FAITH AND SPIRITUALITY AS SEEN IN ABRAHAM (2)
[p. 282] FAITH AND SPIRITUALITY AS SEEN IN ABRAHAM (2)
JT Attention was called this morning to the use of the title Lord, as applied to Jehovah; in Genesis 15: 2 it is said, “Lord Jehovah, what wilt thou give me? seeing I go childless”. The title Lord applied to Jehovah clearly would have authority in mind. Here it is Adonai, a plural word, and is connected with the word “Father” in the epistle of James, chapter 3, verse 9. “Therewith bless we the Lord and Father, and therewith curse we men made after the likeness of God”. The title Lord used here is connected with the Father, and it is undoubtedly of significance, especially as we are accustomed to connect grace purely with the Father. At the same time there is the idea of authority attached to the Father; the Lord Himself refers to the Father in this very sense, addressing Him as “Lord of the heaven and of the earth”, Matthew 11: 25. We have to apprehend the Father in that extended way in order to understand how the terms applied to the Godhead are flexible; and that in treating of the Father we are not to limit the idea simply to grace, for there is authority also with Him.
AJG Would that agree with what we have in the first epistle to Timothy where God is spoken of as the blessed and only Ruler, the King of those that reign, and Lord of those that exercise lordship?
JT That thought is stressed there in the sixth chapter; Paul says “... which in its own time the blessed and only Ruler shall show, the King of those that reign, and Lord of those that exercise lordship”. He will show who is to have authority whatever it may be. A very important matter just now, because of the need of the idea of authority being stressed among the brethren.
PL Would the expression, “which the Father has placed in his own authority” (Acts 1) bear on that?
JT I would say that.
JC-S Whilst He has taken the name of Father in grace, it has not cancelled other features attaching to Him.
JT Quite so. It shows the flexibility of the truth made known to us relative to divine Persons. They are all One, although they are three Persons, yet there is one God and Father; “one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all”.
PHH Might I ask in this connection what is the force of the word judge in Hebrews 12 as a part of the system to which we have come? We have come to “God, the Judge of all”.
JT It is part of the system to which we have come, and it fits in with what we are saying.
PHH So that the matter of the Judge, and the throne, and this title Lord, all stand together to emphasise authority?
JT I thought that, and I think the brethren will acknowledge that it is something we have not thought much of.
AED The title Lord, as applied to God, is employed in Acts when the authorities came in to prevent the testimony going forward. “They, having heard it, lifted up their voice with one accord to God, and said, Lord, thou art the God”, Acts 4: 24.
Ques Does Asaph reach it experimentally when he says, “For God is the judge; he putteth down one and exalteth another”, Psalm 75: 7?
JT Just so. This passage we have alluded to in Acts 4 should be treated extensively I think, because it is a critical time, and there is a reference to the idea of Master in the chapter. It says, when Peter and John had returned, after being severely threatened, to their own company, “they, having heard it, lifted up their voice with one accord to God, and said, Lord”. The word is literally despot, the master of a slave; one having sovereign power, as in Jude 4; 2 Peter 2: 1; Luke 2: 29, and other scriptures. So that we have a considerable amount of truth here, as bearing on the present time, to show that there is the idea of authority in God. God is viewed as a despot, meaning that He has full power as to all matters relative to His government here.
Ques Is Abraham himself in full accord with that when he says, “Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?”
JT I am glad you mentioned that, because Abraham is in full accord with it; it is a question of “the Judge of all the earth”. We have someone who does right; we have come to “God the Judge of all”.
AM Had Abraham faced the matter of judgment in relation to himself and his family in this chapter? It says “a horror, a great darkness, fell upon him”.
JT Yes. It enters into the chapter in a very conspicuous way, I mean the idea of accepting judgment. It is a question of God entering into covenant with Abraham, and these pieces of sacrifices are brought forth pointing to maturity in the subject we are engaged with, because the animals are of mature age, three years of age; not the birds, but each animal. They were to be three years of age, the females, and then the ram. So that we have maturity before us in these matters, and the truth brought in in connection with Isaac in chapter 22 helps as to it, because there the ram is found caught in the thicket; that is to say, it is the idea of continuance in the sense of begetting, of fruitfulness, on the line of a certain family, and what we have had [p. 285] comes into all this, both the animals and the division of them. And then the power of God passing through them, as though God is giving Abraham, and us now, testimony to His power. The Lord said to those who came to Him with the thought of what there is to be, male and female, “Ye ... err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God”, Mark 12: 24. The idea of error in regard of the Scriptures, and the idea of male and female, all comes up now as we are here together, where the male and female come in, and then how the distinction is made between the male and female in the sacrifices; and so the covenant runs on those lines. Then the power of God went between those pieces; they represented Abraham’s exercises and representation before God.
JC-S Was that why you spoke of the thought of maturity?
JT Just so, because we have come to the time when we should understand the matter of male and female, and what is to be the representation of it in the coming world, as we say, in the eternal side of things.
PHH What is the main distinction?
JT The first is as to whether there is such a thing as male and female in the eternal state of things, and then what it means, because the Lord meets that question in the Sadducean objection to Him; and it -is to be understood between us now, especially as to where it comes in in our exercises in the service of God, in our relations in that sense. The Lord, as I said, met the matter in very plain terms, but then we have to think of it as it is treated in the epistles as well as the gospels; and the epistle to the Galatians treats of it directly. There is no male and female, it says, in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3: 28).
PHH While there is no male and female as applying to us in our persons, that is, men and [p. 286] women, in the eternal condition of things, do you understand that male and female may apply as in Christ and the assembly?
JT That is just what I do understand.
JC-S Do you think that the only way in which the feminine thought will be carried over will be in the assembly?
JT That is how I understand it. Of course, you have the masculine thought carried over by itself in the sons of God and the brethren of Christ, but we have to treat of the assembly as composed of all brethren, brothers and sisters, as we are down here now. We have to consider the assembly as including all, and Paul says in 2 Corinthians 11: 2, “For I have espoused you unto one man, to present you a chaste virgin to Christ”. He speaks there to all the saints in Corinth.
PHH Would it be right to say that God reverts to His original thought as outlined in Genesis 1 and 2?
JT I would say that. And then the question arises as to nations, and what there will be in what we call the millennial condition of things. Undoubtedly the idea of male and female will remain then as regards men and women; but certainly it does not seem as if it continues on in what we rightly call the eternal condition of things.
Ques Is that what is implied when Paul says, “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God”?
JT Just so.
Ques Referring to the passage quoted, how would that tit in? “Do not ye therefore err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God? For when they rise from among the dead they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels who are in the heavens”, Mark 12: 24, [p. 287] 25.
JT Male and female are not found there. It is found only among men; it is not found among angels. They were to be as angels.
Ques Have you in mind that in eternity the three things you mentioned run on collaterally, what is feminine being seen in the assembly, and what is masculine being seen in those who compose it, the brethren of Christ and the sons of God?
JT Well, if we just fit in the matter in that formal way, but I would prefer to keep to the facts as mentioned in Scripture, as to Christ and the assembly. “I speak as to Christ, and as to the assembly”, as Paul says.
JC-S That is, you are thinking of the masculine thought in relation to Christ, and the feminine thought in relation to the assembly?
JT That is where it is. And if we think of a sister or a brother now, and anticipate coming conditions, well, a sister is just the same as a brother, and a brother is the same as a sister in that sense.
JC-S So that involves spiritual power in ourselves to absorb the truth of it.
JT It does. That is just the thing that enters into what we are saying. “Ye ... err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God”. We err on those matters.
PL We read in Genesis 5: 2, “Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created”. Does that suggest the merging of the assembly in that sense in relation to Christ?
JT Well; yes, if you extend the thought in that way, but you actually get male and female there; Eve was a female. I think it is better to keep to these wonderful things, because they are wonderful, but they are mysterious. That is the most difficult side in the mystery. Paul speaks of mystery,
[p. 288] and whether we are accustomed really in our minds to mystery is the question.
HH In Psalm 22 “the hind of the morning” is mentioned, and then in Habakkuk, “he maketh my feet like hinds’ feet”.
JT You mean the feminine thought is there.
HH I thought it fitted in with what you are saying.
JT It does, and John 20 does too. In the allusion in Psalm 22 to the hind of the morning it is a question of the agility in the female; it is not a male thought, it is a female thought. It really alludes to the assembly as the spouse of Christ.
Ques Your reference to believing Abraham this morning, is that set over against the character of the Sadducees?
JT Quite so. There is hardly anything more denied than the truth attaching to women in the Scriptures.
GA “This mystery is great”. You have referred to that. Does that indicate that the apostle was impressed with the greatness of what had come into the expanse?
JT I think so. Ephesians is in mind, the highest feature of the Scriptures that we have. The work of God at Ephesus comprises the highest feature of the truth; and the idea of mystery must be attached to that epistle, but Paul in the epistle to the Romans, as we may remember in the last chapter, alludes to the same thought. “Now to him that is able to establish you, according to my glad tidings and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, as to which silence has been kept in the times of the ages, but which has now been made manifest, and by prophetic scriptures, according to commandment of the eternal God, made known for obedience of faith to all the nations — the only wise God, through Jesus Christ,
to whom be glory for ever”. We can see therefore the place of mystery in the truth, and how we are to be accustomed to it in our minds.
CHH Do you think the attack here was peculiarly against that idea of male and female in Genesis 15? The birds of the air came down, and I wondered whether the idea was to destroy the manifestation before God of the male and female, and that which was pleasurable to Him in them?
JT We might as well look at it, “The birds of prey came down on the carcases; and Abram scared them away. And as the sun was just going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and behold, a horror, a great darkness, fell upon him”. Abraham took the matter in hand, and in this he is a type of what we all should be, resisting the devil so that he will flee from us. He scared them away.
CHH I wondered whether in Abraham scaring them away there would be the manifestation in him of the power of God, transferred, as it were, to Abraham as a characteristic believer, so that he had power to scare away the evil.
JT That is good.
PHH This matter of mystery would prevent us from becoming too formal in certain parts of assembly service.
AJG You have spoken often of Paul’s intelligence in the mystery, and would his desire be that we should know his intelligence in the mystery?
JT That is just the point. There was someone who knew. God was pleased to set someone down here who knew, and Paul could speak of himself in that way. “My intelligence”, he says, “in the mystery”, not as something entirely unknown but “the mystery”.
JC-S Paul was going about in his service disseminating the truth, as he says, “to enlighten all [p. 290] 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, according to the purpose of the ages, which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord”.
JT So that the assembly has the thing. The inference is that the assembly has that knowledge. Even although it were not in every one of them, it was in Paul, and Paul was of the assembly. It was there, so that the angels would desire to look into it. It does not say they understood it. I do not think they did, or ever will, but they desire to understand, and of course that is a good example for us, the desire to understand.
AJG Is it right to think that the feminine side of things in eternity is seen in the assembly in her relations with Christ, but in the assembly’s relations Godward is it the full thought of sonship entered upon by the saints with Christ?
JT Well, yes, only we would not exclude the Father from His part in the mystery, and the joy He has in it. Matthew tells us about a certain king who made a marriage for his son. There is something there for us.
PL He brought the woman to the man. Would that give a hint as to joy on the Father’s part?
JT Well, it might. Whether Adam really had any knowledge of it is another matter, but certainly there it is. Adam did have knowledge and God is displaying it. He is calling attention to it, and He is ever ready to call attention to what He has placed here amongst the brethren; it is something worth calling attention to, because it is a known thing. We have the Spirit of God, and we are told “ye have the unction from the holy one, and ye know all things”, 1 John [p. 291] 2: 20.
AJG The assembly according to Revelation 21 coming down out of heaven from God prepared as a bride adorned for her husband, would very definitely bring God into this matter of what is feminine.
JT Very good. I want to come back to what has just been introduced, as to the Father.
AJG I was enquiring for help whether the feminine thought of the assembly in eternity is connected with the assembly in her relations with Christ, but whether the assembly in its service Godward under the hand of Christ unto all generations of the age of ages is the full thought of sonship in Christ and the assembly. Is that right?
JT Quite, we should not shut out the Father from the mystery. I think that the Father would have a part in all this. What pleasure He must have in the Son, and in the Son with His bride. What pleasure He has in her, and all that comes into the service of God now.
JC-S That would be supported, would it not, by that verse in the end of Ephesians 3, “But to him that is able to do far exceedingly above all which we ask or think, according to the power which works in us, to him be glory in the assembly in Christ Jesus unto all generations of the age of ages”.
JT It is what is in the assembly, and what part the feminine has in that sense. What joy the Father must have in what He has, and what the Son has in the assembly.
Ques Would you distinguish between the affection of the assembly viewed as a woman for the man, and her part with Christ under the eye of God for His pleasure?
JT Well, I think so, “I will shew thee the bride”. It is mentioned by itself. The Spirit of God says to John, “Come here, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb’s wife”. She is to be shown to him,
[p. 292] and she is seen by herself coming down from God out of heaven, having the glory of God. What a marvellous thing that is. What a future thought it is too for us.
PRP Do you mean that the expression “the mystery” has specially in mind the feminine idea?
JT Not specially. The mystery is one great thought, inclusive of Christ and the assembly, though of course there are other thoughts of mystery besides, but it is one thought that the Spirit of God would stress, I believe, amongst the brethren, because the time has come for the greatest thoughts, and the Lord is saying to us, that they are now available. There may be only a few who enter into them, but these great thoughts are available, and it is a question of each desiring to have them. Whatever there is, it is for all.
JC-S You were referring to the greatness of what Paul had in comparison with John. The mystery is the distinctive feature of Paul. John never refers to it, does he?
JT I think it would be a mistake to make John have a ministry by himself, such as Paul had.
JC-S John got what he had from an entirely different level from Paul. It was from the Lord here on earth, whereas Paul got his direct from Christ in heaven.
JT Paul is the only one that is singled out as receiving a ministry in that sense. Of course, Peter is too, but not in the sense of Paul. Peter had a certain speciality, but the twelve generally are much on the same level. Peter is said to be first in Matthew 10: 2, but Paul is by himself, and speaks of himself as having certain ministries, not only one ministry, but certain ministries, and we are therefore to cleave to him. We can be sure that Paul had a distinct ministry that John did not have. John did not have a distinct ministry in that sense as Paul.
[p. 293] Ques Have you in mind the passages in Colossians that refer to his being made a minister and completing the word of God (Colossians 1: 23, 25)?
JT Quite so.
PHH You would say that John has a line of things which runs into Paul’s ministry.
JT It belongs to the twelve. It belongs to the whole matter that we have in the second chapter of the Acts. The twelve are there alluded to, and they were appealed to. The apostles’ teaching is referred to, and it, of course, included them all, but there is no speciality there. We have to wait for Paul in that respect.
JC-S I think it is important what you say, that nothing should be allowed to becloud Paul’s distinctive place in his ministry. It stands out.
JT Quite so. That is just what it is. No other apostle or minister has the place that Paul has; there is no comparison really, and to place others on the same level in ministry is not right.
PL Peter’s word, “What of this man?” the Lord rebuked, and did not state what was John’s commission in chapter 21.
JT “If I will that he abide until I come”, the Lord says, “what is that to thee?”. We must not pretend to know, because we do not know.
RRT That is the serious matter in 1 Corinthians, is it not? Levelling out matters, saying, “I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, and I of Christ”. Levelling matters in that way.
JT Quite so, but I do not want to divert from the chapter before us, the seventeenth chapter of Genesis is a most important one. It is a continuation of the fifteenth, and more than that, it increases or enlarges on that. We have here in chapter 17 a change of name in Abraham, and in Sarah too, so that clearly it is a new line of thought for us, but [p. 294] then there is this matter of his age, and so on. Chapter 16, of course, cannot be ignored, because of its negative character, that is to say the readiness with which the flesh in us, whether we are believers or otherwise, for the flesh is in believers, is apt to have recourse to some method of reaching an end that is not according to God and that works ruin, which is what Abraham and Sarah did. It is to Abraham’s credit, it should be said, that the suggestion came from Sarah, not from him.
HH What is the thought in the trouble in regard to Hagar? It brought in a lot of trouble, as we see from the references to Hagar in the New Testament.
JT It does. Wherever a sister makes a proposal of that kind you may be sure it does bring in trouble, and then it brings up the whole question of headship. Sarah failed in it clearly here.
PHH 1 Corinthians 11 would make the matter of headship more extensive than just between husband and wife. Is it not introduced there in the creational order?
JT Very good. It is more extensive than what exists between husband and wife, because the head of the woman is the man. Clearly the apostle had in mind that a sister, even although she did not have a husband, had a head if a man were there, so the sisters never need to be regarded as headless in that sense. “The Christ is the head of every man, but woman’s head is the man, and the Christ’s head God”. That is the order of the truth in creation.
AMH I suppose Chloe had no head, but she knew where to refer, did she not? She writes to Paul.
JT She certainly did. She knew where to write to. How often it is that we hear of people writing here and there, especially sisters, and brothers too, to long distances whereas they could get their answers [p. 295] nearby, especially when you have a brother like Paul, or anyone at all labouring with him who is available, a local man.
Rem And her house, too, under right control, because her household was of one mind about what was going on, showing the feminine authority in the absence of a head.
JT Quite so, running very well with Aquila and Priscilla. Aquila did not have any great place in the service, but he was one who had a wife, and she could be recognised as having part in the service in relation to him, so they both worked together, and also in having Paul in their house.
HH Also “I commend to you Phoebe, our sister, who is minister of the assembly which is in Cenchrea”, Romans 16: 1.
JT Quite so.
CCC Would the change of name in chapter 17 bear upon the developments in view?
JT It does, but we are reserving that for the next reading, which I hope will be a full one tomorrow, God willing. The thought is to run on to the end of the history of Abraham, that is to say to the end of chapter 24, bringing in Christ and the assembly. You feel it is a fitting thing if we are dealing with Abraham, to extend the thought to Rebecca, for she has her place in the testimony, and then Abraham disappears; he is not mentioned after that. In chapter 24 the servant’s master is Isaac, which is a great matter for us to see in what we are dealing with now; the thought of what Christ and the assembly is, and how divine Persons can, as it were, merge Themselves in the truth They will unfold, and bring us into it. They are ready in a sense to take up attitudes or positions so as to enlarge on the truth, in order to bring it out. They are standing for it.