THE AUTHORITY OF CHRIST IN THE ASSEMBLY (4)
[p. 209] THE AUTHORITY OF CHRIST IN THE ASSEMBLY (4)
1 Corinthians 4:21; Revelation 12:5, Exodus 4:2 - 5; Exodus 7:14 - 17; Exodus 14:16
JT It is thought that the subject of “the rod of God” might come under our consideration. The verses read in the New Testament are suggested because they show the connection in which the rod is used; firstly, in relation to the ministry; how the minister, having qualified in moral power with God, has certain authority. Of course, in this case it was apostolic, but still the Lord said that He gave to His bondmen the authority, as if it were left here on that principle, as in the bondman. Then in Revelation we see it in its extreme severity, as in the hands of the Lord Jesus in the world to come, when He will rule the nations, not only with a rod, but with a rod of iron. We have it in Revelation also as a means of measurement. In chapter 11 the temple, the altar and the worshippers were measured by the rod that was given to the prophet; the New Testament thus showing the significance of the rod of God, but the Old Testament opens up the details of it. It is connected with Moses, who peculiarly represented God in the sense of authority; for the idea of authority runs through and is connected with the rod. The word used is sometimes translated “staff” in the New Translation, which probably alludes to its use by one in his pilgrimage or journeying, or, as in Moses’ case, in caring for the sheep of his father-in-law; it evidently represents therefore the experience that the believer acquires with God, and according to that measure he is used and becomes authoritative in a moral sense amongst the people of God. Then also, we shall see, as we proceed, how it works out against the resources of Egypt in Exodus 7, and in chapter 14 against death,
[p. 210] that is, the Red Sea; then we may see its use in other connections on a later occasion.
WR Would you say underlying this authority there is the need for bringing forward the man child?
JT Yes; the “male son” is a remarkable appellation of the Lord Jesus. It might seem to be tautological, but it is not; it is to stress the idea of manhood, I think. The government is not vested in the woman, but in the man, so that if the woman governs at all, it would be as recognising that government is rightly in man.
AFM In Isaiah 9:6 Israel in faith says, “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder”. Does Revelation 12 support that prophecy?
JT I think it does. The government is on His shoulder.
ANW Why is the idea of shepherding connected with the severity of an iron rod?
JT Well, it would show that extreme measures will obtain in the millennium as having in mind the preservation of all. In Corinth, the extreme measure directed by Paul to be taken against the incestuous person, has in view the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit might be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus; it was not for destruction really, but for preservation. Paul says, “If any one love not the Lord Jesus Christ let him be Anathema Maranatha”, which means that if one is not true he will be accursed when the Lord comes. The rod will mean a curse; so that in the millennium the sinner of one hundred years is to be cut off, yet the general principle is shepherding and there is an effective means of doing this. It will be carried out in righteousness; “When thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world learn righteousness”, Isaiah 26:9. Severity is the best kind of service to render; the effect of it is to break down the flesh, and preserve the person from walking after [p. 211] it.
AFM Is that the force of “iron” in the words “iron rod”?
JT I think so; iron is a type of what is strong. In the book of Daniel, chapter 7, the teeth of the fourth beast were of iron, which “devoured, and broke in pieces” (Daniel 7:7).
WB-w In Revelation 2 the overcomer in Thyatira shepherds with an iron rod. How does he use it in the way of shepherding?
JT It says, “To him will I give authority over the nations, and he shall shepherd them with an iron rod; [p. 212] as vessels of pottery are they broken in pieces, as I also have received from my Father” (Revelation 2:26,27). I suppose that would be as over against the rule of Rome. It had ruled the nations; now the overcomer that suffered keenly at the hand of that persecutress, shall be ruling in his day.
WB-w Has that an application to the assembly today?
JT Well, I think the rod of iron is future in each case. It refers to the millennium, I think; not that the idea of severity is future; the apostle speaks of coming with a rod as implying severity. He did not want to destroy anybody, and yet he said, “Having in readiness to avenge all disobedience when your obedience shall have been fulfilled” (2 Corinthians 10:6); that is, when the saints generally at Corinth were brought into subjection there were still those he would deal with in the most drastic way, those that had sinned and were not repentant.
ANW What you say about the constructive character of the rod would be confirmed in Psalm 23:4 The psalmist said, “Thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me”, both of them.
JT Yes, I think that line of thought seen in the Psalms and the prophets would bring out that idea; even Job speaks about it. The rod is usually discipline, but it may go so far as a rod of iron in complete destruction — “as vessels of pottery are they broken in pieces”, the Lord says (Revelation 2:27).
JS I suppose it shows that He has authority to deal with evil, wherever it presents itself.
JT I think that is what is meant. The material of which the rod is made being iron is irresistible. Paul does not say what his rod was made of; I suppose it alludes to the power of the ministry with which he would come, but the rod of iron must have in mind the unrelenting character of the judgment against evil in the millennium, so that the sinner of one hundred years is to be cut off.
EEH Why is the staff mentioned negatively in Matthew 10? It says, disciples as sent out by the Lord were not to provide themselves with a staff.
JT It is connected with other things they were not to take; that is, the Lord has in mind that they are not to be like ordinary missionaries, with all that man in his calculations would supply, but in entire dependence upon God. I think that is what the Lord had in mind.
JS They were really sent out in weakness, to be as sheep in the midst of wolves.
JT Yes; nothing in the way of weapons for defence or even an agent for support — a staff. A staff would support you in your journeyings. I think it is to induce absolute dependence in the service.
CN Is the primary thought of the rod, as in Moses, intended to shepherd, but as wielded against the enemy as in Pharaoh, it is the opposite idea?
JT I think it would be enough to suffice for all emergencies, all opposition, even death itself. It is a matter of the authority of God, of the rights He has. God invading even death itself; what man thinks impossible, God shows is subordinate to His rights.
CN In attempting to use it, you have in view recovering or gathering together the Lord’s people.
JT Quite so; so that it says, “Thou leddest thy people like a flock by the hand of Moses and Aaron”, Psalm 77:20. That is in the benign sense; but the first [p. 213] application of the rod is against Pharaoh and his resources in view of releasing the people of God. God exercises His rights in this world, not to overthrow it, nor to destroy it exactly, but to bring it down so that it might release its grasp upon God’s people. That is how the saints can count upon God to exercise His rights in any given circumstances, whether it be employment, for example; for God has His rights there; He can intervene with your employers or regulate other conditions around you to release the world’s hold on you.
CAM The previous verse in 1 Corinthians 4 refers to the kingdom of God — “not in word, but in power” (1 Corinthians 4:20). We might be satisfied if we have it in word, but that is not sufficient, it is to be in power.
JT So that we have various designations of the gospel in the Scriptures, and one of them is “the gospel of the kingdom” (Matthew 4:23); that would mean that it has power.
ABP Would you say that in Paul’s use of the rod at Corinth, it would be just as much an expression of the spirit of Christ as if he were to come in meekness?
JT I am sure it would. He preferred to come in meekness. Of course, to use the rod would be only an extreme necessity.
JS As an apostle, he had the authority; he could have come with it.
JT Quite so; we hardly realise what power he had: if he wished to wither up or rebuke a person, the power would be there to do it.
GL Is that power seen in Peter in the judgment on Ananias and Sapphira?
JT That is a very solemn illustration of the thing of which we are speaking.
CAM In Deuteronomy 17, we are instructed as to any controversy that could not be decided; God had a place where there were priests and a judge (verse 9), and if anyone did not listen to them, that man would die. It was a very severe but right action to take.
JT [p. 214] I am sure it is a word for us. Although Deuteronomy is so full of Christ and the Spirit and the covenant, we have these severe words. “The priests, the Levites, and unto the judge that shall be in those days” (Deuteronomy 17:9). A weak state of things might be implied, but the judicial and spiritual elements are in mind, and although there may be a refusal to submit to them, it brings down the severest judgment. Paul says, “For indeed we are weak in him, but we shall live with him by God’s power towards you”, (2 Corinthians 13:4).
It may be helpful to point out that the introduction to this subject in Exodus 4 arose from Moses’ conscious weakness. He says to Jehovah, “But behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice; for they will say, Jehovah has not appeared to thee. And Jehovah said to him. What is that in thy hand? And he said, A staff. And he said. Cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent; and Moses fled from before it. And Jehovah said to Moses, Stretch out thy hand and take it by the tail — and he stretched out his hand and caught it, and it became a staff in his hand” (Exodus 4:1 - 4). And then the explanation is given, “that they may believe that Jehovah, the God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath appeared unto thee”. This was the first sign and it was to induce faith, so it says, “that they may believe that Jehovah ... hath appeared unto thee”. So that authority is a great matter; it induces faith. Paul received grace and apostleship for obedience of faith among all the nations; that is, authority was vested in him.
AFM Do you think the reference you made to power would come in here, not only was this rod an inducement of faith, but Moses had leaned upon it for support in the earlier days, and it was now an evidence of power to others?
JT I think that is the idea: “What is that in thy hand?” (Exodus 4:2) The servant is taken up according to what he [p. 215] has, and that is the reason why I think we should begin with this passage, as to the real meaning and the moral significance of the rod; that it begins with oneself. If I am to wield it, it must be what God has taken account of. It is not a mere accident if I have something in my hand. God knew what Moses had in his hand, and knew the history of that staff. How often Moses had leaned upon it and shepherded the sheep with it; so that it is a question of beginning with oneself. If one is enabled to wield the rod of God in any measure, it is as God takes account of oneself according to what He knows is there by formation of Himself; He can link Himself on with that.
CAM That is very interesting; I am sure God would not use anything in an arbitrary way, so that if He does use severity, it is of necessity because of conditions. As using Moses in this way it would be because of fitness through long training.
JT Quite so. Jehovah knew the staff better than Moses did. Moses would probably have forgotten many things in connection with that staff. We know how we forget such things very easily, but God forgets nothing. He knows the latent things in you far better than you do. He has been watching the effect of the work in you, ever since you were converted. Then, especially with young brothers and sisters, God watches the effect of the word on you, how it enters into your experience, and one day He may say to you, “What is that in thy hand?” You may have a desire to serve; but may say like Gideon you are weak and your father’s house is poor, and all that, but the test is what you have. He calls Gideon a mighty man of valour. With Moses it was what he had in his hand; that is, it is something you control, that you have proved and used already, that you are accustomed to; God will take that on.
JTJr Does taking the serpent by the tail denote that God takes up man in a new way — He does not take him up as he was [p. 216] exactly?
JT No, I think if any of us would revert back in our histories we will remember our proneness to begin as men begin, in a natural way. God would remind you of that, that that is how you did things, and up to the present time maybe you have not changed your mind in that respect. You think you can serve God as other men do, with good speaking, or learning, or the like. Well, I think in releasing it from your hand, letting it go from your control, you see the thing objectively, what you really are, what you are capable of, as moving on that line. The staff became a serpent, showing what one is capable of.
JS Would the staff becoming a serpent show that Satan had usurped the power of God over man?
JT I think so. I think that is what man became as coming under Satan’s control. When man is insubject he is capable of anything. This applies even though one is a Christian, I must be kept under control. The spirit of control is one of the greatest things in the New Testament — they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ teaching — the stress is on the apostles’ teaching, not Moses’ teaching, but the apostles’ teaching. That is divine authority in the apostles, and everything must be regulated by that; and as soon as I release myself from control, even though I be a Christian, I am liable to do anything.
CAM Satan could do anything with one in that state.
JT If we are out of control, we are like an ox let go from its owner, it may kill a man. The oxen that drew the cart with the ark, stumbled or broke loose, we are told.
JTJr Moses killed the Egyptian. I suppose that was something like the staff becoming a serpent?
JT Well, that is an example of the sort of thing we are speaking of; Moses was not under control then.
ANW I suppose, as coming out of Pharaoh’s house he had hardly acquired [p. 217] his staff.
JT I should think not. If this staff were his at that time, then it would be all the more extraordinary; if he carried it through and took it into Midian, I think he would understand the more what this sign meant, that as free from divine control he would do anything.
AFM Why is the direction given by Jehovah to take this serpent up by the tail?
JT Well, that is the next thing. We have seen the idea of release from control; man became in that state as having sinned. Adam released himself from control as disobedient; Satan got the advantage of him, we may say, and that is the history of man all along. Nimrod, for instance, was a mighty hunter before the Lord; he was without control; he did anything he liked with the creatures of God. Thus Moses would say, I can see now that I did as I wished. The Lord said to Peter, “When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst where thou desiredst”, (John 21:18). I think that should be before us as a first lesson to learn, especially for young brothers, who have any exercise as to service: to come definitely under divine control. Romans is provided to teach us this great lesson of subjection.
JS You would view Moses as a type of Christ — taking man as under the power of the serpent and bringing him under control?
JT Yes. I think the idea is that man was lost to God in Adam, but is recovered in Christ.
CAM I suppose Satan knew what would happen at the outset, and so tempted man into disobedience, hence out of divine control.
JT Quite so, but the epistle to the Romans works out the power of control in the Christian. In learning sin in the flesh, I say. This is what I am capable of; hence I must have control. I must have the Spirit of God. If I have not the Spirit of God I am exposed to the devil. “I myself with the mind serve God’s law” (Romans 7:25). That is resolution, but in order to carry that out I need [p. 218] the power of the Spirit; one of the fruits of the Spirit is self-control; so that taking the staff back, I think, typifies man abstractly in Christ — perfection in Christ. All believers are taken up in Christ; Romans teaches that, and we are to accept the fact: “Reckon yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus” (chapter 6:11).
ABP Would you not say that what has been before us is seen in Saul of Tarsus; although having been under the teaching of Gamaliel, he was really like a serpent on the ground, persecuting the saints? When the Lord met him on the way to Damascus, He said he would be told what he must do. Was not that the Lord taking control of him?
JT Quite so; he calls himself an insolent overbearing man; he did not care for anybody’s thought at all, but now he is led by the hand, and is subject to his brethren.
APM “It became a staff in his hand” — that is, he was recovered.
JT Quite so; “this man is an elect vessel to me”, the Lord said. He is in the Lord’s hand now, for His use. This is a very important lesson; I do not know o anything more important for the Lord’s people, especially the young people, because what you have in your hand is what you are accustomed to; and God uses that, but it is humbling and wholesome to keep in mind the previous history, when you were free from control, and did what you wished. If taken back by God, He would press on you that you are now to be for Him.
TH Would the suggestion of Jacob leaning upon his staff be included? He was in perfect control ere he passed away.
JT I think that is right — worshipping, leaning upon the top of his staff. That is a New Testament reference. It was not natural power he was resting on, but divine, and well proved, I think, relating to his whole [p. 219] history.
GMacP Are we under divine control as the truth becomes subjectively effective in us?
JT Quite so; Romans teaches that. Chapter 6 is baptism; it is committal to Christ’s death. That “even as Christ has been raised up from among the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also should walk in newness of life” (Romans 6:4). It is a new thing, so that in application to us, we reckon ourselves “dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus” (Romans 6:11). It is a change of man, as we have often heard. Now I am in a new status before God.
JTJr Would you say this element was lacking in Corinth, so that Timothy was sent there by Paul? He went there to represent this idea of subjection and control.
JT That is what the apostle meant. “I have sent to you Timotheus ... who shall put you in mind of my ways” (1 Corinthians 4:17). He was a man under control even like Paul, who was “legitimately subject to Christ” (1 Corinthians 9:21).
CAM I think it is remarkable, too, in that connection, for in spite of the inroads Satan had made in Corinth, still there was that rod, that mighty power, a token really of Satan’s downfall, and it was in the hand of Paul, was it not?
JT Quite so; what could we do without it? He has given to His bondmen not simple authority — but the authority. I think the book of Revelation is based on that idea; that is, Christ shows His bondmen “what must shortly take place; and he signified it, sending by his angel to his bondman John” (Revelation 1:1).
CAM So that it would be a sort of key to that book — confidence placed in the bondmen.
JT Quite so; so that in Mark, the Lord says in regard to the day of His coming, that even the Son does not know, nor the angels, but the Father — the Father alone. I think the opening of the book of Revelation gives you to understand what is meant: it is the revelation which God gave Him to make known to His [p. 220] bondman what must shortly come to pass; “he signified it, sending by his angel to his bondman John” (Revelation 1:1). That is the ground upon which we get the Apocalypse.
JH I was wondering why, after Moses had this experience of control, he should be told to put his hand into his bosom, and that it should come out leprous.
JT That is the second sign. Jehovah says to him: “Put now thy hand into thy bosom. And he put his hand into his bosom, and took it out, and behold, his hand was leprous, as snow. And he said. Put thy hand into thy bosom again. And he put his hand into his bosom again, and took it out of his bosom, and behold, it was turned again as his flesh” (Exodus 4:6,7). The first, I think, is man in his sinful state. The staff suggests what he was doing — what he had in his hand — lawlessness, Satan working that in him; but now the second sign is what we are as in the flesh — leprous as snow, but God has taken man up again in Christ, so that he is normal, as God intended him to be. That should help in the preaching.
JH I thought that taking his hand out would show what was in Moses’ own bosom.
JT Quite so; “The heart is deceitful above all things, and incurable”, (Jeremiah 17:9).
AR It says in verse 5, “that they may believe that Jehovah ... hath appeared unto thee”. What does that signify?
JT The signs were intended to induce faith, but then the appearing to Moses was in view of mediatorship, typically that there was a Mediator between God and men. It is to call attention to Christ as the Mediator. The appearings to Moses would be of that character; as you get in chapter 3 in the burning bush. I think that is to bring out the new mediatorial system of things. There is one man that God appeared to, and these signs are to witness to that, and to induce faith. If it be not that, Christianity is nothing more than an ordinary religion, but it is real and divinely accredited.
JS [p. 221] Does He establish Moses for the deliverance of the people? Power for this is now in the hands of Christ.
JT That is right. Moses now rises to the distinction of a mediator. The reference, “hath appeared unto thee”, of course directs our thoughts to chapter 3, to bring out the effects of the appearing, but it is a question of faith; faith being active in relation to the mediatorial system of things; Exodus 4 brings that out strikingly. Moses is given the authority, and Aaron is his prophet. The rod is the symbol of the power of both, hence as you go on through the book you find that Aaron uses this rod interchangeably with Moses. It is the mediatorial system in the hands of Christ that is in mind.
JS It is an evidence, is it not, of the power of Christ against the god and prince of this world?
JT Quite so; whether it be Christ in His apostolic authority, or in the priesthood, it is the same rod. It can be employed in either sense.
AR Is that why the Lord says, “All power has been given me in heaven and upon earth”, (Matthew 28:18)?
JT That is right. This rod typifies that. He exercises it either as Apostle or as Priest.
AFM How do you look at Numbers 17, where Aaron’s staff was laid up before Jehovah?
JT In that instance Aaron gets a staff of his own; it bore fruit and thus marked Aaron off as the true priest. The testimony of life was there. In Exodus 7 God specifies Moses’ rod; it says, “And Jehovah said to Moses, Pharaoh’s heart is hardened: he refuseth to let the people go. Go unto Pharaoh in the morning — behold, he will go out unto the water — and take thy stand by the bank of the river in front of him; and take in thy hand the staff that was turned into a serpent” That is, in this particular case, there must be no doubt as to what rod it is. In other instances, it is not so distinctive as this, but you are now dealing [p. 222] with a monarch, the prince of this world, as you might say, and it is as one representative of the power of God — one despised, that Moses is to stand before him. Of course, he was the same Moses that once was in the king’s house; he is not to be so regarded now, but as identified with Hebrew slaves; one bearing the reproach of Christ, and “esteeming” it “greater riches than the treasures of Egypt”, (Hebrews 11:26). Thus here, as possessing the power of God, what is he other than insignificant in the sight of the monarch of Egypt? Paul speaks of having the treasure in earthen vessels, “that the surpassingness of the power may be of God”, (2 Corinthians 4:7).
RWS Are certain bondmen qualified to use this rod more than others? I am thinking of Timothy and Titus, as examples.
JT Well, if God intends to use a man. He prepares him beforehand. He anticipates in our histories our usefulness, and so prepares us for His service; the apostle Paul speaks of serving God from his forefathers. He was like a lion, “mighty among beasts, which turneth not away for any”, (Proverbs 30:30).
CAM There was in Moses an assurance of what he was going to do to the end. The appearing in the bush would be a guarantee that God would qualify him for his work before he really began it.
JT Yes; I think it is well to grasp the facts here as we have been speaking of them. It is what you have in your hand. You have never really used it in the sense in which you are now going to use it, but it is in your hand. You have been using it as a natural man; I mean, applying it to yourself. You have never come to a change of man as illustrated in Moses’ rod becoming a serpent; you have to learn that you are apt to come under the power of the devil at any time. God’s end for you is that you are to be under His control.
ANW Moses later is said to be the meekest man in all the earth.
JT [p. 223] As having to do with God, he had become that. I do not think he was that naturally, but just a man like any of us. We can hardly say he was marked by meekness in Pharaoh’s house — “mighty in his words and deeds” (Acts 7:22) does not fit in with humbleness of mind. You can understand that he would have had no difficulty in slaying an Egyptian.
Ques Do you think Moses would ever forget that he had thrust his hand into his bosom?
JT I am sure he would not. No doubt such great experiences would often be related. Moses, David, and Paul could record many such episodes. It is for us to see how these things work out. The longer Moses lived, the more he would understand the tendency of the natural man to be leprous; on the other hand, now, as moving in obedience to God he would be pleasing to Him — man as taken up in Christ.
JS There was moral dignity with him. In standing before Pharaoh, he was greater than Pharaoh, as conscious of the power God had given to him.
JT Quite so; Paul says to Agrippa, “I would to God, both in little and in much, that not only thou, but all who have heard me this day, should become such as I also am, except these bonds”. (Acts 26:29). Think of the support that Moses must have experienced when God said, “Take thy stand by the bank of the river in front of him; and take in thy hand the staff that was turned into a serpent”. He would be clothe with the power of God, as the Lord Jesus said, “till ye be clothed with power from on high”, (Luke 24:49). With such power what could he not do in the presence of a monarch?
WB-w That is why we need faith; I was thinking of the centurion in Matthew 8. The Lord said of him, “Not even in Israel have I found so great faith” (Matthew 8:10). He said, “I also am a man under authority” (Matthew 8:9), he was under [p. 224] control.
JT He discerned the Lord in that way. The Lord was here with authority; He came from God, clothed with it. The Lord’s comment implied that the centurion saw by faith the whole position.
GMacP Paul in writing to the Corinthians said, “For I did not judge it well to know anything among you save Jesus Christ, and him crucified” (1 Corinthians 2:2); but the power of God was there.
JT Quite so; the apostle says, “My word and my preaching, not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power” (1 Corinthians 2:4). Paul came “not in excellency of word, or wisdom, announcing ... the testimony of God”, (1 Corinthians 2:1). God would have His testimony rightly represented in that way. Moses was to stand in front of Pharaoh, but with the rod that was turned into a serpent. But it must not be turned into a serpent again. God must ever retain His control. That is the lesson to learn in it; if I am to stand in front of Pharaoh, I must not come under his control, otherwise I will lose my power.
AMacD Do we see the power of the enemy in the previous verses, where Pharaoh’s men cast their rods down, and over against that we have the power of God in that Aaron’s rod devoured the other rods?
JT Yes. They may imitate to a point, and they do. It says, “Aaron’s staff swallowed up their staves. And Pharaoh’s heart was stubborn” (Exodus 7:12).
AC Do you think Jacob’s position was somewhat akin to that of Moses here? He stood before Pharaoh the king and blessed him.
JT Jacob is greater. It is a question of his greatness in the sense of blessing. He represented God in blessing, not for the destruction of the world or its overthrow; Genesis suggests blessing. It is the patriarchal idea, that of father. “The Father judgeth no man” (John 5:22) the Lord said; but when we come to Exodus, it is ministerial, and that is the test. In this respect we need power to deal with evil in the world in order to [p. 225] get the people of God out of the world. Jacob never undertook that; it was not his mission. Here we have a man sent, not yet to destroy the world, but to cause it to release its hold on the people of God. That is the position today.
AR In chapter 7 Moses smites the river: is this to break up the source of supply first?
JT I think so. Pharaoh says, “My river is mine own”, (Ezekiel 29:3). It represented the resources of the world, and God gives power to the Mediator, that is, to Christ. The gospels, of course, and the Acts are the great evidence of what the Lord did by ministry and by His servants to break up the world, so as to release its hold on His people; not to destroy the world, as yet. In Sodom and Gomorrah the world, typically, is absolutely destroyed, but Egypt is the world of today out of which God would take His people; hence He weakens it so that it releases its hold on us.
AFM The point of verse 15 of chapter 7 which has been brought before us is very important, I think. Jehovah says, “Take thy stand by the bank of the river in front of him; and take in thy hand the staff that was turned into a serpent”. That would suggest that we must be true to our committals. In taking the serpent in his hand, it became a staff in his hand. The thing for us is to be true to that principle. Often we are not; we fail by allowing the flesh and hence fail in our service. Moses’ action would stimulate us.
JT There is nothing we would not do as soon as we release ourselves from control; we may come under the direct power of the devil. Moses is now before Pharaoh with this staff in his hand, so it says in verse 16, “Say unto him, Jehovah the God of the Hebrews” (he is identified now with the reproach of Christ) “has sent me to thee, saying, Let my people go, that they may serve me in the wilderness; but behold, hitherto thou hast not hearkened. Thus saith Jehovah: In this shalt thou know that I am Jehovah — behold, I will [p. 226] smite with the staff that is in my hand upon the water which is in the river, and it shall be turned into blood” (verses 16,17). That refers to the resources of the world turned into the most gruesome thing — such as the believer would recoil from. The change really is in the believer, and the world loses all its power over him by this means.
AFM Is this a figure of death as judgment?
JT It is blood; you get it enlarged upon in Revelation. The rod is the great power for breaking up the world, not yet destroying it, but weakening it in order to release its hold on the Christian. Sodom is the world no longer viewed as in reconciliation, but Egypt is different. If I go into Sodom, I go of my own volition, because I love the world. I am viewed in Egypt as under the government of God. I have been born in it, and it is a question of getting out of it, that I might serve God in the wilderness; the world thus becomes a wilderness to me.
WB-w The gospel is the powerful means to get me out of the world.
JT That is right. So you begin in Exodus 12.
ANW It is interesting in that connection to see that Egypt comes into blessing in a future day, which Sodom and Gomorrah will not do.
JT Quite so; the children of Israel were told not to abhor an Egyptian.
CAM It is interesting too that Sodom and Egypt are seen together in the last book of the Bible.
JT Quite so; “spiritually Sodom and Egypt” (Revelation 11:8). I suppose the Egyptian character of the world merges into the Sodom character, so that it comes under unmitigated judgment; the city falls, but Egypt itself will come into blessing, as remarked. The final verse that we read is only to call attention to the fact that the rod dealing with the Red Sea, symbolises God’s authority over death, and therefore it enters into the death of the Lord Jesus. Jehovah says, “Lift thy staff, and [p. 227] stretch out thy hand over the sea, and divide it; and the children of Israel shall go on dry ground through the midst of the sea”, Exodus 14:16. This movement is for the deliverance of the people of God. Christ was “delivered for our offences and has been raised for our justification”, (Romans 4:25). In the death of Christ, God asserts His rights in death; it has to give way, for He took Christ out of it.
CAM That is very striking. When it is applied to the life of the world, the Nile, it was a gruesome sort of death, but here the people of God go right through it in the power of the death and resurrection of Christ.
JT Yes. Who shall stand in that war? What shall they do in the swelling of Jordan? What can man do there? God enters into it, in Christ, in the way of right and abolishes it.
CN The Lord said as to His life, “No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have authority to lay it down and I have authority to take it again. I have received this commandment of my Father”, (John 10:18). Does that help?
JT It does. The commandment implied God’s rights; Moses here exercises the power of that right. In laying down His life and taking it again, the Lord makes a way through for us.
AFM I would like to inquire as to the bearing of this scripture upon our subject in these readings. We have been considering the authority of Christ in the assembly. How does this scripture bear upon that?
JT What is before us enters into God’s rights in the assembly. “Shall I come unto you with a rod?” alludes to the power of the apostle in the house of God, so it fits in; but what is more immediately before us is the rights of God asserted in this gospel; that is, the intervention of Christ to weaken the power of the world so that it releases its hold on the Christian, as seen in the earlier chapters of Exodus; and then God [p. 228] entering into the domain of death and making a way through. It is a question of His commandment. “I have received this commandment of my Father” (John 10:18). He entered into death by commandment and took His life up again by commandment.
AFM This commandment was seen first in Christ subjectively, and would work out for the deliverance of man through Christ and the assembly finally.
JT Yes, that is how it works out. This same rod goes right through the wilderness — God’s rod.
AR Christ went into death as being entirely subject to the will of God. Speaking reverently of the Lord, He was under control, thinking only of the will of God.
JT Yes; He says that He had authority to lay it down and to take it again. Of course, in His own right. He could do it as God, but as become Man, He is “under authority”. The centurion saw that. He saw the delegated authority vested in Christ. It is a very fine thought. At the Red Sea, it is the Mediator, now entering into the domain of death and opening the way through it for us.
CAM It gives you a great idea of power.
JT It shows you what our position is; that we are subject, under control. Thus the Christian has power. So the apostle says, “for obedience of faith among all the nations” (Romans 1:5); and Peter says, “by sanctification of the Spirit, unto the obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ”, (1 Peter 1:2). That is where the power lies.
AC Does not the apostle act on the principle of control right through? 1 Corinthians 9:27 confirms what you say; he speaks of leading his body captive; all is in subjection.
JT Yes; he had power to do it; in that chapter he speaks of being “legitimately subject to Christ” (1 Corinthians 9:21).
AR We are apt to think of what is before us as an initial subject, but Saul lost the kingdom because he disobeyed. Samuel says, “Obedience is better than sacrifice” (1 Samuel 15:22).
JT Quite so; obedience is a principle. 1 Samuel 15:22,23 contains an oracular pronouncement by Samuel. It is given in poetic form as the New Translation shows. “Obedience is better than sacrifice, attention than the fat of rams ... self will is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of Jehovah, He hath also rejected thee from being king” (1 Samuel 15:22,23). He was sent to destroy the Amalekites. He did destroy the people, but he spared Agag and the best of the cattle. He said, “I have fulfilled the word of Jehovah” (1 Samuel 15:13), but he had not done it completely. Samuel then hewed Agag in pieces. You might say that is an extreme thing to do; but he was dealing typically with Satan in the flesh. Then we are told that “Jehovah repented that he had made Saul king over Israel” (1 Samuel 15:35), but alongside of Jehovah’s repenting, Samuel is mourning for Saul. He was out of accord with the principle he had so well expressed. Hence Jehovah says, “How long wilt thou mourn for Saul?” (1 Samuel 16:1) and goes on to say in effect, I have another man. The point for us is to get the other Man. As long as I keep mourning for Saul, I will miss that other Man.
CAM Yes; that making way for the other Man impresses itself upon one. It was really the birthplace of the great power that God was going to wield. Saul was rejected and David came into view.
JT Yes; the next chapter shows that as long as we keep mourning for Saul, we will miss David, and will be looking for another man like Saul. Samuel says of Eliab, “Surely Jehovah’s anointed is before him”,(1 Samuel 16:6) but David was in the mind of God and He caused him to be anointed.