring out the Person of the Lord Jesus, His loveliness in the eyes of the Father. It is the voice that speaks. In Mark the Father speaks to the Lord Himself; here the attention of others is called to Him. “This is my beloved Son”, is a question of testimony.
JTJr Mark would have the servant more in mind in singling out the Person.
JT Quite so. It is the Father speaking to Him there. It is very comforting that there is such a thing as that; the servant gets a word direct to himself. You see it illustrated in Paul’s own history, as in Acts 23: 11.