THE ASSEMBLY (6)
THE ASSEMBLY (6)
JT Our subject at this time treats of Joseph and Asnath his wife. The brethren will be aware that nothing special is stated as to Asnath. In each of the types that we have considered before, such as Eve, Rebecca, Leah and Rachel, there have been elements of virtue which have been recorded. In this case, what we may speak of as virtue is almost entirely seen in Joseph. He is outstanding in the family of Abraham — outstanding in the whole book, really, as a type of Christ, and as viewing him thus, it becomes a matter of the facts relating to Joseph’s history, especially in that part in which he typifies Christ as raised up on high. Indeed, in Acts 2: 33 we have the word: “Having therefore been exalted by the right hand of God ...” So that we are to view Asnath as typifying the assembly from that standpoint, and how she runs through to the end of the dispensations — not simply the present dispensation, but all dispensations — because the assembly is seen as a family coming down from God out of heaven, in the book of Revelation. And, of course, from that standpoint, we cannot view her as either Jew or gentile. It is a question of our heavenly relations with Christ and all that is suitable to Him. So that it is said at the end of the Bible, “The Spirit and the bride say, Come”. They say, Come, to Christ.
PL Do we get this order in Philippians 2 where we have His exaltation, renown, and authority? 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”, verses 9, 10.
JT Quite so; Joseph has the name of Zaphnath-paaneah, meaning ‘Saviour of the world’, or ‘Sustainer of life’.
AR Is that why he is one of the most outstanding types in the Old Testament?
JT I think he is one of the most remarkable types in the Old Testament. It is the type that runs through the book of Acts, you might say. When we come to the end of Acts, we have the statement by Paul to the Jews: “Be it known to you therefore, that this salvation of God has been sent to the nations; they also will hear it”, Acts 28: 28. So that that position, in this sense, would correspond with this type.
PL Would Colossians come into this? Is it Christ received amongst the gentiles when He was refused by His brethren after the flesh?
JT Quite so; and then in Ephesians, I would say, there is a combination of Jew and Gentile; nevertheless, the full thought is in it; that is to say, “I speak as to Christ, and as to the assembly”, Ephesians 5: 32. It is not the assembly linked up with either the Jews or the gentiles, but Christ and the assembly. “I speak”, he says, “as to Christ, and as to the assembly”, and that, of course, comes down to our own times. So that what we are speaking of relates to ourselves as forming part of the assembly.
ABP Did you suggest that Joseph’s history spans the present and the coming dispensation? — that it carries right through the recovery of Israel?
JT I think so. The future dispensation would imply His exaltation, too. The Jewish remnant will come into that, of course. We considered Rachel and Leah at our last meeting. Rachel really refers to the Jewish remnant at the millennial end. Leah would link on with what we are engaged with now; that is to say, Asnath would be a gentile, but she is linked up with Joseph. And Leah was first received as Jacob’s wife, Jacob being a type of Christ there. Here it is Joseph. Leah was the first received, and Rachel, though loved first, was received last. But the word said of her and of Joseph is, “And it came to pass when Rachel had borne Joseph, that Jacob said to Laban, Send me away, that I may go to my place and to my country”, Genesis 30: 25. It was a question of the position in Canaan — that the link should be there; and it will be in the Jewish remnant presently. But Leah has the first place, representing the gentiles and our part at the present time, which is the leading part, as of the assembly.
ANW Is the link with Ephesians confirmed by the apostle’s reference: “Because of this a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall be united to his wife, and the two shall be one flesh”, chapter 5: 31? The product of this union of Joseph and Asnath is witnessed to in his forgetting his father’s house.
JT Yes; the apostle quotes from Genesis where the statement is made in relation to Adam and Eve.
AR Would Ephesians 1: 22 apply also? Christ has been given to be “head over all things to the assembly”.
JT Quite so. So that we have a wonderful subject before us now as to the exaltation of Christ, and His bride in that relation. It is not in the Jewish relation but in the gentile relation, the gentiles carrying through the whole idea. According to Acts 28, what has happened is, that “this salvation of God has been sent to the nations; they also will hear it”. We belong to them, and are taken account of in that light.
JTJr Pharaoh would be typical of God as seen in Ephesians as giving everything to Christ?
JT Quite so; the Supreme. Pharaoh is viewed as the supreme ruler, and Joseph is next to him.
JTJr Joseph rode in the second chariot. Would there be in that an allusion to the relative position divine Persons have taken — the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit?
JT Perhaps we may be helped to open that up a little. The Lord would do this for us.
PL Is not the Holy Spirit introduced in verse 38?
It says, “a man in whom the Spirit of God is”. The New Translation uses a capital ‘S’ there.
JT In Pharaoh’s mind, it would be ‘the spirit of the gods’, I suppose; but the translator, I am sure, had the mind of God, that the Spirit of God was in Joseph as He was later in Joshua. The same thing is said of him.
GH “The Father loves the Son, and has given all things to be in his hand”, John 3: 35. Is that in an administrative way?
JT Yes; very good; the Father loves the Son; that is the point; and then, “and has given all things to be in his hand”.
EAL Although Joseph was given so much power, Pharaoh did not seem to fear him.
JT Joseph was fit for it, which is remarkable. He was actually fit for the position and successful in it right to the finish of the book. Pharaoh is the supreme ruler and represents God. There is none greater than Joseph save Pharaoh himself, the supreme ruler of Egypt, and Joseph was second to him. We have to learn that principle; what is to be first, and what second. The Lord Jesus would lead the way in that.
GVD Following on John 3, which has been quoted: “The Father loves the Son, and has given all things to be in his hand”, the Samaritans apprehended the Lord as Saviour of the world, in chapter 4. Would that link on with this section?
JT Quite so; the Samaritans recognised it; and in that chapter the Spirit shines, too. The Lord is seen as the giver of the Spirit: “the water which I shall give him shall become in him a fountain of water, springing up into eternal life”, John 4: 14.
JTJr That would bring out the fulness of the name here. There are three meanings to it: ‘Saviour of the world’, ‘Sustainer of life’ and ‘Revealer of secrets’. The idea of the ‘Revealer of secrets’ would [p. 608] come out at the present time, would it not, in what has been recovered to us?
JT Pharaoh had in mind the idea of the first two titles. We have to connect God with what he says. Whatever he meant, we have to connect God with it, because it has been preserved to us down the ages, that this is the name of Joseph.
JTJr And so Pharaoh says, “I am Pharaoh”. That would emphasise what you are saying. Is it not an allusion to God asserting Himself?
JT Yes; “I am God and there is none else”, He says.
ANW The name on the Egyptian side means ‘Saviour of the world’ or ‘Sustainer of life’, but in the Hebrew it means ‘Revealer of secrets’.
FSC Had not Joseph been an expression of God to Pharaoh?
JT Well, he had, and he became that. The whole of the book from this chapter on indicates that. We shall see how Joseph represented God. When we come to the end of Jacob’s history, he said to Joseph, “I know, my son, I know”, chapter 48: 19. That is to say, Jacob was in the intelligence of worship. And, of course, Joseph had to fall into his place because Jacob had the leading place there, prophetically. But as to efficiency, Joseph’s place is outstanding here.
FHL I think this is the third reference to the Holy Spirit in the Scriptures, which is very suggestive in connection with the thought of Christ exalted. The three would constitute a complete testimony to the Holy Spirit.
JT Very good; the first reference is in chapter 1; the second in chapter 6, and the third is in our chapter.
ABP Is not the Holy Spirit intimately linked on with the thought of sonship in Galatians, particularly? “But because ye are sons. God has sent out the Spirit [p. 609] of his Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father”, chapter 4: 6. I wondered if the idea of sonship is prominent here in the two sons of Joseph more than the idea of the assembly.
JT I am not sure that I am clear as to what is in your mind.
ABP I was struck with your remark that very little is said about Asnath, but the two sons of Joseph are prominent and I wondered, therefore, if the personnel of the assembly is more in mind in relation to sonship.
JT I would go with that; but the distinction in the end of the book lies with Jacob himself, because it becomes a question of knowledge. He said, “I know, my son”, and he guided his hands wittingly, putting Ephraim before Manasseh. He knew where to place the persons according to divine knowledge.
EAL Do we see moral greatness in Joseph? He was ruler over the whole land, but he showed great respect for his father in going to meet him.
JT Another thing in respect to Asnath is that while she is not mentioned in any virtuous sense like the previous women we have considered, yet she begets these two children, and they come into prominence.
JTJr So that while not distinguished in herself, and not lending anything to Joseph, the sons bring out, perhaps, what she was able to effect.
JT Well, it just came to me now that there is that distinction. I mean to say, there is something more there that has to be recognised. And wisdom or knowledge have to do with it. Jacob saying to Joseph, with respect to the sons, “I know, my son, I know”. He was conscious of his own dignity and greatness as a patriarch: he was Joseph’s father. So that Jacob becomes a type of God in the book of Genesis.
EEH Would you consider Jacob’s blessing of Pharaoh in that regard?
JT Yes; “the inferior is blessed by the better”,
[p. 610] Hebrews 7: 7. It says that he blessed Pharaoh and then went out.
AI Would you say that in this chapter, in type, there is so much of Christ, and the assembly has such a place with Christ, that, speaking reverently, there is no sense of any loss whatever in relation to Israel?
JT Manasseh’s name would suggest that: “For God has made me forget ... all my father’s house”. And he is distinguished in regard to that at the end: “The blessings of thy father ... shall be on the head of Joseph ... that was separated from his brethren”, chapter 49: 26. So that he is a type of Christ there, too, as separated from his brethren.
AMacD Is there something in the fact that Pharaoh gave him his wife?
JT One translation that I have seen says that Pharaoh married her to Joseph, as if he had the supreme right in that.
PL And the word gift enters into the name Asnath, as if she was given to him by another.
JT Let us see what it says so that we can get the full meaning: “... and gave him as wife Asnath the daughter of Potipherah”, verse 45. The word gave is used.
ANW And there is a link between her name and the name of Zaphnath-paaneah that Pharaoh gave to Joseph.
JT I think the godly way to look at all this is that God had it all in mind. It was not mere accident; God was overseeing it all. God oversaw all that is in the Scriptures.
JS God gave Joseph great fruitfulness among the Gentiles.
JT Well, that comes in at the end of the chapter. As to Ephraim he says, “For God has caused me to be fruitful in the land of my affliction”; and of Manasseh, he says, “For God has made me forget all my toil, and all my father’s house”. These two names are to be noticed.
JTJr Jacob is referred to in Hosea as toiling for a wife; that is, the toil the Lord had in securing the assembly. But here it is not that, is it? Is it not more the assembly viewed as given?
JT Very good; and we probably ought to be a little more favourable in what we have said about Asnath. If Pharaoh selected her, and undoubtedly he did, it was for such a man as Joseph, of whom he had said, “Shall we find one as this, a man in whom the Spirit of God is?” So that we cannot but believe that Pharaoh thought of what a man Joseph was, and what a place he was to have in the kingdom; and so he gave Asnath to him. I suppose he would think of what was suitable to such a man as Joseph.
AR Is that selection seen in that she was the daughter of a priest?
JT Yes; quite so. There may be something in that, for you can image that Pharaoh would not fail to provide a suitable wife, because it is a question of a gift: he gave her to him, as if she was suitable.
ETM You were saying that Asnath does not occupy so large a place as Joseph. Is it not one of the features of the woman of worth in Proverbs 31? It says, “Her husband is known in the gates, when he sitteth among the elders of the land”.
JT Very good; I was reading that today. Her husband is known in the gates. We cannot say that he was known because of her; but we may be sure that Pharaoh would think of what was suitable to a man like Joseph. And God thinks of what is suitable to Christ.
FHL It is stated that Joseph was thirty years of age when he stood before Pharaoh.
JT That was the Lord’s age, too, when He took on His [p. 612] public service.
ANW It also says in Proverbs 31 that “her children rise up and call her blessed”. Manasseh and Ephraim are blessed here in the reference which is made as to them.
JT Her children call her blessed, so that the motherly side comes in there. She is, you might say, in line with Sarah on the motherly side, “whose children ye have become”.
GH I would like a little more help in that Jacob toiled for a wife, but a wife was given to Joseph.
JT Well, it says in Hosea 12: 12, “Israel served for a wife, and for a wife he kept sheep”. He was an industrious man. He kept sheep, not simply that he had them, but he kept them. The Lord says, “those thou hast given me I have guarded, and not one of them has perished ...” John 17: 12. I suppose all that would enter into it.
JHE Would Asnath be God’s answer to the suffering side, whereas Jacob represents more the toiling side? Joseph was sold into Egypt and cast into the dungeon.
JT Quite so; “the word of Jehovah tried him”, Psalm 105: 19.
ABP “They afflicted his feet with fetters; his soul came into irons”, verse 18. That would imply suffering, would it not?
JT Very good.
JTJr Would both sides be seen in the Acts? The Lord has suffered, and then He is seen as known in the gates; His name was known in Jerusalem. And then the assembly is seen coming to light immediately.
JT Say more about the assembly coming to light.
JTJr The assembly began to show itself in the early Acts, did it not? Joseph had suffered, typically; now the Lord had suffered and gone back into heaven, but He has the assembly as given to Him. The assembly began to show itself down [p. 613] here.
DP And would Pharaoh recognise the piety of Joseph in giving him such a wife who was a priest’s daughter and not one from the gross Egyptian world?
JT Well, it is to be noted that she was the daughter of a priest. Whether there is any virtue in the word priest in the Egyptian, we cannot say, but still it is there.
PL In the three times that her name is mentioned, her lineage is referred to. In verse 45 as the daughter of Potipherah; and in verse 50, “... whom Asnath the daughter of Potipherah the priest in On bore to him”; and in chapter 46, “... whom Asnath bore to him, the daughter of Potipherah the priest in On”, verse 20.
JT I did not recall the reference in chapter 46. It is of note to see that she is mentioned each time with her lineage and that she is the daughter of a priest.
RWS Verse 42 speaks of the chain that was given to Joseph, and then of him riding in the second chariot. Then we have the name which Pharaoh gave to Joseph, and finally, that Pharaoh gave him Asnath as wife. Is she a crowning feature of the section? She is no afterthought.
JT Please enlarge a little on that.
RWS Well, he was given glory in Egypt; there was the ring and the chain, and the bowing the knee, but that is hardly the same as the wife. I wondered if Asnath being given to him was the crowning thought.
JT Very good; I would go with that fully, especially since the word gave is used in relation to her.
AR Joseph’s two sons were born during the years of plenty.
JT They were born into good circumstances. How often we say to ourselves, and to one another, and to God, too, that we are in good circumstances; rich circumstances; rich times; because the assembly is blessed above all other families.
EAL Asnath being the gift of the supreme ruler [p. 614] of Egypt would suppose that she would be the very best there was, would it not?
JT Well, I would think so, and I confess that I think more of Asnath than I did before, because of what we see in her now, that God had Christ in mind and the giving of the assembly to Him.
EEH Does the reference in Psalm 2 correspond with what we have before us? It says, “Ask of me, and I will give thee nations for an inheritance”, verse 8.
JT It does; it is the great idea of giving. And of Israel God says, “I gave Egypt for thy ransom”, Isaiah 43: 3.
AAT It says that Asnath was the daughter of a priest.
JT That would probably point to the godly or virtuous side in her. And we are coming to see that she is greater than we thought she was. It is evident that God had in mind, in giving her to Joseph, to make her a type of the assembly.
JTJr She would correspond in that way with Rebecca; that is, Rebecca is seen as answering fully to the requirements of the Spirit, and Asnath would be in accord with Pharaoh’s mind as to what was suitable for such a man.
JT Such a man is the very expression that Joseph used of himself: “Did ye not know that such a man as I can certainly divine?” chapter 44: 15. That is to say, he could reveal secrets.
WAT She would correspond with the wife of Moses in the sense that she was the daughter of a priest.
GAL Do we see a figure of the assembly largely made up of the gentiles in that Asnath was an Egyptian?
JT The assembly is largely made up of gentiles, and that is exactly what Acts 28 leads on to: “this salvation of God has been sent to the nations”, and that has continued ever since, and we belong to it now in this city.
PL Paul says, “For I speak to you, the nations”, Romans 11: 13. It all fits in with what you are saying.
JT So that we have to remember, as we come to this, that Paul was the minister of the assembly, and it is a question of the mystery. He tells us of it in Romans, his first great epistle.
PL I wondered if the ‘Revealer of secrets’ would link on with the mystery.
JT Clearly; that is where it lies. And that is what Joseph’s name really meant. He was a revealer of secrets. And he tells his brethren, “Did ye not know that such a man as I can certainly divine?” They did not know that.
PL And this name which he received and his wife being given are mentioned in one sentence: “And Pharaoh called Joseph’s name Zaphnath-paaneah, and gave him as wife Asnath”.
FHL Would Joseph being in Egypt and his interpretations to Pharaoh fit in with that reference, “Coming, he has preached the glad tidings of peace to you who were afar off”, Ephesians 2: 17? And does that precede the thought of Asnath?
JT Just so; that is an Ephesian word, and it goes on to say, “... and the glad tidings of peace to those who were nigh”.
GVD There seems to be a link between the name that Joseph received as ‘Revealer of secrets’ and what Pharaoh said in verse 39: “... since God has made all this known to thee”. Would this suggest communion between divine Persons?
JT Pharaoh took notice of it. It was an immense thing for him and for his kingdom. What Joseph revealed to him enormously implemented his place in the kingdom.
AR Verse 50 would further enhance Asnath in our minds in the reference to the two sons, “whom Asnath ... bore to him”.
VCL It is interesting that Asnath was given to Joseph before he went out over the land of Egypt, as though there would be peculiar solace and comfort for his heart as the final bit of glory before he took on administration.
JT And the wealth that entered into his service is very striking; in fact, it is said that the corn was “as sand of the sea exceeding much”. It could not be computed, the amount that he gathered up was “without number”. So that what we have come into is infinitude.
WAT Verse 47 says, “And in the seven years of plenty the land brought forth by handfuls”. Would ‘handfuls’ suggest that the abundance is within our reach?
JT Man’s hand is in mind, but the earth brought forth. God did that under Joseph.
PL Does that refer to the true Joseph: “And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which if they were written one by one, I suppose that not even the world itself would contain the books written”, John 21: 25?
JT Quite so. He says, “I suppose”: it is left just in that way, as an infinite thought for us to drink in.
JTJr It says, “And the seven years of plenty that were in the land of Egypt were ended”. I suppose that time is coming, is it not? We are in the time of the fulness of things now, but there will soon be a famine.
JT “And the seven years of the dearth began to come”, verse 54. How terrible that thought is!
RWS Is there a sense in which there is double fruitfulness now? I wondered if Ephraim’s name, meaning ‘Double fruitfulness’, might link on with the Spirit. Here, we have double fruitfulness; in Ezekiel, the double river; and in 2 Kings, a double portion of Elijah’s spirit. Is there some relation with the Spirit in this type?
JT And then there is the double occurrence of Pharaoh’s dream. Joseph’s explanation was that the thing was established.
PL Joseph has a double portion in Ezekiel 47: 13: “This shall be the border whereby ye shall allot the land as inheritance according to the twelve tribes of Israel: Joseph shall have two portions”.
JT Yes, quite so; in connection with Pharaoh’s dream, the explanation is that the thing was established: “And as regards the double repetition of the dream to Pharaoh, it is that the thing is established by God, and God will hasten to do it”.
JTJr It is so sure that God will hasten to do it. Joseph brings God into these matters. In regard to his sons also, He brings God in: “For God has made me forget ...” and “For God has caused me to be fruitful”. It would be piety, would it not?
JT Quite so; the Lord could say, “the men whom thou gavest me out of the world”, John 17: 6.
ABP Would “the thing is established by God” connect with divine counsel and purpose as brought in in Ephesians: “according as he has chosen us in him before the world’s foundation”, Ephesians 1: 4?
JT Very good.
AI Would the seven years of plenty have the present time in view?
JT Well, I think it is the gospel time. There has never been such a time in the history of the world. We do not hear of universal famines, but they used to have them. In Old Testament times and in the middle ages there were great famines; but God is very gracious to us, and it is because of the truth and of what He is doing by the Spirit here on earth.
AR And is the present ministry establishing us in the truth of the Spirit here?
JT I think God is acting through it; and there is a remarkable product from it. God is blessing it in relation to His service and His work.
JHE So that Paul was “to announce among the nations the glad tidings of the unsearchable riches of the Christ, and to enlighten all with the knowledge of what is the administration of the mystery hidden throughout the ages in God, who has created all things, in order that now to the principalities and authorities in the heavenlies might be made known through the assembly the all-various wisdom of God”, Ephesians 3: 8 - 10. Is that like Joseph’s position in Egypt?
JT Very good; and then he goes on to the Father: “For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom every family in the heavens and on earth is named”.
SW Did I understand that the new Jerusalem coming down from God out of heaven is neither Jew nor gentile?
JT We do not think of that side of things at all in relation to what is in heaven. It is not a question of Jew or gentile. It is what God has put there.
SW When Jacob claimed Ephraim and Manasseh as his sons, would he be a type of God linking on the gentiles with the remnant? Jacob said, “And now thy two sons, who were born to thee in the land of Egypt before I came to thee into Egypt, shall be mine: Ephraim and Manasseh shall be mine, as Reuben and Simeon”, chapter 48: 5. Reuben and Simeon were born to Jacob, but Ephraim and Manasseh were born to Joseph when he was in Egypt, and typical of what Christ has acquired among the gentiles.
JT We cannot very well say that they were Egyptians, though born in Egypt. They were Israelites; they were children of Joseph, as he says to his father: “They are my sons, whom God has given me here”, verse 9.
ANW That is a striking thing. While they are the children of Asnath, it says, “And to Joseph were born two sons”, chapter 41: 50.
PL And Joseph’s two sons are listed in the family of Israel, in chapter 46: “And to Joseph in the land of Egypt were born Manasseh and Ephraim”, verse 20. They are linked on.
JT Yes; they were born in Egypt but they are linked on to the generations of Jacob.
Ques What is the force of the word regulate in this chapter? It says, “according to thy commandment shall all my people regulate themselves”.
JT It means that they were to be under control or in order. If you are in the right place, remain there! God has put you there. If you know where your place is, be there! You are to be regulated. God will never put you in a trade union! But He will put you where He wants you. And so Joseph was to regulate everything. He was next to Pharaoh and was to act for him in everything.
ABP And it says, “and without thee shall no man lift up his hand or his foot in all the land of Egypt”. Does it not apply to what we do and where we go?
JT Quite so; the hand or foot.
PL “To bind his princes at his pleasure, and teach his elders wisdom”, Psalm 105: 22.
JT The ability to teach, not only to grow corn in the land but to teach his elders, or senators, wisdom.
RHS What are we to learn by the fact that Jacob claims Joseph’s sons in chapter 48, saying, “They shall be mine”?
JT It is the sovereign right of fatherhood.
ABP The Lord Jesus said, “the Father himself has affection for you, because ye have had affection for me”, John 16: 27. Is that like Jacob taking the two sons of Joseph into adoption?
JT It is the Father taking the sons as His own; so that the Father has taken us all on. Although given to Christ, the Father takes us on. He has made us sons. He is bringing many sons to [p. 620] glory.
GH In the prophecy of Joel it says of God, “I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh”, chapter 2: 28. Would that thought of liberality and plenty fit in with this section?
JT Quite so; Peter says, “but this is that which was spoken through the prophet Joel. And it shall be in the last days, saith God, that I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions”, Acts 2: 16, 17. There is great liberality in what is given from God.
JAP If we come up to what Manasseh and Ephraim represent we would be affording Christ a measure of joy, that He may forget His toil and have fruitfulness now.
PL Is this thought extended, in measure, to Paul? He says first, “forgetting the things behind”, (Philippians 3: 13), which may bear on the forgetfulness implied in the name of Manasseh; and then he continues, “So that, my brethren, beloved and longed for, my joy and crown”, chapter 4: 1. Would that be the double fruitfulness?
WS Is it not significant that Hebrews 11 says, “By faith Jacob when dying blessed each of the sons of Joseph, and worshipped on the top of his staff”; and then the chapter closes with “God having foreseen some better thing for us, that they should not be made perfect without us”.
JT Very good; he blessed both the sons of Joseph.
FSC Is there anything in the fact that Joseph named his two sons, whereas Jacob’s two wives named their sons?
JT That would only stress what we have been saying; that Joseph has the supreme place in these chapters; he names his sons himself.
CFE Is there any meaning in Joseph riding in the second chariot?
JT It means that he took the place that Pharaoh [p. 621] gave him. The supreme ruler gave him that place. None but Joseph could occupy it. There was none greater than he except Pharaoh.
ABP The Lord Jesus could say in answer to the wife of Zebedee: “to sit on my right hand and on my left, is not mine to give, but to those for whom it is prepared of my Father”, Matthew 20: 23.
JT Just so; it is a question of the sovereignty of God.
FNW And in that place, as next to Pharaoh, he has Asnath. Would it be right to say that the assembly is given to Christ as having taken up a subservient position in relation to the Father, but that we always reverence Him as God?
JT But no matter how great the assembly may be, we cannot bring her into deity. This must always be brought into the truth. It is wonderful what a place the assembly has, and we are of it, because we have the indwelling Spirit. God will not take away the Holy Spirit from us. We are sealed for ever!
DP Everyone in the land would know that the throne was supporting Joseph, and that in carrying out his administration he could use the power of the throne to enforce Pharaoh’s rights.
JT He has part in the throne, but still, he was second to Pharaoh. He was second, because Pharaoh had the throne, and was the supreme ruler.
GVD Would this scripture apply: “God has made him, this Jesus whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ”, Acts 2: 36?
JT God has done it, and we cannot question it.
ANW Does not Philippians 2 put it beautifully, that “at the name of Jesus every knee should bow ... and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to God the Father’s glory”, verses 10, 11? The lordship is owned to Christ, but the glory to God the Father.
JT That is so, but when we come to Christ we must remember that He is God [p. 622] Himself.
AR It says in Ephesians, with respect to union, that the two shall be one flesh, but is union presented in 1 Corinthians 6: 17, as based upon our having the Spirit? “But he that is joined to the Lord is one Spirit”. Is union with Christ as close as we can get to deity?
JT Quite so; union is a wonderful subject, but it does not place us in deity.
JHE The devil’s lie at the beginning was, “ye will be as God”, Genesis 3: 5. So that we must be ever alert to his insinuations, that we do not regard ourselves as greater than we are.
JT Quite so; the Lord Himself, however, quoted the scripture as to the judges of Israel, saying, “Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods to whom the word of God came (and the scripture cannot be broken), do ye say of him whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest, because I said, I am Son of God?” John 10: 34 - 36. So that the idea of gods, in that sense, was applied to men, but that does not mean that we have part in deity.
RD Would you say a word as to the heavenly origin of the assembly?
JT I think that is a question of the purpose of God in eternity. It is an eternal thought of God to have the assembly for Christ.
JTJr So that she comes down and she goes up again. She has that liberty as no other family has.
WAT And does mystery attach to the assembly? There seems to be something mysterious about Asnath because we do not get much about her.
JT Well, we have noted three references to her, and that means something in her case. She has a peculiar place in the realm of Joseph and of Pharaoh, the supreme head.
ETP Would an appreciation of what this setting typifies give a glorious character to our preachings?
The apostle writes of “the radiancy of the glad tidings of the glory of the Christ”.
JT Very good; so that if you are preaching there is radiancy in it. It is wonderful to be conscious of that; “the radiancy of the glad tidings of the glory of the Christ”. And usually there is reproach attached to it.
VCL It says that Joseph went out from Pharaoh and passed through the whole land of Egypt. Would that refer to the shining out of the word of God at the present time?
JT I suppose that the universal character of the testimony would be in mind, especially in view of the famine that was coming. If the blessing is in mind, the judgment is also in mind. And that is what the book of Revelation discloses to us, the terrible judgment that is to come upon the unbelievers.
ABP Is another feature of this chapter the fulfilment of Joseph’s word? It says, “... according as Joseph had said”, verse 54. And in Psalm 105 it says, “the word of Jehovah tried him”. Stress is being laid on announcing the word of God.
JT That is what we have on our notice boards; it is pretty much universal now, and it is right.
ABP It is a challenge to everyone that preaches that what is said takes on that character.
JT The announcement of the word of God is oral; that is to say, it is a question of a person speaking, and how he speaks.