THE ASSEMBLY BROUGHT TO CHRIST BY THE SPIRIT
[p. 400] THE ASSEMBLY BROUGHT TO CHRIST BY THE SPIRIT
JT I was thinking of this chapter as setting out the assembly, and also the Father’s thought for the Son. At the outset it was said that it was not good that Man should be alone; there was no family as yet in Genesis 2, but the counterpart was of Adam. And here you get the family link: the wife for Isaac was to be of the family related to Abraham and Isaac. As it says in verse 4, “Thou shalt go to my land and to my kindred, and take a wife for my son Isaac”. Genesis 24:4. So that we are at a high level. It seems to be greatly fitting the day, the first day of the week, for the Father is brought into it. He raised Christ on that day by His glory. It says, “By the glory of the Father”, Romans 6:4. It would go further than by His power. His affections were in connection with it, and the assembly undoubtedly was in mind. So that it is not only that she is of that family, but she has the graces proper to the assembly, answering to what the servant understood was needed. So that it is said of him that he was astonished. “And the man was astonished at her” Genesis 24:21 — astonished at her.
Then the chapter is full of worship on the servant’s part. And I thought we might look at the closing paragraphs as showing the culmination of what is in mind in the chapter, that the assembly is led into a place, not her own properly, but which she is to grace in testimony, that is Sarah’s tent. The word in verse 67, as no doubt most of us are aware, is ‘led’; “Isaac led her into his mother Sarah’s tent”. As there, she becomes his wife. She is there in that position; she is there to be loved by Isaac, pointing [p. 401] to the graces of the assembly seen in the early part of the Acts in testimony.
And it was further thought that we might notice Laban as an outstanding figure in the chapter. He is mentioned before his father in verse 50, and he is mentioned before his mother in verse 55. We may notice him in view of after-history and in view of such limitations as one such as he might impose on the progress of the saints, of the assembly. Because, although discerning the movement which came about as of God, he would have detained Rebecca. He and her mother say, “Let the maiden abide with us some days, or say ten; after that she shall go” (verse 55). I thought that perhaps we might be helped in seeing what marks Laban as definitely the leading personage in the house, which would be irregular, as the father is still there. Laban would have detained Rebecca. Are we conscious of anything of that character in regard to the movements of the Spirit of God in view of the assembly today?
WW What element are you suggesting that Laban represents today, did you say?
JT Well, you might say he is the leading man in the place, discerning what is the movement of God, but still he would hinder — hold back.
WW You mean that there might be an element among the saints which would hinder the movement of the Spirit?
JT Yes, and perhaps the leading element, too. One having that place or who is mentioned in that way. Here Laban even received presents from the man, from the servant.
EI You mentioned subsequent history. Were you thinking of his transactions with Jacob?
JT Yes, quite so. This is the beginning of all that. You might say he was a good brother, you know. He was an active man. But he is mentioned first in verse 50 when they say, “The thing proceeds from Jehovah: we cannot speak to thee bad or good. Behold, Rebecca is before thee: take her, and go away”.
That really was her father’s part. If anyone spoke first it ought to have been her father. That is, it represents one who, whilst evidently recognising what was of God, was irregular. He was shutting out some other person who had a right to speak before him.
Ques Is there a suggestion of indifference — in what he says? “We cannot speak to thee bad or good”.
JT Yes. You mean using the word ‘bad’?
Rem Yes. I wondered whether it was perhaps that feature that hindered us in assembly procedure.
JT It was not the time to introduce the word ‘bad’ at all, was it? It was a wonderful time. The servant of Abraham was astonished; he would not entertain the idea of badness at all. It was all brightness. Everything was proceeding as expected by Abraham, and the servant is worshipping all the way. But there is nothing of that kind with Laban.
JB Does it suggest that he was occupied with the outward adornment rather than with what was for Isaac?
JT “When he saw the ring and the bracelets on his sister’s hand” Genesis 24:30. You mean that that moved him?
JB Yes.
JT Well, you can understand that. And he got something himself, too. The servant gave him something. “The servant ... gave to her brother, and to her mother, precious things” (verse 53). Bethuel, the father, does not come in for anything. So that it would be an advancement to Laban himself. I suppose applied typically to a leading brother, anything that would enhance the gathering would enhance [p. 403] him.
WW How are you regarding Abraham’s servant in verse 52? “And it came to pass, when Abraham’s servant heard their words, that he bowed down to the earth before Jehovah”.
JT That is not the first time. At first it says he “was astonished at her, remaining silent” Genesis 24:21. And then in verse 26 we read that he “stooped, and bowed down before Jehovah, and said, Blessed be Jehovah”. Genesis 24:26. That is because of Rebecca, because of what he saw in her. Then he says, “Blessed be Jehovah, God of my master Abraham, who has not withdrawn his loving-kindness and his faithfulness from my master; I being in the way, Jehovah has led me to the house of my master’s brethren”. Genesis 24:27. A remarkable statement that, “the house of my master’s brethren”. I suppose it would be observed by us that his name is not given here. We have sung, ‘Praises for the Holy Ghost’. (191:3). I suppose in principle here it is. The Spirit keeps Himself out of view in the economy. He is much in view in the Scriptures, but He retires to make much of Christ. “He shall glorify me”, the Lord says John 16:14. He speaks of Christ. He speaks of God. He has taken a lowly place. So that in this chapter the man is just a servant in Abraham’s house, over all that he has, without his name being given. You are struck with what is in the man. How he impresses you all through. So that in the end he tells Isaac. “And the servant told Isaac all things that he had done” (verse 66). He was doing much, but Isaac must know — referring to Christ. The Spirit is equal with the Father and equal with the Son; there is no doubt about that in the abstract, but as to the economy, He has taken the most attractively lowly place.
EI So eventually the man speaks of Isaac as his master.
JT That is in keeping with the chapter. “That is my master!” the servant says to Rebecca (verse 65).
- [p. 404] S. You were speaking about the leading brother. Is what should characterise the leading brother seen in this man?
JT The servant is really a type of the Spirit, I suppose.
- S. I was meaning that. A true spiritual leading brother would take character from the Spirit.
JT Quite so. Laban here was in this matter, but as it has been remarked, he takes notice of the gifts, the adornment of his sister first. He cannot deny that it is of God, but he says, “We cannot speak to thee bad or good”. Peter says as regards the gentiles coming in, “Who indeed was I to be able to forbid God?” Acts 11:17. Well, Peter might have said much more than that, although we have to admit that he was defending himself before the Jews. The Holy Spirit fell on the gentiles as he was speaking to them, showing that God was thinking much more of them. So Laban does not say much here, but he uses the word ‘bad’.
Ques Would that help us in speaking, not only to say what is negative, but something good?
JT You would have something good to say to the brethren. I think that is the principal thing in ministry. Unless, of course, there is something to correct. There was not anything of that here. But should Laban have spoken at all? Why did not Bethuel speak? If we go back in the chapter we see how prominent Abraham is in all these matters. Sarah is dead, we know, but the wife’s side is not brought in. Why was not Bethuel brought in? The servant would expect that it would be the father. In verse 55 the father is not mentioned. Where is Bethuel? Rebecca speaks of Bethuel; she says, “I am the daughter of Bethuel the son of Milcah, whom she bore to Nahor” (Genesis 24:24). She does not speak about the brother. It [p. 405] is the father.
Ques What would Bethuel represent rightly in the assembly?
JT Well, it is the fatherly quality. Everything refers back to God in the assembly. All must proceed from God. So that the order of precedence must come into line. We have to discern where the fatherly qualities really are. Not merely the active brothers, but the father’s activities in love. Paul says, You have many teachers. Some of them said of Paul that his bodily presence was weak and his speech contemptible. But, he says, you have only one father. So John also, he addresses the saints as children. I suppose it is a question of discerning where love is, because God is the source of all. “Of whom are all things”. 1 Corinthians 8:6.
FW Laban does not seem to be more than what we should call an official.
JT He was an active man. But Bethuel was the father. You must make room for that.
EI Was it your thought that what subsequent history brings out throws light backwards?
JT Hence God says, “Jacob have I loved”. He does not say that at the beginning; He says it at the end. “Esau have I hated” Malachi 1:3, Romans 9:13; He did not say that of Esau either at the beginning. It is a question of subsequent history. And what subsequent history brings to light is nearly certain to appear in some little way at the very outset. Here, the most serious matter is that her mother and Laban would have detained Rebecca.
FW It does not seem to give any reason for that.
JT That is just it. The servant says, “Do not hinder”. He calls it hindering. That is a serious matter. For I am in company with Satan if I am hindering the work of God. “Satan has hindered us”, Paul says 1 Thessalonians 2:18.
Ques What about the mother?
JT [p. 406] She is hindering, too, but evidently Laban is the leader in the thing.
Rem It emphasises the importance of recognising the element of the father.
JT Yes. It refers to the economy. The economy is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. That is the divine order. Not that They are not equal in Deity; viewed in Deity, They are. But in the economy the positions are given: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. And it is necessary that it should be so, so that love should work out. Hence Paul says, “Raised up from among the dead by the glory of the Father”. Romans 6:4. That really covers all that is taught in the book as to family relationships. Because we say, Abba, Father, in Romans 8. We “have received a spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father”. Romans 8:15. That gives the position: we are sons. We come into all that glory.
WW It does not seem as if any of the relationships did very much here. The great matter was the work of the servant.
JT They are not exactly against him, except in the matter of hindering. “Some days”, they say, and then they add, “or say ten” (verse 55). If they hinder ten, you see, you do not know what might happen. It is a breaking in on the mind of God.
WW The whole matter seems to be a question of the discernment of the Spirit. Everything else was hindering, whether passive or active.
JT Does it not remind us where it would lead to except for the Holy Spirit?
JB Is there the danger of being content to have all that comes to us as coming from Him to us, but seeking to stop short of going to Him, that is Christ risen?
JT Quite so; especially if the leading ones are not giving full place to fatherly qualities. Because [p. 407] that is where the fatherly qualities are seen, in those who are prominent among us. Bethuel is on one side; he is not saying anything. He is not asking her to stay, but he is not saying anything. It is the brother and the mother. Satan is behind this, because he would hold us back from the full thought of the mind of God. Often young people are held back, and others, too. So that the great matter is to recognise the work of God. Do not hinder it. It is just to detain the maiden, without saying anything more. Why? Why should they detain her?
ATB “And it came to pass, when Abraham’s servant heard their words, that he bowed down to the earth before Jehovah” (verse 52). That was as no opposition was presented. One can see the service of the Spirit in securing the bride for Isaac. But the moment the hindrance is presented we see the resentment on the part of the servant.
JT When the hindrance is offered, he says, “Do not hinder me, seeing Jehovah has prospered my way: send me away, and I will go to my master” (verse 56). That is a fine speech! That is bringing God into it. It is God’s work, typically. The assembly is here; there is no question about it. The graces of the assembly are manifested in Rebecca. “Send me away”, he says. He will be faithful to his master. We want to get into that spirit, to learn from Him. The Spirit’s way in regard of the assembly, that is what we get here, the Spirit and the bride. The servant, it says, was astonished. Not that one would say that of the Holy Spirit, but it shows how affected He was and how jealous He was that all that should be secured for Christ, typically. Do not hinder Me in that. So that we are not to be hindering. We speak of the care meeting; it really ought to be care for the work of God, to see that that is not hindered.
Rem “And the king will desire thy beauty”, Psalm 45:11. We are allured from this scene as led by the Spirit, so that we are no longer earthly-minded but we become attached to Him in the Spirit.
JT So that the question is put to her. Very well that they allowed her to speak at all. “Let us call the maiden and inquire at her mouth” (verse 57). That is a beautiful suggestion. “And they called Rebecca and said to her, Wilt thou go with this man?” Not to Isaac, but “with this man”. Typically it means the effect of the Spirit in others. Will you go with Him? And she says, “I will go”. No hesitation at all. That is very important, the definiteness with which the work of God identifies itself with the Spirit. For at the very outset we have to do with the Spirit. New birth involves the Spirit; the work of God involves the Spirit; we have even the very words, “the love of the Spirit”. Romans 15:30. She was interested in this man. She says, I will go. So that itself is a testimony to the economy.
And “they sent away Rebecca their sister, and her nurse, and Abraham’s servant, and his men”. So that all is settled now as regards Bethuel’s house.
And then in verse 61 we see Rebecca in her movements, “And Rebecca arose, and her maids” (the first mention we get of them) “and they rode upon the camels, and followed the man”. A very fine description! “And Isaac had just returned from Beer-lahai-roi” — the well alluding to the Spirit again in another sense. For Christ is occupied with the Spirit, too. In truth all His relations with us are in the Spirit. Union is by the Spirit. The note says, ‘came from coming to’, showing that the thing was in his mind. As far as I remember it is in relation to Hagar that this well first comes into view, but now the Spirit of God instead of that is to be employed in relation to the assembly. Not Hagar but the assembly, that is Rebecca. She had means of refreshing [p. 409] there where she was. It is the Spirit in relation to Christ.
And now this paragraph treats of Isaac and Rebecca. “And Isaac had gone out to meditate in the fields toward the beginning of evening. And he lifted up his eyes and, saw, and behold, camels were coming”. It is not stated as if he was expecting them; the article is omitted. It is “camels were coming”. “And Rebecca lifted up her eyes and saw Isaac, and she sprang off the camel. And she had said to the servant, Who is the man that is walking in the fields to meet us? And the servant said, That is my master!” That is all he says. He does not say, That is the man I have in mind for you. He leaves it there. How much of this enters into the antitype! What Christ is as coming from the well, to stress the importance of the Holy Spirit as essential to this matter, union, and all that enters into it. The servant says, It is my master! But He comes into view in the well, the resources that are necessary for her as to this great matter of union with Christ, both as to the union itself and the support, and the freshness that goes with that. For the idea is that she is never to grow old. The assembly comes down in freshness after a thousand years. The Spirit ministers to us on behalf of Christ. He is with us, too; He is by our side. And then you see the position of Isaac. He is meditating in the fields; he is not occupied with great affairs. It is Isaac himself personally outstanding. She says, Who is he? “That is my master”! That is all.
ATB Who is the man in verse 61?
JT That would be the servant. “They ... followed the man”. “As many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God”, Romans 8:14. And is it not very beautiful that when they come to Isaac, the servant having fulfilled his charge, he “told Isaac all things that he had done”?
[p. 410] M It is interesting that the man retires at a certain point. Is there a point where the Spirit, so to speak, makes way for Christ?
JT Quite so. “The servant told Isaac all things that he had done”. His mission is done. And now the idea is the position of the assembly as led by Christ. In Luke 24 He leads the disciples out as far as Bethany; that would be in their own setting as the remnant of Israel. But this leading into his mother Sarah’s tent would be another line, into Israel’s place; It means that Israel is now regarded as out of the way by death, and the assembly is installed in that position. And that is where we are in these very days. So that the testimony is carried on. They will come into it later on, and we are in it now. The Lord has led us there. It is not in heaven. According to this she became his wife in Sarah’s tent. And that is the position we are in now as I understand it. It is where we are loved, as if the Lord is pleased with what marks us here in the place of testimony. Assembly administration now would be in localities; not any longer in Jerusalem as a centre but in different localities. Peter is moved by that spirit, you know.
WW Instead of Israel being in that place, the assembly is there.
JT Quite so. And in that place she is loved. “And Isaac led her into his mother Sarah’s tent; and he took Rebecca, and she became his wife, and he loved her”.
Isaac is the heavenly man in testimony here. Abraham is distinctly the heavenly man, and Isaac is the counterpart of that, that is, the heavenly man down here in testimony. And so his bride is here in the place of testimony.
EI Would Acts 9 be in keeping with that, where Paul is brought in?
JT Yes. So you get ‘assemblies’ — the word in the plural — in that chapter Acts 9:31. “The assemblies then throughout the whole of Judaea and Galilee and Samaria had peace, being edified and walking in the fear of the Lord, and were increased through the comfort of the Holy Spirit”. It is no longer Jerusalem, and Peter was in keeping with that. He opened the door to the gentiles in that light.
Ques Does the feature of response mark Rebecca?
JT Yes, it is beautiful here. “She took the veil, and covered herself”. Not only so, but “she sprang off the camel” (verse 64). There is a spring there. “And she had said to the servant, Who is the man that is walking in the fields to meet us? And the servant said, That is my master! Then she took the veil, and covered herself”. So that she is equal to Isaac as she was equal to the man. She shines in both positions. When she gives water to the camels the man was astonished at her. Her grace shines here as there, only more fully. She covers herself.
ATB Do you think it was the report of the servant that brought about all this wonderful movement?
JT Well, she is led on in it, but it seems as if everything that you see in her is of herself. The suggestion is the work of God in us. The whole book of Acts is to bring this out. Although there were some acts which were not the work of God, generally the whole book is to bring out the work of God, a very important matter. The work of God is always true to itself in the saints.
RC Would the service of Paul bear on it when he says, “I have espoused you unto one man, to present you a chaste virgin to Christ”, 2 Corinthians 11:2?
JT Quite so. I think it does bear on it. And I think his statement of the Father raising the Son by the glory of the Father is very full. You can see the [p. 412] glory of Abraham shining in a wonderful way in all this chapter. It is all his thoughts.
WW What about the comforting in verse 67?
JT It is all in testimony. Paul says in Romans 9:4, “Who are Israelites; whose is the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the law-giving, and the service, and the promises”. How much he shows belongs to them! He, of course, is expressing the feelings of Christ, how the Lord felt in all that becoming dead. Take, for instance, the new covenant; it belongs to Israel, but see its effect in the assembly! Greater, I believe, than ever it will be in Israel. It has taken a higher level. And the ‘comfort’ lies there. And hence what we are in our localities. It is a question of what we are in testimony.
Rem “And Isaac led her into his mother Sarah’s tent”; the assembly comes in in Matthew.
JT Quite so. I suppose that Matthew’s gospel is to show how it took place.
Pages 413 - 437 — Two contributions from ‘The Word Proclaimed’ (preachings Nos. 31 and 4).