NEARNESS TO CHRIST AND PUBLIC SERVICE (1)
NEARNESS TO CHRIST AND PUBLIC SERVICE (1)
Ephesians 2:11-13; Ephesians 2:17,18; Genesis 43:31 - 34; Genesis 45:1 - 4
SL Do you suggest that these scriptures contain the way of the recovery of affection, not only to the Lord, but to one another?
JT Quite so. Ephesians presents what God has effected in Christ. We have been brought near — brought near through His blood. I was thinking of the difference between being brought near and drawing nigh, the former is what God has effected, the latter is our side. I thought Genesis would help us as to how we are brought near, as already in the relationship of brethren, but at a distance from God and from Christ practically, through our state. Ephesians, in keeping with the parable of the prodigal son, shows us how we are brought near who were afar off — we have been brought near in Christ, through His blood, and then we have access to the Father through Him by the Spirit. That is the truth from the divine side, but it has to be taken up; and it is in taking up the privilege of drawing near to God by the Spirit that the question of our state and associations comes up.
RWG Speaking of state and associations, do you get these in what you read in Genesis?
JT Yes. Chapter 43 gives an extraordinary set of facts. Joseph has bread set on for him by himself, for his brethren by themselves, and for the Egyptians by themselves. That does not indicate nearness or family relationships. Although there is food and the position is in the house, as the chapter teaches, yet we are impressed with the distance that [p. 135] existed, the distance with which, in the antitype, many are content — content to be fed alone, to remain by themselves, different coteries or sets feeding by themselves; but it does not satisfy the Lord’s heart.
RMcB Would that be occupation with self, do you think?
JT Well, division is there, groups feeding each by themselves.
WW That is what the Corinthians did.
JT Quite so. That sort of thing sprang up there, and has developed into the grossest forms now. The Lord is not indifferent to it, nor has He been. He cares for all His own, nevertheless.
PJG You mean in all the systems around?
JT Yes.
HH Is it not important to see that from the divine side all the distance has been dealt with, as in Ephesians and in Luke 15? But, as you were saying, the exercise is as to how far we are in line with the fact of all that having been disposed of. Is that your thought?
JT That is right. I am thinking particularly of the passages in Genesis showing typically that groups feed by themselves; whereas the Lord has to eat by Himself, so to say, in those circumstances. In view of a move such as is depicted in the chapter, the house comes into view; as soon as they bring Benjamin down to Egypt, the house is in view and one over it. And it is said of Joseph that he came home at noon, so that from his point of view the conditions were there, the family affections to be reciprocated from his side, but not from their side; and certainly not among the Egyptians, for, they could not have anything to do with the Hebrews. They had their own discriminations.
JMcM Thinking of what God has effected, is that why we “are made nigh by the blood of Christ”?
JT Yes; the blood represents death, in the sense [p. 136] that it can be applied, I think. It is that side of the death of Christ that has to do with God’s rights.
JB Do you think that Joseph recognised that in Judah, and that he could then ask them to draw near?
JT I think he did. In Judah’s speech you have the recognition of the rights of the father and of the child. Judah represents progress being made. Chapter 43 is the house, Benjamin being in view. Benjamin, I think, is the overcomer; not yet having overcome, but he is in that way — he had no part whatever in the guilt of the ten. So that as he comes into view you have the house and one over it who is in the secret of things. But what has been said about Ephesians is a good basis to go on, that from the divine side we are brought nigh by the blood. We have a status before God from the divine side, and His rights are fully met by the blood of Christ.
RMcB “He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?” (Romans 8:32). God has come out thus.
JT Yes; He has come out to bring us near, that is the point. Love abhors distance, and He would have gentiles near, but if He brings them near, it must be in keeping with His own rights; so, while the status is in Christ, it is by His blood.
RA Would you say that the blood suggests the thought of the removal of distance?
JT Exactly; it is that which may be taken and placed before God. It is placed before God in the sin-offering, so that the distance is removed thus. It is not only that God can come out, but also that man is brought near. In Ephesians it is not that God has reached man where man was — that is Romans; but that the gentiles are brought near, showing that that is what God has in His mind. In Romans He has come out to where we were; in Ephesians He has come out that we might [p. 137] go in.
HD'AC It could only be in Christ Jesus. The blood would remove all distinctions, would it not? Then, allied with that, there is “in Christ Jesus”.
JT Yes. “In Christ Jesus” is the thought of the status in which we are set up before God. The blood is that which meets His rights.
RA You were referring to associations, had you in mind that our associations can hinder our enjoyment of these things?
JT What has come about today is that christians have set up barriers between themselves and God, whereas His thought was that they are to be brought near. They have reverted to the old barriers which God has done away with. God has done away through the rent veil with these barriers that stood between Him and men. God began by bringing the gentiles nigh, and that not only objectively, as we say, in Christ and by the blood of Christ, but He gave the Spirit that we might have access to Him.
HH Is not the activity of divine love set forth in the blood of Christ, all the value of the One whose blood is poured out? I was thinking of what the apostle says in Acts 20:28, “shepherd the assembly of God, which he has purchased with the blood of his own”. Does it not show what lay behind the blood?
JT Quite so; the Holy Spirit is the witness in our hearts to that love.
WDG Do you think the silver cup would give a link between these chapters? Was it not Joseph’s mind that they should drink with him?
JT The cup is no doubt the link; it was his cup. I am thinking particularly of Ephesians 2, how it brings out what was in the heart of God. He has wrought to bring us nigh, we who once were afar off.
SL Is not relationship with Christ a most powerful thing to attract our souls?
JT It is indeed. Ephesians shows, not simply [p. 138] that God has come out in Christ to where we were, as in the case of the man who fell among thieves, but that He has wrought to bring us nigh; and so that we might draw nigh He has given us the Spirit. We are told that the Lord coming “preached the glad tidings of peace to you who were afar off, and ... to those who were nigh” (Ephesians 2:17); and then it is said that by one Spirit we both have access to the Father through Him.
SL So that nearness is secured by the blood of Christ, and that is entered upon as the Spirit forms us.
JT Quite so. It is by the Spirit we draw near, according to Ephesians. It is presented as if God brought about these conditions; now, can we take them up? The gentiles have reverted to the old state of things, of distance between God and themselves. The whole system of so-called worship abroad in christendom implies distance between God and His people; it is a denial of the dispensation. And what God is doing now is to bring about nearness to Himself in His children, to bring us nigh in a practical way.
W.D.G. Is it priestly?
JT It is. You find all depends on the skill of Joseph in this section of Genesis. Everything hinged on Joseph’s skill in dealing with his brethren. What is before us is the Lord in His apocalyptic character. He has to be apprehended, since the great falling away, in His apocalyptic character. The addresses to the churches in the book of Revelation imply distance, but distance with a view to a state of things being brought about in which the Lord can manifest what He is to His own. He brings about a state of love amongst the saints, and thus He can show what He is to the assembly, and what the assembly is to Him.
Ques Does not Genesis 44:14 correspond with what you are suggesting from Revelation? In [p. 139] Revelation John falls on his face; here the brethren fall down.
JT That is good, it shows they are being led on. The Lord works at a distance under such circumstances. He cannot assume to be near to us if we are in a bad state, He has to maintain distance.
WDG The rough speaking (Genesis 42) then has to do with the fact that He would have us near Him.
JT The whole process is in order that we should be near. Love abhors distance, and what impresses you is the skill of Joseph in bringing about the nearness.
Ques Is that in any way seen in the woman who touched the hem of His garment?
JT There it is a question of touch, that is, contact for healing power. You see in these chapters in Genesis how the ten brethren must come up with Benjamin. It is Benjamin that is the link, they came up with Benjamin. Then the house comes into view; thus they are drawing near to the time of disclosure. In this we learn how the Lord can make known what He is to the brethren, what He is to the assembly, and what the assembly is to Him. If He can find a few answering to it, He has opportunity of disclosing what He is to the whole assembly. We must apprehend Him as to what He is to it.
RMcB Would you speak of the kingdom in connection with Benjamin?
JT I think Joseph is in that position — the lord of all Egypt. But in the presence of Benjamin the house comes into view and the ruler of it, who is in the secret of things.
JH It is a time of activity on the part of Joseph. He is not yet ready to ungird himself.
JT While christendom remained as it was through all the centuries, there was no thought of the Lord ungirding Himself and sitting down, so to speak, in the evening. The Lord’s supper is the evening [p. 140] meal, that is to say, it suggests freedom from ordinary activities; whereas what you get here is a noonday meal — it was the time of day when things were being done. Although they had the repast and rejoiced, it was not the Supper, it was not the evening meal. The evening meal is the Lord’s supper; He introduced it then. Of course He does not eat it — I speak of it as the occasion in which, love existing in those partaking of it, the Lord is free to be with them.
LDB Why have you alluded to the house frequently in this connection?
JT I think it indicates that that is what the Lord has before Him in all these dealings; He has nothing less than Ephesians before Him, He has the very best before Him; the full thought of the house is in Ephesians.
EP Is Ephesians priestly nearness, or family nearness?
JT I should say both.
EP Would you say a word as to the distinction?
JT Priesthood is based on the family relationship. “Through him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father” is family, insomuch as it is the Father that is approached; but it is also priestly, for we must approach in holy intelligence as well as in family affection.
Rem No one could be a priest unless he were a son of Aaron.
JT No. In Leviticus 8:13 the word is, “Moses brought Aaron’s sons near”. The gathering of the congregation was to be at the door of the tabernacle, and they were brought near; so that they were in full view of all that in which their service was to be carried on. Then they are clothed with their high caps and vestments, so as to be qualified to have part in that service according to God.
EP Is the nearness in Hebrews 10 equal to this nearness in Ephesians?
JT [p. 141] I do not think it is quite on this level. Hebrews is elementary; we draw near there by the blood; the access is by the blood. “Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus ... let us draw near”, (chapter 10:19 - 22). Of course there can be no approach to God without what is presented here, but it is not the same level as Ephesians. In Hebrews you need the high priest. Ephesians does not say that; it says, “through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father”.
FWW Would this nearness involve not only moral suitability, but frame of mind and movement of affection? It is not mere material closeness.
JT It is a question of what goes on in your soul. You see how God has wrought to bring you — through the blood; and then by the Spirit you may draw near through Christ.
Rem It says that on the mount of transfiguration “they saw no man, save Jesus only” (Matthew 17:8); and here Joseph says, “Cause every man to go out”, as much as to indicate that the blotting out of every other thing from one’s heart induces what the Lord is wanting — nearness.
JT Joseph ordered everybody to go out; that is to say, the time had come for him to make disclosures; whereas in John 20 the saints are concerned that there should be no foreign element there — the doors were shut.
Ques Would the family features you are suggesting be seen in Benjamin, he had the same mother as Joseph?
JT That is what comes out. The link was between Joseph and Benjamin. The recovery implies that the saints are not only brought back to the same father — that is, God is our Father — but to the same mother, the saints are brought back to the assembly — that is the work of the Spirit. We are brought to [p. 142] Galatians — Jerusalem above is our mother. These men were sons of one father, that was their boast; they could not say they were sons of one mother, because they were not. Most of the saints of today hardly dare say they are sons of one mother for they are in different systems. God is aiming to bring us to that; but as long as I am allied to a human organisation, that is my mother, and I am taking character from it, whereas Benjamin had the same mother as Joseph.
Ques You referred to Benjamin as a type of the overcomer; would that be the state which would be produced suitable for this?
JT I think so — the saints brought to the apprehension of the church in some sense; as soon as Benjamin comes into view, the house is referred to. Now you have got the conditions, the father and the mother, and the house comes into view. The house of God is not composed of people who have different mothers.
SL The soul, being conscious of relationship, reaches up to the house.
JT Benjamin is fit for the house; in the mind of Joseph the house was essential to that one. As soon as he saw Benjamin he was moved, he was stirred in his inner affections; and you can understand how, applying that to Christ, in the overcomer you have one who recognises only one mother, that is, the assembly; there is the abandonment of human organisation for what is of God.
HH Many souls speak of God as their Father and seem to be sensible of the relationship, yet fall short of what you are speaking of.
JT They do. The house conditions are not really depicted in chapter 43, Joseph (that is, Christ, typically) eating by himself, and the Egyptians eating by themselves, and the Hebrews eating by themselves;
[p. 143] that is not suggestive of house conditions, nevertheless the house was there.
Rem He would seek house conditions with them before he could ungird himself.
JT Yes; so chapter 44, as has been suggested, brings in the cup.
Ques Would the cup suggest what is introductory to the house of God?
JT Yes. It was the cup in which Joseph divined. Joseph would retain Benjamin through the cup, the cup was the link. It was a humiliating process so far as Benjamin was concerned, but it was very effective. You want what is effective, however painful. Joseph was operating in all this to bring about, not only the house, but house conditions.
Ques Is that 1 Corinthians 10?
JT Quite so. In Corinthians you get the cup mentioned first — it is a cup of blessing — but then you get the bread. What you want is a complete idea in divine things, not a partial thing. Some of us were remarking the other day about the woman of Sarepta, who was a widow. The prophet said, “Fetch me ... a little water in a vessel”, then, as she went for that, he said, “Bring me, I pray thee, a morsel of bread in thine hand” (1 Kings 17:10,11); there is not a whole idea in it — it doubtless alluded to her state; she was not governed by a complete idea, neither are any christians in the ‘systems’, they are partial. Then he says, “make me ... a little cake first” — not a little morsel, but a little cake — that is a complete thought. That is what God is working for, to bring about a complete thought — that is Christ. A cake is a complete thing in itself and that is the Lord’s supper, it is bread, not a piece of bread. What is right is a cake or loaf; there is thus before us a complete thought of Christ and of the assembly also, and that is what the Supper conveys to you. “The bread which we break,
[p. 144] is it not the communion of the body of the Christ? Because we, being many, are one loaf, one body” (1 Corinthians 10:16); that is a complete thought and it brings about unity.
JPG So the Lord reproved Sardis, He had not found their works complete before His God; (Revelation 3:2).
JT Exactly. They were wanting in completeness. All that which man builds up is wanting in completeness, but in Christ you have a complete thought, and that is presented in the Lord’s supper. Rightly apprehended, it works out in completeness in every way.
HH Would the woman of Sarepta typify people who are exercised about individual things and with no spirit of adjustment as to what is connected with the assembly, resulting in saints being held up in regard to entering on privilege and unable to touch the Ephesian side of things, because, although there is a certain amount of exercise, things are not in suitable adjustment?
JT Quite so. Ephesians 4:13 is, “until we all arrive at the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, at the full-grown man, at the measure of the stature of the fulness of the Christ”.
JB Have we a similar thought in Ephesians 1:23, “his body, the fulness of him who fills all in all”? It is complete.
JT Yes. God graciously takes account of us; if we are thinking of a morsel, He is able in grace to bring the whole together in our souls. The prophet conveyed to the woman of Sarepta the idea, a little cake; but he says, Make for me first.
HB Really the thought of a sect is a broken part.
JT That is it, exactly. They can have their piece of bread, but those who are intelligent about Christ want the whole loaf. You are formed on those lines, and thus you become a member [p. 145] of Christ.
SL Even in Romans and Corinthians and Galatians, the Spirit of God had the very highest thought before Him.
JT Yes, God has never anything less than that, so the house comes into view in Genesis 43 that house conditions might come about.
SL Nothing could possibly satisfy the heart of God for His people but to bring them up to the affections and love of the bride.
PJG Would you say that the introduction of anything of man is productive of distance, such as organisations and rules of etiquette, or anything official?
JT You see, what the religious world would say is that a part will do for Christ; they acknowledge the divisions as if they were good enough for Christ. But they are not good enough for Christ, He wants the whole church, and He would bring that about, in principle at least, by introducing the bread. “The bread which we break” (1 Corinthians 10:16) signifies one whole.
DMcI Being in the good of that, you would be a help to others.
JT Joseph insists that they must bring Benjamin, because I think Benjamin represents what is in his mind, he had the same father and the same mother as Joseph. This thought is reached in Exodus 6:20, where those who lead in the testimony, Moses and Aaron, have the same parents.
Rem Benjamin represented the true family of God.
JT Yes; Joseph had that in his mind, and the basis of it was that he and Benjamin had the same father and the same mother. The others had to come to that, but that was the line on which God was working. You cannot leave Benjamin out if you are to reach the whole idea, you must bring him in, otherwise you have fragments. Fragmentary things will never do for God or Christ. Paul says, “I have not [p. 146] shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God”, (Acts 20:27).
HL In that connection, would you say a word about the twelve shewbread loaves?
JT They represent a whole administrative idea. Twelve is also suggestive of what is capable of divine manipulation, it being so very divisible.
Ques What would be the aim of that manipulation?
JT To get the greatest possible service. We do not need to be together, as we are now, for instance, for that. You may be sent in one direction in the world, and I in another. We are subject to divine manipulation, so that the greatest possible results may accrue. But although we may be working severally and at distances from each other, as under the Lord, we are in unity and co-operating to the same end.
Ques How does Joseph’s cup test us today?
JT It enters into the Lord’s supper, I think, in the way in which it is presented to us in 1 Corinthians 10, the bearing of it in our everyday life.
Ques Does the death of Christ come in, in that regard, as serving us?
JT I think it does. You see Benjamin had the cup. It seemed a calamity that he had it, at first, but the calamity is changed, it was for his advantage that he had it; he is brought back to Joseph through it. The process was humbling, but it was effective. We are brought back to God in connection with a high order of things, not mere discipline; there is this, but you are brought back with very high things — the cup that Joseph used, for divining was no small matter. It refers to a very high level; we want to be brought back on the level God has designed for us. You remember it is said of Paul that he reached Ephesus through the upper districts; (Acts 19:1). There was not full recovery at the Reformation, the [p. 147] church was not reached at all, things were on a low line, whereas the recovery of the last century was on a high level, it is in connection with that which is most valuable; in the type the very cup with which Joseph divined. Luther and others of his time were raised up and used of God, and so we owe them much under Him, but the church and the purpose of God generally were not reached; room was not made for the Holy Spirit. By way of contrast, we see how wonderfully honoured the saints are in these days, brought back to God on the very highest level.
Rem You want to be recovered to something.
JT That is the very thing. Then we see the state of Judah, who represents the ten. He is concerned about their father, an old man (he had right feelings), and his youngest son, whom he loved. “His brother is dead”. His brother, note, not ‘our brother’. Judah’s remarks lead up to the line Joseph was on. “We have an aged father, and a child born to him in his old age, yet young; and his brother is dead, and he alone is left of his mother; and his father loves him”. Such a group of circumstances arouses the most tender family feelings. These are in keeping with the cup.
Ques What answers to the cup today?
JT It says, the cup in which indeed he divines. Think of being brought back in connection with that by which the Lord divines! “The eyes of the Lord run to and fro throughout the whole earth”, (2 Chronicles 16:9). And in Revelation 3:1 we read of the “seven Spirits of God”. It is in that connection we are brought back in connection with the Spirit of God. It is said that “the spiritual discerns all things”, (1 Corinthians 2:15).
Ques Do you think that God is exercising us to bring about family affections for the comfort of His own heart?
JT He is. The Reformation did not reach [p. 148] the church level. Someone was saying the other day that it is very doubtful whether Luther reached the first verse of Romans 5; he spoke much of being justified by faith (and of course we thank God for this and the great stand he made), but was there peace with God, access into favour, and rejoicing in hope of the glory of God? That is the line. The Lord has nothing less for us today than Ephesians.
Ques Is it not by means of the truth that we are recovered? “Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free”, (John 8:32).
JT Yes; but justification by faith was truth, but not the whole truth. The ‘cup’, so to speak, was not there at the Reformation. Whereas what we are considering here shows in type that recovery is on the highest line; we are brought into the family consciously, and all that is contrary is put out.
Ques Did the Lord approach the woman in John 4 on that line?
JT On the line of worship of the Father. Joseph put all out here. Chapter 43 contemplates operations — Joseph comes in at noon from his business — but that is not chapter 45, there all are put out and no one is there but Joseph and his brethren; it is the time of disclosure, of manifestations, wherein he shows what he is to his brethren. In chapter 44:14 we read that Joseph “was still there” — in the house — when his brethren returned, as if waiting and not occupied with other things. So that what follows occurred in the house.
Ques Do you connect this cup with the cup of the new covenant?
JT Well, no doubt it is connected, but it is really on a higher line — it is what Joseph uses, by which he drinks and divines. Today nothing will answer the Lord’s heart but the very best He can give for His brethren; you can see that now we are to be brought into the secrets of the Lord, what He is [p. 149] doing. Having that cup looked like a calamity, but it was not; in result it meant that they were brought into his presence as brethren and he was revealed to them. Then, secrets were revealed to them as to what was going to happen. The idea of divining is, the Lord discerning and taking account of things. We have the mind of Christ, the means of thinking as He thinks.
LDB In that way there is nothing much more testing than the love of God.
JT Oh, it tests you, surely! but do you not think that the Lord in all these centuries has had His own mind about things? The book of Revelation shows that everything is known to Him. Having His Spirit we come into the understanding of all, and we are brought consciously into the family. So we are lifted out of the whole realm of current religion into an order of things in which Christ is operating — that is the line of recovery.
Rem John is marked out as the one who leaned on Jesus’ breast.
JT Yes; he was like the Urim and the Thummim, through him the mind of the Lord was obtained.
Ques Is it like, “I call you not servants ... but ... friends”, (John 15:15)?
JT Quite. You are brought into a realm where you get to see how Christ has been viewing things all through the centuries.
Ques Would it suggest that Joseph saw something in Benjamin to which he could commit himself?
JT I think it does. Benjamin had the same father and the same mother as Joseph.
Rem In many minds, the cup is buried in the food sack, they view it as a means of grace.
JT Quite.
Ques Is there any difference between that and Luke 15?
JT I was thinking at the beginning that it [p. 150] corresponds with Ephesians; the prodigal is the gentile brought near and made suitable for the divine presence. What you get in Genesis, is, I think, the family of God, as we may say, in parts. Benjamin represents the real thing; he had no part in the wickedness, and he had the same mother as Joseph; and so Joseph’s requirement was that they must bring Benjamin. As soon as he sees Benjamin the house is in view, and he is moved. He comes in at noon; he has not reached the end yet, but he is nearing it. “Set on bread” — it is a question now of the administration of the goodness of God; it is carried on in the way of distance — “for him by himself, and for them by themselves, and for the Egyptians ... by themselves” — that is how the matter stood. And then the cup comes in because he would bring Benjamin near; Benjamin must be the link, and he has to be brought back, and when they returned Joseph was still there, as if waiting for them. Then comes Judah’s speech, and the Egyptians are put out, and he makes himself known.
Rem It is not only the cup “in which my lord ... divineth”, but the cup in which he “drinketh”.
JT Yes; you can see therefore what a high level we are on. You get into the way of divine enjoyment.
Ques You spoke of Benjamin having to go through apparent calamity, what would answer to that?
JT Well, you have to go through things with your brethren, even though you may have no part in the guilt. You cannot escape the ordinary discipline, but the Lord has His eye on you specially. In chapter 44 we are introduced into an order of things where we learn the divine way of viewing things, and doing things. That is, to my mind, very wonderful, and indicates the peculiar character of the present time. The great revival is in relation to the very highest things.
[p. 151] Rem With Israel the revival comes in through Benjamin, “Let thy hand be upon the man of thy right hand, upon the son of man whom thou madest strong for thyself”, (Psalm 80:17).
Ques Do you think that the features of Benjamin are brought about through exercise? I was thinking of the death of Rachel.
JT Yes. Judah conveys what they had reached, in telling what he was to his father.
Rem Benjamin would be far removed from any party spirit.
JT That is what I thought. He recognises the assembly, in principle. Brought to this, you disallow all partisanship, you come into the good of the house. But then the others are to be brought into it as well. The Lord, if He is operating with an overcomer, has the whole idea before Him, He would bring all into what the overcomer has. In the meantime Benjamin has to suffer with the others, but he is already reminded of the place he has, in the five portions, he has already a testimony to the place he has with Joseph. Later he gets the kisses.
Rem Coming into the light of these things involves a good deal of suffering.
JT However spiritual you are, you go through with the brethren whatever may come upon them through the governmental dealings of God.
Rem He was the only one who wept on Joseph’s neck.
JT Yes; he responded fully to Joseph’s affections.
HD'AC The picture is not complete without Judah coming forward and taking a large share of the blame. That spirit is important, is it not? He was not the guilty one, but he faced the situation, and it was through his admissions and confession that Joseph saw the time had come to make himself known to his [p. 152] brethren.
JT Judah therefore represents what was becoming in the ten; he did not speak for Benjamin. Judah in his exercises represents the ten — all as responsible. The Lord has nothing less than that before His mind; therefore, as Judah speaks, Joseph says, “Cause every man to go out from me”. It is a question of showing, typically, what Christ is to the brethren as a whole.
RMcB Is that so that He could seek all his brethren?
JT Quite so. Every man is put out. It is not now a question of doing outwardly great things, but of being engaged with his brethren. “In that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me”, (John 14:20). The Lord’s prayer in John 17 shows what they were to Him, they were enough to engage His affections.
Here it is disclosure of His relation to us — under these circumstances He makes us know that we are His brethren. This is marked by great feeling — Joseph “wept aloud” as he “made himself known unto his brethren”.
Then he said, “Come near to me, I pray you. And they came near”. Then follows the expression of mutual affection. All this shows in the most striking and affecting way how the Lord has wrought at the present time to bring His own back to Himself in the apprehensions and realisation of the most exalted family relationship.