SONSHIP IN THE SAINTS
[p. 401] SONSHIP IN THE SAINTS
Galatians 3:25 - 29; Galatians 4:1 - 7; Romans 8:14 - 17; Ephesians 1:3 - 6
JT Sonship is a very wide subject in relation to service in the assembly and it seems that we should get the initial thought of it first. I suppose what is in mind is not sonship as seen in Christ especially but sonship as applied to the saints. The thought necessarily comes out in Christ. It is in Him that we see it fully. We see it in type in Isaac and in Joseph. We see it applied to the saints in type in the sons of Aaron, and we see it nationally applied to Israel in Exodus 4. These are allusions in the Old Testament that will help us in our subject, but it seemed to me that, in view of all understanding and following, the wisest course is to consider the subject as presented initially in Scripture. We have, so to speak, the doctrine of it in Galatians to bring out that it is a relation that belongs to the faith period properly, not to the period in which God’s people are held under tutors and governors; that is, according to the law. We have the expression “faith having come”. That is the period to which sonship belongs, so that it says in this chapter, “ye are all God’s sons by faith in Christ Jesus”. It is not a question of atonement or even state initially; it is a question of light.
Ques Why do you think Paul brings in this subject initially in Galatians?
JT Well, he was dealing with christians that were going back to law, and he insists therefore on what they were giving up, pointing out what they were going back to, the infantile state, the nursery, as you might say; whereas christianity implies maturity. They are brought into the relation of sons, not only of children but “all sons”.
WB-w Was there an attack being made by the enemy on the truth of sonship, according [p. 402] to Galatians?
JT That is quite obvious. They were going back to law and giving up the principle that Christ had set them free.
WB-w It seems as if the enemy began very early to make the attack on that precious truth.
ANW Ordinarily you would put Romans before Galatians?
JT Yes; Romans is clearly an initial epistle, but where the truth is being given up and is being corrected, you get it more emphatically in Galatians, I think. It is a corrective epistle. You get there more about sonship doctrinally than in any epistle.
Ques The hymn used to read ‘heavenly men by birth’. Is this verse in chapter 3 a correction of that? We are sons by faith.
JT Yes.
Rem Explain the difference between the two. I think it would help a number here.
JT The only One that acquired sonship by birth was Christ “I this day have begotten thee”, Psalm 2:7. We are sons by adoption. The idea of birth applies to children in Scripture, “As many as received him, to them gave he the right to be children of God, to those that believe on his name; who have been born, not of blood, nor of flesh’s will, nor of man’s will, but of God”, John 1:12,13. Birth underlies that and gives us a place as children. That is generation. Sonship is adoption, so that Ephesians gives it fully — “having marked us out beforehand for adoption” (that is sonship) “through Jesus Christ to himself”.
AFM The word ‘adoption’ can be generally rendered ‘sonship’, can it not? Does it not make it a little clearer to use the word ‘sonship’ instead of ‘adoption’?
ARS In the Old Testament it says, “Let my son go, that he may serve me”, Exodus 4:23. Sonship there is connected with the servant; and then you have, “Wherefore come out from the midst of them, and be [p. 403] separated, saith the Lord, and touch not what is unclean, and I will receive you; and I will be to you for a Father, and ye shall be to me for sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty”, 2 Corinthians 6:17,18. That is the covenant made with Israel, is it not? What we are going to go on to is something further than that. The son is intelligent as to the mind of the father.
JT That is what we should see this afternoon, what sonship is in christianity.
ARS We have very little about sonship in the Old Testament.
JT What there is would be unintelligible to us did we not understand it in the New Testament. We have to read everything in the light of the New Testament. Galatians was expressly to bring out the truth of sonship, among other things, so that attention should be paid to it particularly, especially by young believers, as to how we come into it. We come into it on the principle of faith, and that is general. It applies to all believers. It does not depend on their state. It is not put as depending on their state. It is a question of the period in which we live as believers. Of course, there were believers under the old dispensation, too. There were always believers. This dispensation is one characterised by faith.
AFM It would be necessary for us to receive that, in order to have the light of it. If it is the period of sonship, what would be presented to us so that we might be consciously sons?
JT I think it is presented in Christ; “Thou art my son” it says in the Psalms (Psalm 2:7), and in the gospels it is “This is my beloved son”, Matthew 3:17. This is. He is here. It is no longer a prophetic announcement. It is an actual fact that He is here; and then again “Thou art my beloved son” (Mark 1:11), it is the person addressed.
ARS Would it be right to say that while sonship is mentioned in the Old Testament it is not developed until you come to the New, after Christ [p. 404] comes?
JT It begins with Him properly. The Old Testament is only typical of what began in Him. Everything begins with Christ.
JEH Is that why it says in Exodus 4, “Let my son go”, not my sons. Was Christ before the heart of God?
JT I think so; so “out of Egypt have I called my son”, Matthew 2:15. It is applied to Christ in the New Testament.
Ques Would it be possible for God to take account of us as sons, that is of a believer, without the believer understanding it himself?
JT I think so. He takes account of us all as sons as soon as I have faith. “Ye are all God’s sons”.
ARS “Because ye are sons, God has sent out the Spirit of his Son”.
CAM In that way, the greatest thing that can be stated as fact or light is not dependent upon us in any way except that we are in the realm of faith.
JT Just so. As soon as I have faith, it applies to me. The Spirit is given according to chapter 4 because it applies to me, not that it should apply to me but because it already applied to me. The Spirit makes it conscious so that He cries “Abba, Father”.
AR Is there any difference between Romans and Galatians? In Galatians the Spirit cries, and in Romans we cry.
JT There is. Romans is the normal thing. It contemplates that you understand that the Holy Spirit is to be used in that way, and intelligence is brought into it, but it is a cry that could not be made in the Old Testament. No one could make it in the Old Testament. There was no one in this relation properly in the Old Testament.
AR Does Galatians envisage a growth which is abnormal in the christian? The Spirit of God does the crying there.
JT Yes; it is not the normal thing. He will, [p. 405] if you let Him, but if you are abnormal, you may not be in the state of faith. You may hinder Him. The Spirit may be grieved in you; hence, you get very cramped and limited in addressing God. Many christians are abnormal. I suppose you might travel the country over and you would not get the expression “Abba, Father” uttered in the systems. They know very little if anything about it.
AFM Does the Lord give the lead to that in Mark’s gospel?
JT Yes; we only have it three times: once from Christ, and twice in the epistles, and it is significant that He gives the lead. Mark alone tells us that He said it. It is a remarkable expression, probably having in mind that the thought applied to the whole race of man. It could be used by the Jews, the Israelites and also by all men, for the word “father” is Greek. In the words “Abba, Father”, the word “Abba” is Aramaic or Hebrew. It is taken from the Hebrew; that is, it would be the Jew and the gentile brought together: it is universal; it includes all. Ephesians is the epistle that takes us nearer to God, and the nearer we get to Him, the more sensitive we are of the universality of sonship; that is, it is the portion of all men on the principle of faith.
AFM How is it that in addressing God, we generally use the words “God and Father”; even in our morning meeting we couple the two titles? Is there such a thing as addressing God simply as “Abba, Father”? Is that common or proper?
JT It is not common. It is not general at all, as far as I know, amongst us, but the Lord said it, and these epistles teach that it was done in early days. “Abba” is more the expression of affection. It is a term that has arisen from a child speaking to its father.
CAM Do you not think that a great many times when we use the expression “God and Father”, for instance in our prayer meetings, we do so in the relationship [p. 406] of children? It is often connected with our daily needs, do you not think?
JT No doubt; it is a question of what each has in mind.
CAM I wanted to ask you if, when we are speaking in this light, we are in our spirits positionally in the good of sonship?
JT That is what the term implies. We are positionally in the relation: whether we are consciously in it is another thing. The more consciously we are in it, the more we are likely to use “Abba”. I believe if we follow the Scriptures, that is what we learn. “Abba” is a word that has arisen from affection, the Father taken account of by a child in affection.
JEH A remark like that would exercise us greatly as to whether we know anything about it, whether we are free to use the terms.
JT I think the more we dwell on the combined words “Abba, Father”, the more we are impressed that the first is an expression of affection.
ANW In view of that, I wish you would say a little more as to the Spirit viewed distinctly from ourselves and our hearts in which He is. What you say as to affection seems to be confirmed by the fact that He is in our hearts, but the Spirit cries. Where are our hearts when He cries?
JT Well, He operates in them. The words would be actually by you. To illustrate, you have a demoniacal person in the gospels — sometimes the demon speaks and sometimes the person, the man, speaks. I am only using that as an illustration. The Spirit speaks and cries in us, but whether it is you or He, the articulation is by you.
Ques Is it more the conscience speaking in Romans 8, than in Galatians 4?
JT Well, it is more your side; that is, the believer’s cry — “whereby we cry”. I think it is one of Paul’s ‘We’s’. I have no doubt [p. 407] he used it.
ANW Even here, he changes the order. It says, “because ye are sons, God has sent out the Spirit of his Son into our hearts”, confirming what you say, that He joins with them in that.
JT I am sure the apostle was conscious of what it meant. He would follow the Lord’s lead, and affection would enter into it. The word “father” in the Greek would give the status more definitely; otherwise, it would be tautology; there is a meaning in it. Literally, they both mean the same thing, but not spiritually. There is affection in the “Abba” that I believe is not in the Greek form. Why did the Lord use the Greek? He was undoubtedly used to speaking Aramaic or the language of Palestine. Why did He use the Greek form in Gethsemane as well? There must have been some meaning in it. The Greek is translated into English for us, but the “Abba” remains, as if it is to be the medium for all times for the breathing to the Father; in all languages it remains.
Rem It remains uncontaminated in every language through which the Bible and christianity have gone.
JT It is really the purest language spiritually; Greek may be literally. Hebrew and Aramaic are kindred languages; the root is in Hebrew and I believe it is because it is the purest spiritual language. Therefore the word remains in all languages so that we have the very breathings of Christ; you cannot get anything more suggestive than that you have the very word He used.
JHE Would “Rabboni”, the word that Mary used at the resurrection day, be a similar thought?
JT Yes; that would be in another sense. That is ‘master’, of course.
JEH Why is the word “crying” employed?
JT I think it is the urgency, the deep feeling behind it.
JEH There was urgency in Gethsemane.
TH Would you mind helping a little in going back.
In Mark’s gospel it does not say ‘He cried’, but “he said, Abba, Father”, and then He refers to the cup and the fulness of the matter of the cup.
JT You can understand that with Him it would be the calm utterance of His affection on the one hand, and His full recognition of the Father’s place in the word “Father”. You can understand in Him how restful and quiet He would be as speaking to His Father; as you get elsewhere: He “lifted up his eyes to heaven and said, Father”. I suppose the thought of crying both in Galatians and in Romans is to remind the young christian of how urgent this matter is, this great relation into which we are brought, that the Spirit in us is urgent in it. He cries, “Abba, Father”, and He addresses the Father Himself. It is simply that He cries, but the cry is through your lips, through your vocal powers.
RWS In addressing God as “God and Father”, is there not the maintenance of reverence as well as intimacy with it?
JT I am sure that is right. You can understand that, if you heard the Lord speak in Gethsemane. I believe we have to learn everything from the Lord as to how He spoke. He says to the disciples, “When ye pray, say, Father”. If you heard the Lord say that, you would know how to say, “Father”.
RWS Would you not prefix it with “God”?
JT Not necessarily. You have the example in Paul — “Blessed be the God and Father”, and he says, also, “For this reason I bow my knees to the Father”, Ephesians 3:14.
AFM In Ephesians 3, that is a prayer to the Father; whereas, in chapter 1, it is the “God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory”, Ephesians 1:17. Would the title of Father there take in the full thought, the mature thought of God in that relation?
JT You mean in chapter 3; I think so. “For this reason I bow my knees to the Father”. I understand the words “of our Lord Jesus Christ” may not be there; it is the Father.
[p. 409] D In the public setting, would you not always prefix the name of God, even if in one’s spirit one would be happy in regard to the term “Abba, Father”?
JT That is what you see here amongst the saints, but there is no objection whatever to “Father”, as I see it. There is no irreverence about it. The Spirit gives you liberty to say “Father”.
JS There is no undue license.
JT No; I should not say it in a natural sense; some persons might. There is no hindrance that I can see to a christian saying, “Father”.
D You often find christians that do. They use the term “Father” continuously interwoven in their prayers and thanksgiving.
CAM They hardly seem to use it in the sense in which Mr. Darby uses it in his hymn. We sing it, do we not?
JT We sing it constantly, and it is right to use it in giving thanks just as it is in singing.
Rem They had just come into the use of it from clericalism, but sonship is in the state of the sons and in the light that they have.
JT Yes, and in the unction with which it is said. In speaking to the Lord, it says, “No one can say, Lord Jesus, unless in the power of the Holy Spirit” (1 Corinthians 12:3), and so “Abba, Father” by the Spirit has the unction in it which gives it its place. It is perfectly suitable when it is spoken in that unction.
FHL The Lord never used it in front of His disciples. Is it because there is not an intelligent state that we do not hear it?
JT That may be. I do not know at all why it is we do not use it. We follow probably those that we hear and we pick up what we hear. That is well to a point, but it is well to test things out by the Spirit, and if Scripture warrants the use of “Abba, Father”, there is nothing to hinder its use, as I see.
FHL I was wondering whether in view of the close of things and the coming of the Lord there is [p. 410] an awakening of the affections that would bring that out.
JT Just so. Certainly the best hymns we have are full of it.
Ques Would you say more as to the difference between the light of sonship through faith, and the use of words by the Holy Spirit?
JT I think that helps as to having power in the assembly. They were uttered up in the Spirit, for it is a cry of the Spirit. That is the first thing you get here, the Spirit cries, and He will do that through your voice, if there is an opportunity in you for Him to do it. I think it is well for us all to think of Galatians, because some of us here may wonder what we are speaking about, what is sonship, and am I a son? So Galatians 3 and 4 present the great initial and general idea of sonship; how it has come about and how it is applied to christians; that every christian, every true believer today is a son. That is what this scripture tells us. It is one of the most important things for young christians to accept; it does not depend on whether I am in a good state or a bad state — not that I would belittle these things, but I want to show how it applies. It is a question of the time, the time of faith has come and sonship belongs to that time as over against the time of bondage, that is Israel under the law.
Ques Would faith in Christ Jesus mean that you accept Him as the Head of the new order?
JT Well, it is just faith in Him. That is enough. There is no question of what measure of intelligence goes with faith.
JEH Will you please tell us again what led Paul to take up this matter?
JT Well, it was because they were going back to judaism.
JEH Where does that fit in now with us?
JT It fits in with the denominations particularly, for they have gone back to the legal state of things. I doubt that sonship is known at all among our brethren [p. 411] in the denominations consciously because they are so hampered with the position and circumstances.
JEH Why is it so little known by us that are not so hampered?
JT I am not prepared to say that it is little known. I believe the Lord is going to help us in the matter. I mean to say, we will take you as a typical brother among us. You can speak to God in liberty in sonship, and there are dozens of others, thank God, like you that can do that today. God is working on that.
JEH I was only going by what you said earlier that the thing is known so little among us. What is holding us back from it?
JT I do not say that we are being held back, but there are a lot of young christians that are moving on and need this instruction. They need to see that this relation belongs to them because they are in this present period instead of living in David’s time. They are living in the time of the Spirit. Since the time of the Lord’s death and resurrection and ascension, He brought in faith, He brought in sonship, He brought in all we have, and it belongs to us because we are in this dispensation.
CAM Do you think one reason for our slowness is that we might be doing what the Galatians did? They put themselves in a position where they were really expecting something from themselves. Do you not think we might be slow because we are not free from hoping that we are reaching something?
JT I think so; at this point, anyway. It is made a question of time, “when the fulness of the time was come”, in this section. Well, do I live in this time? I do, and if I do and I have faith, this belongs to me. I am no longer in the nursery; I belong to the grown-ups spiritually that have access properly to the Father.
WB-w The point of the period is a good one. It says the period is fixed by the Father — the period that we live in.
JT That is [p. 412] it.
AFM I was going to ask if we ought not to be like Paul himself. He said, “Be as I am, for I also am as ye, brethren”, Galatians 4:12. Would that not go a long way?
JT I think so. You see he was a son and they were sons. “Be as I am, for I also am as ye” would mean that he was in the enjoyment of liberty in his soul, and what he enjoyed belonged to them as much as it belonged to him because they all lived in this wonderful period of time.
Ques You mentioned Isaac as a type. Does Ishmael come in to hinder the activity of sonship?
JT Well, he does. Ishmael in the house interfered with the matter.
Ques What does that mean?
JT It is man after the flesh, what is of the flesh in myself. That has to be dealt with.
ARS To make this plain for these young people, is it not a fact that sonship is the absolute state that belongs to the people of God. Now I believe that, and if I give the Spirit His way with me, He will lead me so that I will be in the good of sonship.
JT That is right. So He will make a great impression on you at the beginning because He cries, and He uses your vocal powers in the cry.
FHL It is open to brothers and sisters. You were speaking of all believers. I think sometimes some of the younger ones are hindered on that line.
JT Does it not say expressly, “there is no bondman nor freeman; there is no male and female; for ye are all one in Christ Jesus”. That is expressly stated here.
JS You would have young christians especially open to be freemen in the reception of the light of sonship, for the light of sonship is seen here in Galatians. The young, and the older ones too, have a tendency to go back to judaism, but spiritually we are to see that this is the period of sonship and we are not to go back to what was held.
JT The old system runs along in that God saw it too, but God’s thought for all Jews in Jerusalem was sonship, but they elected to remain where they were in the old system. Comparatively few came into sonship, so he says here, “Jerusalem which is now” (that is, the historic Jerusalem that the gospel was brought to) “is in bondage with her children”, Galatians 4:25. That is where she is, but Jerusalem is destroyed and the Jews scattered. The principle of the old system and all man-made systems in christendom have been defeated by God. That is the state of things around us today, and the deliverance that God has effected is wonderful as one and another is brought into the great light, that this is the period of sonship and that I should not be in the nursery when I can go right into the drawing-room, so to speak, where men are. This is the time of faith in which I can speak freely to God.
ARS Why should you be under the schoolmaster that has been discharged after Christ came? Is that not right?
JT Yes, that is right.
AFM Would you mind saying a word about the apostle himself? He speaks about God revealing His Son in him that he might announce Him as glad tidings among the nations.
JT That is how the thing is conveyed in the gospel. The preaching of God’s Son conveys the idea of sonship. It is Christ presented in the gospel, the idea of sonship is conveyed, and then the great fact that the believer is brought into it; we are sons in relation to Christ.
Ques In addressing the Lord, what relationship do you have in mind? In addressing the Father, you have the relation of a son.
JT You address the Lord as subject to Him. “Dost thou believe on the Son of God?” That is the question. He says, “Who is he, Lord, that I may believe on him? And Jesus said to him, Thou hast both seen him, and he that speaks with thee is he. And he said, I believe, Lord”, John 9:35 - 38. He did not say, Son, I believe. He said, Lord. The Father is in itself a dominating title. It is not like the title of Son. Father is a dominating title, and is suitable to use in addressing the Deity, for we know if we are related to Him. It is not derogatory at all of the divine greatness. It is the title that involves dominance in itself, in the Father.
Ques Then there is another phase in which we address the Lord. We would address Him as Husband as in the relationship to Him of wife, would we not? I am speaking of using the word “Husband”, too, in addressing Him in that relationship. In the Song of Songs, it says, “I found him whom my soul loveth: I held him, and would not let him go” (Song of Songs 3:4), and what is said in reference to Solomon and to what the bride is typifies Christ and the assembly. Could that not be employed in a sense, today?
JT Yes. I think in addressing the Lord Jesus, the second Person, as we speak, it is always right to use the title “Lord” because we are in subjection.
ARS He has been made Lord and Christ.
JT He is our Head, but we do not address Him as our Head exactly. I think the apostle’s allusion in Corinthians would indicate that the title “Lord” should always be used. One can say “Lord Jesus” when you are addressing Him.
CAM The prayers in Acts would seem to confirm that. When the brethren prayed in the Acts, they did use that title.
ANW Referring again to the method of addressing the Father, I notice you are very hesitant about it. Are you almost suggesting that we might amend our method of addressing Him?
JT I think so. There is nothing to hinder it that I see. The Lord has led the way; indeed, the Spirit leads the way in it. Believers characteristically are asked to do it, so it seems to me to [p. 415] be perfectly clear.
JS Our hymns are full of it.
CAM Do you not think in connection with spiritual things, that there is such a matter as holy boldness? Sometimes, I think we are cast in on ourselves, when we really should have access to these holy things.
JT Yes, “through him”, it says. “Through him we have both access by one Spirit to the Father” (Ephesians 2:18), and then it says, “I bow my knees to the Father”, Ephesians 3:14. I do not see anything at all to interfere with the use of the precious term in addressing God in the assembly.
JS It may be that we are suffering more from traditional teaching, things handed down to us, than we are apt to admit, although the Spirit of God would have us review these things in the light of what is coming out.
JT I think so. I should like to see this verse or appellation of God clearly understood in assembly service because undoubtedly the word “Abba” has a meaning that we have not understood. I believe that it suggests affection. It is a form of address that provides for affection, spiritual affection Godward. I doubt that we have employed it as it is presented in Scripture. I would be thankful if the Lord helped us in it so that assembly service is on a higher level, not only as a matter of light but as a matter of affection, or feeling, because the word “cry” undoubtedly has that in mind, to call attention to feeling. That feeling going out must be delightful to God.
EB Is not the cry “Abba, Father” included in addressing God as God and Father?
JT Oh, no, it is not. The “Abba” gives it an abundancy that you do not get without it.
CAM I thought it was interesting what you said about using every language. Presumably that language implies that emotional feeling.
JT I think so, the root of the word going back to [p. 416] a child when it begins to lisp its father’s name. The word is undoubtedly built up from that and employed by the Lord Jesus Himself. What affection there must have been in it, as He spoke to His Father at that time!
AFM Have you any particular period of time in which that would be in use and exercise amongst us? Would you confine it to assembly service?
JT Not exactly; the Lord spoke of that. In both Galatians and Ephesians, it is initial. I think it is brought in in those two epistles to call attention to feeling, feeling that is normal to believers as they begin. The Holy Spirit coming in, cries. It would indicate to you that He is there in relation to God, and you are in the relation of the son. He has got a medium thus to express feeling Godward.
WB-w Would the Lord in Matthew 11:25 give the lead, when He says, “I praise thee, Father, Lord of the heaven and of the earth”?
JT Yes; that helps. It says He rejoiced in spirit there, the feeling was there.
Ques Is this an established matter, that is, God having sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, or is it something God does when we are together in the assembly?
JT No, you have received a spirit of adoption. “Ye have not received a spirit of bondage again for fear, but ye have received a spirit of adoption”, Romans 8:15. Attention is called there to the kind of spirit that He is, “a spirit of adoption whereby we cry, Abba, Father”. That is characteristic “we”. You may be sure that Paul often cried it.
ARS In the scripture quoted, the Lord says, “Father” but when at Gethsemane, He says, “Abba, Father”. Is “Abba, Father” connected with Gethsemane?
JT It is connected with profound feeling. I think that is the point in it. The Spirit cries, and you cry by the Spirit. It does not mean that the Spirit is [p. 417] addressing the Father by Himself, as it were. It is not that He is the Father to the Spirit. That is not the point. The point is that He cries in the believer. He is in our hearts, and cries in the believer; so that it is the spirit of adoption. He takes that form in us. He is the Spirit of God, but He takes the form of the spirit of adoption.
Rem The import of the use of that word is not Paul’s; it comes from God. It is God that sent. It says, “God has sent out the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father”.
JT He is waiting and looking for that cry. The Holy Spirit would not say that to the Father, as it were, by Himself because He is not in that relation. He has never taken up the relationship of Son to the Father.
FHL Abba would be the affection of a babe, and “Father” would be the intelligence of a son.
JT I think that is the way we ought to understand it. The Greek word “father” would give the full status that could be known, and it is universal, being that language; whereas, the other word is more limited; the setting of it being really Hebrew. It is the spiritual setting, and one of great affection, fatherly affection, family affection because we have to go back to Abraham for all that was developed in Israel. He is the great father, and he is the father of a multitude, but that is emphasised in Abraham, and that is what is brought in here, so he says, “But if ye are of Christ, then ye are Abraham’s seed, heirs according to promise”, Galatians 3:29. The link is with Abraham.
JS Do you think the word might be one that we would acquire in the nursery, and the other more in the drawing room?
JT Of course, in the nursery, the thought of the father is not known in “Abba”. It is the schoolmaster, as you know. He does not always draw out much [p. 418] affection.
JS I was thinking more of the principle of the mother tongue.
JT Well, of course, if you take it up in that way as coming down from Abraham, I think there is something in the Hebrew of a peculiar spiritual nature that is not in any other language.
AFM You can understand Isaac’s using that term repeatedly, can you not?
JT Yes; it belonged to him.
WB-w Do I understand that the thought of God and Father is more a matter of light; whereas, “Abba, Father” is more a matter of affection?
JT I think so. That is more what will be our eternal portion.
CAM Perhaps the “Abba” is more the love side, and the “Father” the light side.
JT Yes, giving the universal status.
RW S. In the epistles the verb is present tense in each case. It is suggestive, having a present continuous bearing. It is not something that has been or will be done. It is “crying”.
JT Yes.
AR The crying is effected in me by the Spirit of God. That would be in the same way in which the Lord Jesus said it. If I take it up as governed by the Spirit of God in me, it would be reproducing it in the same way in which He said it.
JT Yes; it is a divine Person in both cases.
GMacP Are you suggesting that we should be governed in assembly service by the love that governs divine Persons in the relation taken up by Them towards us?
JT You mean the relation of Father and Son? Just so.
TH Did the twelve disciples lose the good of this? He withdrew Himself a little away from the three even, as if this was a secret matter.
JT Well the Lord never prayed with them, as a [p. 419] matter of fact. He is seen more in prayer in Gethsemane perhaps than anywhere, but evidently His prayer was heard. Anyway, it is written for us that He said it.
ANW In John 17, where we are allowed to overhear the blessed Lord in prayer, He uses the appellations “Father”, “Holy Father”, and “Righteous Father”. Perhaps that confirms also what you say.
JT I think it does. It is more a universal thought. The other is evidently a rare thing, but it has its place, and the more spiritual we are, the more we shall value it.
RDG In addressing the Father after the Supper, we do not exactly cry “Abba” in our speaking, do we?
JT Oh, no. The word ‘cry’ I think, means just strength of feeling, strong feeling.
RDG I wondered if perhaps the Lord only used this term in the garden in extremity, and the other two references are only used in connection with the word ‘cry’. I wondered whether it would only be used in extremities.
JT No; I think it refers to the beginning of things, simplicity of feeling, strong feeling. A little child will cry. It is an expression of feeling, I think.
Ques Is it the necessity of it viewed from the divine side?
JT I think so; the Spirit’s urgency that there should be an early return.
RAL You would not like to hear ‘Holy Father’ ten or fifteen times, the way the word ‘Lord’ is often heard.
JT It is always painful where you get constant repetition of ‘Lord’, or ‘God’, or ‘Father’ in a prayer. It is always painful when it is used unduly. We should never think of speaking to an ordinary person that way, calling out his name every few words. We ought to be intelligent. I think God looks for intelligence in our address.
Rem Such repetition would not be the result of a lead given by the Holy Spirit. There is a difference [p. 420] between a doctrinal address and one based on the movement of the Holy Spirit in the heart.
JT There is, and I believe these two scriptures are brought in to show that God is looking for a return. “Abba, Father” is delightful to Him.
APT It is known relationship, is it not? In God as Father you have feelings, and affections are in movement.
JT It is a known relationship, and that is what this epistle stresses, that the youngest christian may take it on, “Ye are all God’s sons”. However young you may be in the faith, you belong to the sons of God.
WB-w And the oldest christian can use it.
JT Surely.
AFM Does not the expression in Romans 8 help us, when we see the believer has advanced quite a bit in his soul. The initial thing is in Galatians, but in Romans 8 the believer has made some spiritual headway.
JT He has, and the apostle uses this form for the sake of convenience, “Whereby we cry”. It is not a question of who is doing it, but we will suppose that it is being done. That is abstract. If it is being done, God has a return. That is brought in more to show what you have in the Spirit.
AFM You are in the domain of the Spirit in Romans 8, are you not?
JT Yes.
GH Would you say that chastening and discipline are always in connection with sonship?
JT That is right, “who is the son that the father chastens not?” Hebrews 12:7. That is to bring us into the consciousness of the thing, showing that what we are saying is not a question of state but a question of light; and Romans 8 says, there were those who said “Abba, Father”. That is the point; God is having the return that He is looking for.
RWS Does that not show that divine Persons [p. 421] like us to be versatile spiritually, that we do not say, ‘Father, Father’, but “Abba, Father”, as if They like to hear different terms as expressive of different degrees of affection.
JT Just so. It has often been talked about, this verse, all down the line of christendom. Why is it? The more you think of it, the more you dwell upon it, the more you are impressed with the fact that affection lies in the first.
JS And the more you see that it is by design.
Rem One language being known and enjoyed all over the world on the first day of the week.
JT One great principle with God is return or circulation. Everything emanates from God, “of him, and through him, and for him are all things”, Romans 11:36. Circulation is the idea. It comes out from Him. The Spirit in the believer cries, the thing goes back again in the form that God loves.
GMacP Would you say, in Galatians the Spirit crying is to give us a lead that we should take up and cry as being in the intelligence and affection of it?
JT That is right. We see the urgency of it, and if the Spirit was so urgent in you at the beginning, why should it lapse? It should go on.
GMacP Would you mind saying how the Lord speaks, saying, “I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God”, John 20:17? He does not use the word “Abba, Father” in John 20.
JT That does not hold to what we are saying. It is a question of languages, I think, and there was the additional language of Rome that appeared on the cross. There were three languages. The Latin form is not brought in. If there had been the word “father” in Latin, then you would have a three-fold thought, but it is not necessary. Greek represents the universal thought, I think.
CAM The fact that when Paul spoke in Hebrew [p. 422] they kept more quiet, would confirm that there is something about that language.
JT And the Lord spoke to him out of heaven in that language, Hebrew. It would show what a place it had.
APf The remark was made that this is used all over the world on the first day of the week. Would you confine it to the Lord’s day only?
JT No, but I think that is the characteristic time for it.
Ques What is the difference between the truth of Romans 8 and what you get in Ephesians 1?
JT I thought Galatians and Ephesians were necessary in this inquiry so that everyone in this hall should get the thought and apply it to himself. That is the idea of these two epistles. The thing should be understood by all christians: “ye are all God’s sons by faith in Christ Jesus”. That is inclusive of every person who has faith, and the following verses down to the end of the passage read in chapter 4 show how God wrought to bring it about, making it a matter of time, and how He has in mind that there should be a return in the cry “Abba, Father”. Now when you come to Ephesians, you get the highest level of the assembly. That is, it is referred to in eternal counsel: “Having marked us out beforehand for adoption through Jesus Christ to himself”, Ephesians 1:5. That is eternal counsel. That is the relation in which we should stand according to counsel eternally; so that it is the highest presentation of the truth, I think.
Ques Is sonship always presented from that aspect, but we do not answer to it?
JT It is presented in that aspect in Ephesians. It is confined in the earlier setting nationally to Israel, to whom belongs the adoption. It says the adoption belongeth to them, but it is taken out of that setting and applied to the saints that form the assembly, in a higher way, so it is taken back into counsel, predestination.
AFM The thought of “the good pleasure of his will” comes in in relation to that.
JT Quite so.
AR What do you understand about “taken us into favour in the Beloved”. Just open that up for us.
JT It is a beautiful reference to Christ, that He should be called the Beloved. It is the embodiment of all the previous thoughts. “This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight”, Matthew 3:17. You get that throughout the New Testament. “The only-begotten Son” — all that is embodied in this: — “My beloved”, leaving out the Person’s name, as much as to say, Who else is it? There is only One. The Beloved is only One.
ARS You have this scripture — “translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his love”, Colossians 1:13.
JT That is not quite on the same level as this; although it is very near it.
FHL God does not say ‘in whom I have found all my delight’, as we often misquote it, because there are those that share in it.
JT That is right. He is leading many sons to glory. He is leading us to glory. We are all being conformed to the image of His Son.
Ques What is the difference between having chosen us and having marked us out? One seems to be the choice of the saints in Christ; and the other, the marking out for sonship.
JT “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ ... before the world’s foundation”. That is in Christ, that we should be holy and blameless for adoption through Jesus Christ, the Man according to the good pleasure of His will. The choice is in Christ, the marking out is with the same persons; He would mark you off for this great calling. You are set apart. He has His own way of putting His stamp on you. He is marking us off.
Ques Are we marked off in [p. 424] power?
JT Yes, God looks down on your actual existence. He sees the thing from the beginning. He sees you. He sees you marked off for this great relationship.
AR You are in a certain class, as it were, in God’s mind for eternity.
JT That is right; every man is blessed in the mind of God for eternity, but here is a certain class. Ephesians contemplates a certain class, and they are marked off for sonship with Jesus Christ Himself.
AFM “To himself” — say a word about that.
JT That would be entirely for Him — “of him, and through him, and for him are all things”, Romans 11:36. How precious that is, being marked off by Himself!
WB-w This first chapter is eternity.
JT Yes; it is the highest platform we can get.
Ques Does chapter 1 go beyond the thought of the sanctuary?
JT I think so. This is our place eternally.
Ques Do we, in the service of sonship, go outside the need of the sanctuary while we are here?
JT The word “sanctuary” contemplates the present time, or the millennial time, not eternity. It is a relative term. It contemplates the presence of evil, and provision is made to keep it out. There is opportunity for sonship.
AFM How far would these verses that speak of eternity go in this chapter? You spoke about this chapter being eternity, but it also involves the world to come. There is a certain verse, possibly, where the eternal thought leaves off.
JT I think it is the verse we started with, “To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he has taken us into favour in the Beloved”. Then he goes on to redemption in the next verse. It is a sort of prologue, giving the great thought of what God has in His mind.
WB-w What did you have in mind in referring [p. 425] to Israel in sonship, and then to Aaron’s sons having part in sonship? What distinction did you have in mind?
JT The application to Israel is national. It has that place as a most favoured nation over against other nations, but the sons of Aaron are typical of ourselves as sons in the sanctuary. It is a priestly relation. It is our relation with Christ, I think, as the High Priest.
WB-w That is when the service is carried on.
CAM Would you regard the expression “the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” as distinctly applicable to the present family?
JT Yes, quite so.
CAM It seems such a very wonderful expression. Would you say it involves the coming of that glorious Person into manhood conditions?
JT It does. It is not what existed before incarnation; it alludes to incarnation.
CAM It seems so clearly to confirm what the saints have been dwelling on recently.
JT Yes; it corresponds to the well-known term in the Old Testament, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It takes the place of that great expression in the Old Testament.
APT Is the expression in Romans 8:14, “for as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God”, a descriptive statement to let you know who are the sons of God?
JT Yes; that is where you would look for them. They are marked off that way. If you see any like that, they are sons.
RAL Does sonship apply to the believer individually or collectively?
JT I think “So thou art no longer bondman, but son; but if son, heir also through God”, would be individual; but generally, the thought is collective, and in the mind of God, it would be collective — eternal sons.
[p. 426] Ques What would you say about this verse in Ephesians being in the past tense? It says, “Who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing”.
JT Well, it is past, but it is continuous.
Ques We might think this is something to wait for. Is the Ephesian assembly looked on as individuals, by Paul?
JT Yes; everything is anticipative in Ephesians.
Ques Does this give us spiritual licence to anticipate it in assembly service?
JT It does. When it says, “has quickened us with the Christ ... and has raised us up together, and has made us sit down together in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus”, that is anticipative, too.
TH In Romans it says, He is “marked out Son of God in power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by resurrection of the dead”, Romans 1:4. What relation has that to the marking out?
JT It has a great relation. That is how the Lord Jesus was marked out. He was marked out as Son of God because He raised the dead. Nobody but He could do that. That is what came out in John 11.