"HE TAKES AWAY THE FIRST THAT HE MAY ESTABLISH THE SECOND"

“^[p. 115] HE TAKES AWAY THE FIRST THAT HE MAY ESTABLISH THE SECOND”

Hebrews 10: 9; 1 Corinthians 15: 47 - 49; 2 Chronicles 21:1 - 15

I intend to refer to other scriptures, that will be known to you as I mention them, to make clear what I have in mind, but I confine myself to the reading of these. What is in mind is the statement in Hebrews 10, “He takes away the first that he may establish the second”. The great culmination of that is in the passage in 1 Corinthians 15, which I shall touch on later.

The statement in Hebrews 10 is a great general principle which has marked the dealings and ways of God since sin came into the world. The necessity for the taking away of the first was evident from the very outset, and in effect was there when Adam was driven out of the garden with no possibility of return, as of “the first”; and what is to be observed is the failure of the men of faith, the most distinguished of them, to observe this principle.

I read of Jehoshaphat’s failure, hoping to dwell upon it at some length, but failure is also seen in such a great servant as Abraham, who would retain Ishmael, saying to Jehovah, “Oh that Ishmael might live before thee!” Then as the true character of his son Ishmael as a persecutor was disclosed, Abraham was slow to remove him. Then another great servant, Isaac, failed in trying to retain Esau, the first-born. And even Joseph, great and relatively free from error as he was, failed on this point. So did Moses in regard to the circumcision of his son, and so did Samuel, a man who had all these examples before him; yet he would have anointed the firstborn, Eliab, in the house of Jesse. I mention all these ^[p. 116] things, dear brethren, because of this ever recurrent danger and tendency with us, even if spiritual and experienced; and the secret of the weakness amongst us, and the errors, too, and reprehensible conduct, is the failure to carry out this great outstanding principle.

I shall touch on a few of these instances in Genesis again to bring out the positive side, but I wish to show how this failure I have alluded to is particularly exemplified in Jehoshaphat. We may take him to be representative of conditions in most of our meetings at the present time, and indeed of the history of the assembly as more or less recognising the rights of Christ and recognising the Spirit, for Jehoshaphat was a good king. He loved the Lord. There can be no church status at all aside from this, for it is out of love to God and to Christ that we show our loyalty, keeping His commandments and practising righteousness. Aside therefore from love to God there is nothing. If we have not got love, it says, we are nothing. In however little a measure it may exist in a company or a person God owns that company and that person. He has them always in His mind and they have first place with Him at all times. Lovers of God, according to Scripture, exist at all times. You will remember how He spoke of them at Sinai, when demanding love as He had a right to do; in asking that, He spoke of the thousands who love Him and He has them in His mind; they are the positive side to God’s operations. They afford Him constant pleasure; they are the drink-offering all the time to God and He puts up with much because of them; but then He never conceals any discrepancies from those who are responsible. Love will not fail to bring forward discrepancies, because it is not love at all to pass them over. God is slow to anger, we are told, but still He never forgets anything in this sense. He requires what is past, and the Holy Spirit ^[p. 117] being here, He has perfect first-hand knowledge of what exists in every gathering and in every person. So that the process goes on all the time. Heaven is intent in all these things and has its pleasures, but there are these discrepancies and in such great servants of His they are marked out, even in a Joseph; he does not get off. It culminates here in Jehoshaphat who is spoken of as one who loved God and was a good king and God honoured him. But he made unholy alliances, and perhaps one might say that there is not a gathering of the saints of God that is free from this. One person in the fellowship contracting an unholy alliance affects everyone in it, and so as regards other discrepancies. Obligation rests on us all wherever there is such an alliance, all are affected, and so though Jehoshaphat was particularly marked as a good man in the main, yet he entered into an unholy alliance. The result is seen in Jehoram, who is made king, but not because he had any kingly qualifications; there is no word said about these. Qualifications must precede the idea of office, if we are to follow the mind of God. That is to say, the moral state must be there before the official. The first Psalm is the moral side of the whole book, the godly man, and the second Psalm is the official side. It is a most important thing to remember that the moral side comes first. Now Jehoshaphat makes nothing of the moral side at all; he is going on with the first in this matter; he stresses the firstborn. He had other sons, and according to Elijah’s testimony they were better than this one, but Jehoram was made king because he was firstborn. That is to say, Jehoshaphat is running contrary to the mind of God in this matter, he is considering for nature; he is considering for the first and not for the second. He is establishing the first while God is establishing the second. And this truth comes home to every person here; first as to the disallowance of the first ^[p. 118] in yourself — the epistle to the Romans teaches how that is to be done — and then if there be a family, the disallowance of the first in the family; if there be acquaintances the disallowance of the first there; and if we are in the fellowship of God’s Son, the disallowance of the first in that. So that the principle runs through in the history of the believer in all his relations from the time he becomes a believer until he comes to the end when he is conformed to the image of Christ, the heavenly, for as we have borne the image of the earthy — that is the first — we shall bear the image of the heavenly. That is the great positive objective that is in God’s mind; He has reached it in Christ and He is looking for correspondence to His mind in us and is not deviating from it one iota.

You see it in the book of Job. God takes away the first family with a stroke because Job had allowed them to pursue their way on the principle of the firstborn. They were feasting in the house of the firstborn when the wind came and destroyed them all. God took away the first but in order to establish the second, and this is done in the last chapter of the book. It is a most important and serious matter for every father and every mother, as to what they are going on with in their house, whether with the first or the second. Baptism implies the second is for you, and the first is to be taken away. God is doing it and you are doing it.

Jehoshaphat failed lamentably. The names of his other sons are given. Why so? There was something good in them. Elijah says so in his writing; they were better than Jehoram. Apparently Jehoshaphat made the selection of the worst man in the family. It was not because Jehoshaphat was a wicked man but because he had refused to accept this principle that the first is to be taken away and the second is to be established. It would seem that he even took on ^[p. 119] Jehoram before he died, he handed the kingdom over to him because he was the firstborn. The names of the others are given and he loved these sons apparently; he took care of each of them and gave them great gifts but his prime thought was the firstborn. He was running contrary to the mind of God. The natural mind says, Of course the firstborn should be king, but the spiritual mind says, Of course he should not be king; he is the last man that should be made king; he should never be made king; he is a murderer. Our natural hearts are so mean; they are capable of murder, and that is exactly what took place with Jehoram. When he was established in his kingdom he slew his brothers. He was marked by hardness of heart and that is what the first man is and he is in me and everyone here; he is capable of murder. If one hates his brother, we are told, he is a murderer, and every one of us is capable of hating. There is no mistake about that; it is a feature of the flesh — “hateful and hating one another” — and the allowance of that in me as a christian means that I am capable of murder. You say, ‘That is very strong’, but it is the Spirit of God that says these things. The flesh is no better in a christian than in an unbeliever and hence the importance for young christians and all of us to begin on these lines; to set aside the first, to do it methodically, constantly, and with power. You have the Spirit to enable you to do it and hence you need never be guilty of hatred. There is no such thing as assuming that anyone would murder another literally but it is the state of the heart that it in view; it is capable of this.

What comes out here, if we apply this, shows what God is going on with; and that is exactly the side I think, because Jehoram sits on the throne of David. God says in effect, ‘In spite of this murder and hatred I am going on’. If it were not for this grace of God there would not be a gathering that would ^[p. 120] stand today. It is because He is going on from His own point of view, because of the covenant He went on in spite of the murder. God goes on with us because of Himself — we marvel how He does it. The Lord would not destroy the house of David because of the covenant He made with David. He has the means of going on consistently with Himself because He has set up a wonderful system in heaven in Christ, and the Holy Spirit is here to carry on the principle of self-judgment with us so that God can go on with us. He does this from His own point of view, and hence hundreds of meetings exist that He is going on with. It is most encouraging in spite of the hatred and murder. Is He then to let it go on? He forgets our sins on the ground of redemption, but He does remember them as His governmental ways go on; He forgets nothing, He requires what is past.

Where these conditions exist among the saints generally or in a gathering, Edom gets rampant and rebellious. That man is the characteristically false brother; he will show his hand. These broken conditions amongst us open the door for Edom to rebel. He should not have rebelled. The blessing of Jacob required that he should rule over Esau but Esau insisted on a blessing and of course the blessing he got suited him. He roams about, he lives by the sword — he is always ready for a quarrel — and he essays for the dominion as soon as he can and whenever he can.

So here the Edomites surrounded Jehoram. It is a terrible thing to be surrounded by false brethren, creeping in unawares. Jehoram overcame Edom but never recovered his dominion. It is a very solemn thing because the broken conditions among us, arising from lack of love, are certain to open the door to rebellion. I think this incident is intended to illustrate the culmination of what I have been saying on the negative side, the disregard of the principle of ^[p. 121] setting aside the first so as to establish the second. There is no establishing here at all. The only ground on which God can go on is the ground of what He is Himself, and that is a poor thing from our point of view. It is a great thing from His point of view, that He can retire into Himself and go on with His people in spite of conditions.

It is a sorrowful thing that there is no establishing here of anything at all for God; even if there are some little exploits there is no establishing the second. So what we get is a writing from Elijah. It might be difficult for most of us to find out how Elijah wrote this to make it fit historically, but it is the spiritual side we have to consider. It is a written testimony. Not that we have anything on record of Elijah’s writing, there is no book of Elijah such as the prophecies of Isaiah and Jeremiah. The bearing of Elijah’s ministry was current. This writing is a sort of treasure, it deals with the final end of the first, the utter shame attaching to those who go on with the first. Jehoram is really antichrist. He is the full-blown representative of the first, the man after the flesh. He was very like Judas; he is a sort of counterpart of Judas. The bowels are alluded to, the want of affection, the want of right feeling, the want of sympathy with others.

It is very beautiful to consider David’s compassions for Saul after all he endured from him, and how he composed an ode to him. What beautiful feelings stirred David as he reverted to the history of Saul, in the book of Jasher, “He bade them teach the children of Judah the song of the bow. Behold, it is written”, meaning that it is a question of uprightness to be able to compassionate our enemies and not to slay them. This writing from Elijah represents the written testimony of the prophets to the culmination of the allowance of the first — shame and degradation. It stands, it is a testimony to the want of compassion.

^[p. 122] Let us not be wanting in compassion. “I beseech you ... by the compassions of God”, says the apostle. How he experienced those compassions and encouragement! We are encouraged of God that we may be able to encourage others.

Now the positive side comes out in the book of Genesis, where we see how the second is maintained and the first set aside. We get the best illustrations of Scripture to show how the thing is effected. So I would allude first to Sarah, the mother, when Isaac was born. Ishmael had been born some thirteen or fourteen years before, he was the first and had been in the house all those years. Abraham had prayed for him, ‘Jehovah, will you not take on this firstborn of mine? Let him live before Thee’. That was Abraham’s mind. He was going on with the first, but as soon as Isaac comes in — that is Christ in a spiritual sense — Ishmael’s character comes to light. I am saying what may apply to that which is spiritual in any one of us, in a family or in a meeting. He that is born after the flesh will persecute him that is born after the Spirit. It goes on in a meeting according to Galatians and it goes on in a family as with Joseph. What is to be learned here is the mother element; that is the spiritual maternal feeling that is proper to a company of saints walking professedly in the light of the assembly. Jerusalem above is said to be our mother, not Jerusalem in heaven; the thought is elevation, as Abram, which means ‘high father’. Sarah took on the thought; she refers to the spiritual instincts, the motherly instincts that are proper to a gathering of saints professedly walking in recognition of Christ as Head and of the Spirit and of one another. We do not want the first; we do not make special friendships with brothers or sisters because they are likable to us in a natural way or because they are of the same spiritual status. The disallowance of the first means that I renounce all ^[p. 123] personal friendships. Love makes the most of every member of the family. Personal friendship is according to the man after the flesh. So Sarah says, ‘Cast out this handmaid and her son; for he shall not inherit with my son’. That is what the assembly says. Secondly you get the paternal side, the element of eldership which speaks of responsibility; the leader or male side is the responsible side. No one can exempt himself from that, and it appears in Jacob. He set the first aside for the second. You will have healthy conditions if these two things run together, that is, the responsible element represented in the father and the maternal instinct that discerns when there is a persecuting spirit against the spiritual. If we have these two things running together the second will prevail and be established.

Then thirdly we have Jacob viewed not as a parent, but as a brother. That is at the outset of his existence. He took his brother by the heel. That alludes to spiritual instincts in a christian amongst the brethren. He sees the first asserting itself, it may be in himself, it may be in another brother. I am not to bow down to something in another that I refuse in myself. If I recognise that the first is to be disallowed in myself I am not going to allow it in another. That is the basis of his name, Jacob, a supplanter. The idea is, I am going to be spiritual, I am going to displace the first element that is so prominent among us. The spiritual is sure to overcome the natural if I insist on it. So Jacob takes his brother by the heel, and that was the end of Esau. Of course the mind of God had put them in that position. Jacob did not know that; his mother knew it but not he. It is a question of instinct. If a brother or a sister is endeavouring to prevail on natural lines, you can displace that by spiritual power; it is a question of spiritual instincts. I am not going to let them have that ground. I am going ^[p. 124] to displace them. The spiritual overcomes the natural. That is exactly what Jacob did. He resorted to a subterfuge, I admit, but he gained his point. It was the mind of God and he had begun to act according to the mind of God, before he knew it. It was a question of instinct, and in the end God says, “I loved Jacob”. Occupy the ground spiritually and to that extent you will negate the first and establish the second. The history of Jacob shows how the second was established in him. What a history it is! That family of twelve sons and four mothers required the greatest patience to work it out. But in result it was worked out and we shall see the names of the twelve patriarchs in the gates of the heavenly city. The “second” is prevailing, the “second” is established, and it began when Jacob as a babe supplanted the first.

That leads on to 1 Corinthians 15. It is a great fundamental, stimulating chapter, finishing with this, “But thanks to God, who gives us the victory”

(verse 57). I want to be among that “us”. It is not the first; it is not persons on the line of the first who get the victory. Paul represents the second; he says, “Most gladly therefore will I rather boast in my weaknesses, that the power of the Christ may dwell upon me ... for when I am weak, then I am powerful”, 2 Corinthians 12: 9, 10. He was establishing the second, and begins on that line with the cross. The cross is the full thought of God in setting aside the first; it is His judgment of the first. And that is what the apostle is insisting on. “I did not judge it well to know anything among you save Jesus Christ, and him crucified”, he says (1 Corinthians 2:2).

His crucifixion is the vicarious setting aside of the first in order to make room for the second. The whole earth and the heavens, beloved brethren, will be filled when the second is established. We want to join in this now, to be in accord with God in the setting ^[p. 125] aside of the first for the establishing of the second. So here we have, “The first man is of the earth, earthy”: it is not his wickedness, it is what he is made of. The second is the Man out of heaven. As it further says, “As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy; and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly”. How very searching that is, as to whether I am earthy in my outlook, in my books, in my service, in my way of living, in my business, or in the bringing up of my family. If I am earthy, how significant it is, “as is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy”.

And then he goes on, “As we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly”. Bearing the image of the earthy is not the same thing as being earthy. Being earthy is characteristic; bearing the image of the earthy is simply physical. As we have borne it, so we shall bear the image of the heavenly, but already the thought of our being heavenly is made known to us and the intent is that we should not be characteristically earthy, but heavenly. And as heavenly here we set out the mind of God as to the second; we establish it. I would like to enlist the sympathy of all the brethren here on these lines. If we have not begun intelligently we can begin now. It is a question of attitude of mind to begin with; the principle is laid hold of in the soul and accepted definitely and worked out. God is with us day and night as we take up this principle and this attitude of mind, and the Spirit is with us supporting it. It results in the second being established in me, in my family, in my business, and in the meetings amongst the brethren, so that in accord with heaven we move on in view of the Lord’s coming, when He shall change our bodies of humiliation into conformity to His body of glory. That is the full thought, dear brethren. The second is to be established in us in that way by the ^[p. 126] power of God, in our being either raised or changed in an instant when He comes.

This should help us in the solution of the difficulties which exist in every gathering that I know of. It is a question of facing all this and finding God with us in power, the second being established and the first taken away.