THE KING IN HIS BEAUTY (2)
THE KING IN HIS BEAUTY (2)
WB-t Does this bring out the manner of Man who was the King?
JT It does. That is the point in it; how He came into the world; how He recognised what was in it; and what He Himself was.
WB-s Is it necessary for a King to have a forerunner? The forerunner is in chapter 3, is he not?
JT Yes. “Now in those days comes John the baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judea”. He prepares the way of the Lord.
BTF How do you connect the thought of King with the Lord in His character as the dependent Man in the wilderness?
WB-t He that ruleth his spirit is greater than he that taketh a city.
JT That is seen perfectly in Christ here. Adam failed in it. Adam was given dominion over everything but he could not control himself. If one cannot rule one’s self by self-control, it is obvious that he cannot rule others. Noah failed specially in this and he became drunk.
WB-s The thought of subjection here is entire dependence, and He knew what it was to be under authority, to be under orders. He would not do a thing Himself. A king has to know what it is to be under authority in a way, does he not?
JT Yes, quite, and the king was to be subject to the word, you know. The law of Moses provided for the king, as we get it in Deuteronomy 17:19. The king was to “Keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them”. The Lord is clearly on Deuteronomy ground here.
WB-s So the headship of Christ, and being [p. 273] subject to God, is a great thought for us now. I do not know that it comes in here, but “the head of Christ is God”, (1 Corinthians 11:3) therefore, He is subject in that way.
JT But chapter 3 has an important place as introducing the forerunner, and what marked his ministry. He was preparing the way of the Lord: those that recognise the coming One must disallow the flesh. A point of chapter 3 is, I think, that in coming into this world the Lord did not intend in any way to honour the flesh. It says, “And John himself had his garment of camel’s hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins, and his nourishment was locusts and wild honey”; and further, “But seeing many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them, Offspring of vipers, who has forewarned you to flee from the coming wrath? Produce therefore fruit worthy of repentance. And do not think to say within yourselves, We have Abraham for our father”. (Matthew 3:4; Matthew 3:7-8).
WCR The fact that baptism is introduced is significant.
JT Those that would join Him must accept that God’s judgment is on the flesh, and not rest on the fact that Abraham was their father. That is the baneful thing that built up the world, who a man’s father is, but the Lord is not going to pay any attention to that. It is a new order of things, and it is now a question of the relation in which we stand to Him, to the King.
EHT Is it not true of all ministry that it is to make room for the Lord?
JT Yes, and to bring down all natural pretensions.
JS-t Being led by the Spirit does away with the flesh.
JT Yes, this makes way for the Man who is anointed with the Spirit. Chapter 3 makes way for that. The disallowance of natural claims is what this chapter introduces; “And do not think to say within yourselves, We have Abraham for our father”. (verse 9) There is so much that we say within ourselves that we do not say publicly. God deals with what goes on within as well as what we say publicly.
BTF Would you say the Lord was looking for a spiritual generation?
JT That is it, and John would prepare that.
CAM So the preparation was moral?
JT Yes, and his ministry was marked by, “All flesh is grass, and all the goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field”. That is what the voice says; see Isaiah 40. The outward form of baptism has no meaning unless what we are saying within ourselves agrees with it. You baptise a king and he remains a king. When the Roman missionaries went out they baptised the kings of the Gentiles. The commission to the twelve was, “Go, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations”. (Matthew 28:19) Make disciples of them. How can a man be a disciple today and rule a kingdom? Paul says, “Ye have reigned as kings”; (1 Corinthians 4:8) but, if they did, they reigned without Paul. The idea of baptism is not to leave things as it finds them here.
CAM So we have present conditions here? I mean the day to come is the day of display.
JT Yes, that is right. If you go out to Christ it is a question of not claiming anything in yourself; saying, I am different from this one and that one. Baptism is a leveller as regards my position in this world. It levels things. It is a question now of what the Lord is going to do, being baptised in view of Him, so that all distinction must come from the King. It is not what those that went before Him accord. It is what He was going to do.
WCR Moses was a prince in Pharaoh’s court but the time arrived when he came into the faith of his baptism and he associated himself then with his [p. 275] brethren.
WB-t Then, as you said this morning, he became king in Jeshurun. I understand you are indicating for us that, while you give up things according to the flesh, if you wait upon God, He will distinguish you, Moses becomes king in Jeshurun.
JT “As many as have been baptised unto Christ Jesus”. If I am baptised unto Christ, it is a question of what Christ will do with me; but then it says, “As many as have been baptised unto Christ Jesus, have been baptised unto his death”, (Romans 6:3). You must blot out all previous history. It does not count. It is a question now of what I am to be as baptised to Christ.
WLP Christians should have those wonderful principles before them.
JT Quite so, in one’s household and as regards one’s self. What am I saying within myself? We are all baptised, and all brethren; but what am I reserving?
CAM That is an interesting thing, as you said, about Moses, if you think of him as a king. Really the thing came about on the same principle as this, and I suppose the same thing took place with David; you have the lowly heart there also.
JT The Lord will distinguish you in His own way, and you will get a place in the affections of the saints; and no one needs to push himself, because in due time the saints accord you the place the Lord fits you for. Moses thought the people would recognise that he was a deliverer, but they did not at first, and he has to go into the wilderness for forty years and then he comes back a deliverer, and in effecting the deliverance he becomes king. He acquires a place in the affections of the saints and that is a far greater thing. David said to Michal, who, of course, had a lineage, being a king’s daughter, that he regarded the respect of the maid-servants of Israel. They were among those who said, “Saul [p. 276] hath slain his thousands, and David his ten thousands”. (1 Samuel 18:7) The saints recognise what a man is and you can leave it there; but the old history has to be wiped out. The ruin of the church, the ruin of the public thing has been by admitting previous history. Men have come in on the ground of what they have been instead of accepting baptism in its full meaning.
WCR Whereas, as a matter of fact, the church has no past history.
JT It is the new thing and therefore everything in it must be of Christ; what one is there must be determined by Him.
Ques Would you say Moses started from the burning bush?
JT He had his discipline before that, forty years of discipline. The burning bush indicated his gift; it is the manner in which God revealed Himself to Moses and that became the power in his soul for his ministry afterwards.
WCR He received his commission there, and the light of what God was going to do.
JT The bush was not consumed although it burned. That was the principle of the wilderness, indeed of God’s ways in discipline.
WB-s I thought his beginning was in the river. He was “drawn out”. (Exodus 2:10 note b) That is the meaning of his name. I thought that was his baptism.
JT That was his parents’ side; his experimental history with God began later.
WB-s His baptism signified death, did it not?
JT Quite, but all he went through in the forty years in the desert was to bring him back to that.
CAM In connection with his service for God, he had the sense at the bush of what God was going to do.
WLP Did the burning bush apply to Christ? There was nothing there burned; the bush was not [p. 277] consumed.
JT It refers to what is of God in the saints. Discipline goes on all the time and yet the saints survive. If applied to man in the flesh it would burn him to ashes. There would be nothing left at all. That which is of God survives in spite of the fire.
WCR It says, “Our God is a consuming fire”. (Hebrews 12:29)
JT Yes, so we are to serve Him with reverence.
WB-t There is a very great principle in the bush not being consumed.
JT The people survive in spite of the discipline.
EHT The Lord in speaking to the Sadducees, when questioned on a certain line of things, said, “Have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him?” (Mark 12:26) It was at the bush.
JT He is the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, not of the dead, but of the living; for all live unto Him. That shows what was in God’s mind at the bush. It is not consumption, but life.
WB-s “The good will of him that dwelt in the bush”. (Deuteronomy 33:16)
JT Yes, that is a very beautiful remark.
WB-t Going back to chapter 3, where John is introduced: in Luke it says, “to turn hearts of fathers to children, and disobedient ones to the thoughts of just men”. (Luke 1:17) I have never understood that, and now that we are speaking of John, would you help me a little on it?
JT I suppose the fact that fathers’ hearts are alienated from their children would indicate apostasy; natural affection had been disregarded. I think a great point with God in the recovery is to bring about recovery of the household. It is a primary thought with God, the household, to have parental and filial affections, conjugal affections. All these are things that need to be regulated. In the East it was well known that they had become entirely deranged. Polygamy, and all that went with that, was the [p. 278] complete demoralisation of the family idea, and it was a great point with God that in the recovery the household should be restored.
WCR Relationship between God and man being broken, every other relationship was broken.
JT Yes, it was very noticeable in the household. The Lord says in regard of divorce, “From the beginning it was not so”. (Matthew 19:8) In the recovery God would revive all primary institutions. He is not going to allow any thought to which He has given expression to lapse; so the household, and all that goes with it, must be reinstated. Hence you find the Lord constantly working in relation to households in His ministry, and John the baptist prepared for that.
WB-s This class of people here are spoken of as Pharisees and Sadducees. They have a standing of their own somehow. Does that class of people exist yet, the Pharisees and Sadducees; I mean in character?
EHT Is not the idea of chapter 3 to bring into view the order of man that is to come in?
JT Chapter 3 is most important as regards what we may be here in this world. It deals with all that, whatever you may be or have. Hence John says, “The axe is applied to the root of the trees; every tree therefore not producing good fruit is cut down and cast into the fire”. (verse 10) The axe is already applied and it is only a question of God’s patience, and giving each an opportunity to cut himself down.
CAM Applying it to us, possibly our trouble would be hiding under a religious status without the moral state for it.
BTF Would you say that what the Lord says about the axe being applied to the root of the trees, is much on the same line as what is said to Nicodemus; “Ye must be born again”? (John 3:7).
JT Yes, Nicodemus was thinking he had a [p. 279] place in Israel, and the Lord swept all that away in saying, “Ye must be born again”.
WB-t So a man could cut himself down: the axe was there?
JT John’s ministry was in order that they might do that. The axe would be what God was going to do. It was a question of what God was going to do to every tree not bearing good fruit, the point is good fruit. Anyone not bearing good fruit shall be cut down and cast into the fire. The time had come for that and therefore John’s ministry and baptism were a mercy, so that men might escape the judgment of God.
AAT Baptism is a negative thing. What is the positive thing here?
JT The baptism by the Holy Spirit. John goes on to say: “I indeed baptise you with water to repentance, but he that comes after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not fit to bear; he shall baptise you with the Holy Spirit and fire”. That is the positive thing. In the water I am submerged. That is, all past history is blotted out. I cannot bring it into the assembly.
DR Would you say that the garments John wore, and his food, indicated he was in the good of his ministry and baptism?
JT Yes, he was in keeping with his ministry in his manner of life. As Paul says, “Thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life”. (2 Timothy 3:10). But when you come to water baptism, it is that you are buried; you are put out of sight and all past history is blotted out; but Christ baptises with the Holy Spirit. That is the positive thing.
AAT That is not Christianity.
JT Yes, it involves Christianity; Pentecost was the baptism of the Spirit.
AAT I thought resurrection comes in as a positive [p. 280] thing.
JT Oh, surely, but as regards the position of the saints here in this world, as baptised they come in for the good of the Spirit.
WB-t I like that thought about baptism; being baptised of Christ brings in what is positive. The Lord now can use me according to His pleasure.
JT That is the point. Baptism means that I am available to Christ. That is what I am for now. I am baptized to Christ, and therefore I am available; it is a question now of what He will do, and so He takes us up. He poured out the Holy Spirit on the early disciples, forming them into the assembly. The baptism of the Spirit implies, I think, that one’s individuality is merged in the company.
WLP Baptism is simply negative in itself, but what follows on baptism, the Lord taking one up, is positive.
JT But there is the baptism of the Holy Spirit, that is the positive side.
CAM But in the water of baptism you are baptised to something, otherwise you would come to an end. Even Israel was “baptised unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea”. (1 Corinthians 10:2).
WB-t People say to their children, You are baptised and because of that you cannot do certain things, but I see a further thought, that is, you are baptised to Christ so that He can use you. You are available for Him now and you must not do that, because that belongs to something which should be ended by your baptism.
JT Whereas, the idea of baptism as conveyed by the Roman missionaries in Western Europe falsified it, because the baptised persons were allowed to remain as they were. It was simply a rite that had no moral force, whereas, the point is that the baptised ones are available to Christ. What will He do with them?
DR Would you say baptism comes in as a [p. 281] foundation principle in connection with the kingdom of the heavens? “The kingdom of the heavens has drawn nigh”. (Mark 1:15).
JT Yes, I think so, and it makes room for Christ who baptises with the Holy Spirit. It says: “Then went out to him (John) Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the country round the Jordan, and were baptised by him”. That is what they would come into according to John’s preaching. They would come into the baptism of the Holy Spirit. That was the legitimate result of their coming out.
AAT But only one hundred and twenty came in.
JT That is an historical fact; but this is how the matter stands: that the One who is in their midst was such an One that John was not worthy to bear His shoes. He is one that will baptise you with the Holy Spirit. “He shall baptise you with the Holy Spirit and fire”. That was the proposal.
WCR But you do not get household baptism here.
JT No, it is the general position of baptism in connection with the coming in of Christ.
WCR Our brother was saying that it would be more believer’s baptism; but when a child is baptised, like Moses, the time comes when he comes into the faith of it. He is not responsible for it at the moment.
JT Household baptism stands on this principle that the head says, “As for me and my house, we will serve Jehovah”, (Joshua 24:15). I hold myself and my house for the Lord. All is available for the Lord. Individually the children may not be, but that is the principle of it.
WB-s The same as with Ittai, they passed over, he and his little ones, (2 Samuel 15:22).
JS-t Would the ten virgins not illustrate what we have been talking about, the negative and positive? I suppose baptism puts you in the position,
[p. 282] but it is that you may receive the Spirit. The five foolish were in the position but they had not the condition suited to it. The five wise had the Spirit.
JT Yes, it is only by the Spirit that one can maintain one’s self in the light of baptism; because it is by the Spirit we “put to death the deeds of the body”. (Romans 8:13). We need the power of the Holy Spirit to maintain a walk in keeping with our baptism, so it says that you may “walk in newness of life”, (Romans 6:4) and that can only be by the Spirit.
WLP Is the fire the judgment of the flesh?
JT It was seen at Pentecost. The Holy Spirit, whilst it brings in the blessedness of what God is in the soul, is not going to honour the flesh. That is the point in the fire I think.
EHT The Lord comes to John’s baptism. Why?
JT “To fulfil all righteousness”. The passage states, “Then comes Jesus from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptised of him; but John urgently forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptised of thee; and comest thou to me? But Jesus answering said to him, Suffer it now; for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness”. This is the King; He fulfils all righteousness.
ST Baptism would prepare subjects for the King.
JT Quite, and He was coming in with them. In the temple spoken of in Ezekiel, the prince, under certain circumstances, comes in with the people and goes out with them. In other circumstances He comes in by himself. Now this is an indication that the Lord, personally, comes in with the people. He takes His place with them, and in taking His place it is a question of righteousness. He says, in effect, It is not simply that it becometh Me to fulfil all righteousness, “it becomes us to fulfil all righteousness”. He is graciously identified with John, and indeed with all the [p. 283] righteous ones.
WCR No need of disassociation with Him, but of association; identification, as you said.
JT He was identifying Himself with them, as they were in the path of righteousness, showing He would have part in that.
CAM So He identified Himself with Israel in Egypt, as we saw previously, here, in the wilderness.
JT In chapter 2, it is God tracing the way. He goes down into Egypt; is called out of Egypt, as they had been; but now they are moving themselves. They are being affected by the testimony. Hence now it is a question of righteousness, and it is not simply the King acting in righteousness, but “it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness”.
WCR The movement baptism produces?
JT The movement John’s preaching produced. The light of the testimony here was presented by John, and there is a movement, and the King is in it. He is identified with His people.
BTF Would you say it is the King personally we have here, not officially?
JT What He is personally. The Antichrist will not do anything like this, he comes in his own name, he exalts himself and tramples others under foot but God’s King personally identifies Himself with the repentant people. It is a very touching scene. “It becometh us”, the Lord says, “to fulfil all righteousness”. I would call attention to that word all; it is His mind that every item of righteousness has to be fulfilled. In chapter 5:13, we are told that He comes from Galilee. When we saw Him there last He was to be called a Nazaraean. That is where He had been all the time apparently. You can see the whole countryside moving to John, and here is a Man coming from Galilee. Jerusalem and Judaea had already come, but here is a Man coming from Galilee, where He had been in reproach, and humility, and obscurity, but He finds His way to [p. 284] join the movement; not indeed because there was anything personally in Him requiring it, but it was righteousness. It was a movement towards God and He is to be in it. “Then comes Jesus from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptised of him”. The Spirit records all that: where He came from, where He came to, to whom He came, and what He came for.
Now the Lord is graciously pleased to give place to John. He goes to John. Think of the grace that is in that, the humility of the Lord! Although King, He goes with all the countryside to the Jordan to be baptised. It was wonderful grace; and then, through John’s remonstrance, the truth comes out. John says, “I have need to be baptised of thee”, but the Lord says, “Suffer it to be so now; for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness”. It was to link John on with Himself in the ministry, and what a wonderful vista of service must have opened up to him! It is a very affecting picture; and so the truth comes out; the Man who loved righteousness appears, and then heaven intervenes. It says, “Jesus, having been baptised, went up straightway from the water, and lo; the heavens were opened to him”. It is to him they are opened, to the Man who is able in His grace and greatness to take the low place with all the others when there is a movement, and He is recognised in heaven. Heaven is opened to Him, and the word is, “He saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him: and behold, a voice out of the heaven saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight”. Notice, the heavens opened to Him, and he saw, but the voice is to others. It is not, Thou art my beloved Son, but “This is my beloved Son”. God is honouring Him in the ears of the public.
WB-s So this chapter is really taken up with John’s service, whereas chapter 4 begins with the Lord Himself.
[p. 285] JT The Lord is introduced to us directly in chapter 4, in His own service.
WB-s I was thinking what a moment this must have been after four hundred years of silence since Malachi.
JT What must it have been to heaven!
ST The chapter brings in the light of heaven.
JT It is now not simply a star moving as a guide, but the heavens opened to Christ.
EHT Would you say that all the Deity is in activity in connection with this movement? It is a movement of righteousness.
JT Yes. The voice is the Father’s; the Son is seen, and the Holy Spirit; so we have revelation. God is revealed here.
AAT Immediately afterwards Jesus is carried into the wilderness. Is there something in that?
JT In Matthew 4, He is “carried up into the wilderness”; in Mark 1 He is driven into it; in Luke 4 He is led in it; all pointing to the fact that He did not go voluntarily into it. No Christian should take up evil voluntarily; nor attempt to handle it. If God leads you into it He will sustain you in it, and so we have a Pattern here, I think, in Christ. He was carried into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.
WB-s So in the prayer we get, “Deliver us from evil”.
JT Yes, quite. There are very few brothers capable of taking up evil things and dealing with them.
WCR It is defiling.
AAT Naturally, I suppose, we would go into the wilderness without having to be urged to go. We would slip right into it.
WLP “Lead us not into temptation”, is in this connection.
JT Yes. You look to God that He should [p. 286] not lead you into temptation: you are so much afraid of yourself.
WLP You want Him to preserve you from it.
AAT He may lead you into it for discipline.
JT He moved David to number the people. That was a serious matter.
AAT Do you mean to say that God would put a man in the way of being tempted?
JT We are told that He “moved David”, but in Chronicles, that Satan “provoked David” to number the people. The word says Satan did it, but God was behind Satan doing it. Compare 2 Samuel 24:1, and 1 Chronicles 21:1. If David had prayed and been dependent on God he would not have been allowed to number the people.
WCR Job was another case.
JT It is a very remarkable case. I was going to speak about Job in connection with the first quotation here. You will notice it is in connection with a man’s circumstances, the needs of his body. The more a man has in this world, the more conspicuous he is, the greater the area on which Satan can act.
WB-t That comes out remarkably in the difference in the way Satan affected Job and Peter. The Lord says, “Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat”, (Luke 22:31). But he deals with the two men very differently. Peter seems to have nothing he can take away, while Job had so much he could take away.
JT Yes, Satan had a wide field to work on in Job’s case.
CAM Apart from the fact that he has a wide field with some, the Lord was without earthly possessions and yet the test of circumstances came. So the test of circumstances is a thing that affects every Christian.
JT Yes, it does, but the more you have of this world’s goods the greater opportunity the enemy has,
[p. 287] and the more God can act on you, too, to humble you. Job had seven sons and three daughters, and he had a large number of sheep and oxen and camels; he was greater than all the men of the East. Satan says, in effect, to the Lord; You have hedged him in, not only personally, but all he has you are watching over. This was true, and it is very comforting that we can invoke God’s blessing on our belongings; but if God is pleased to discipline us, every one of those things affords an opportunity for Him to do so. God says to Satan, “All that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand”. (Job 1:12) The Lord here had no earthly belongings, but Job had, as I said, vast wealth, and the record of Satan’s attack on Job begins with the fact that his sons and daughters were having a feast in their elder brother’s house. The passage begins with that, showing, that in these circumstances of Job’s nature ruled. Faith did not rule. Things were on the principle of nature. The eldest son had the place of honour, and hence the Sabeans come and they take away the oxen and asses, and slay his servants. Fire of God comes down from heaven and it does something; and the Chaldeans come; all showing the wide area Satan has to act on if God permits it. If a man has means Satan can employ the Sabeans, the fire, the Chaldeans, and the wind. The wind comes last of all and it smites the four corners of the house where nature ruled, and the children are destroyed. So Job affords us a solemn lesson as to the seriousness of earthly possessions if they are not held with God; and even if held with God, if God is pleased to discipline me He can do it that way. He can lift the hedge and let Satan attack me. Job is bereft of his children and his goods. Satan returns and God allows him to touch Job’s body, but he must save his life. The Lord’s position here corresponds in measure, for Satan attacks Him first [p. 288] through His bodily needs. But His perfection shines. He needed food, but He would not move a finger to get food if He did not have the word of God for it. It is a wonderful picture. It brings out the perfection of dependence in a man. As He says, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word which goes out through God’s mouth”.
CAM It does seem, as you say, very solemn, because ordinarily, you would say, It is perfectly legitimate to make provision for food, and then you acquire all these things possibly. Therefore the moral greatness of this emphasises itself.
JT It does. “Every word which goes out through God’s mouth”. It is not a special word, but every word which goes out through God’s mouth. That is man’s food.
ST To meet any situation?
JT Yes. I remember a statement of Mr. Darby’s, that he had come to the point that if material things passed away he could rest on the word of God. That is the point to come to.
BTF The Lord never went out of the appointed path of dependence and righteousness.
JT He would not move to alter His circumstances; but see what He brings in as a principle, that man is not to live by bread only, but by every word which goes out through God’s mouth.
WCR I have a family and have to care for them, for instance, and it is legitimate and right that they be cared for.
JT I think that brings up a very important line; that is, piety. If a man does not provide for his own he has denied the faith and is worse than an infidel, so the apostle’s doctrine is that we are to work with our hands the thing that is good, to provide things honest before God and man. That is quite in keeping with this.
WB-t The Scripture says, “Yet have I not [p. 289] seen the righteous forsaken, nor his seed begging bread”. (Psalm 37:25). It would be a very great exercise if a man found himself and family without bread.
Rem It goes further, “that he may have to give to him that needeth”. (Ephesians 4:28).
JT Quite. The man came to the Lord and said, “Speak to my brother, that he divide the inheritance with me”. (Luke 12:13). The Lord speaks from that point, and he says that a man’s life is not in his possessions. He may take an inventory, but he cannot include his life in that. That is not in the assets, and he goes on to show that a man may have such abundance that he has to pull down his barns and build greater, and say, “Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry”. The Lord’s word is, “Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee then whose shall those things be?” (verses 19,20) That shows the position, and then the Lord goes on to show that we ought to be dependent on God in regard to this matter. “Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you”; (Matthew 6:33) that is, all that you need. If God is pleased to add more, it is a question of God adding, and that places you under responsibility as to what you do with it.
WCR Stewardship comes in.
JT Yes, we must not be on the line of socialism. The Scriptures are wonderfully balanced, and so the apostle says on this very point, “Charge them that are rich”. He does not say, Tell them to destroy their means, but “that they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute”, (1 Timothy 6:17,18). You have the means, but he says, do not trust in them, but lay hold of that which is really life. That is the thing.
CAM The forty days here would correspond with the forty years of Israel’s history in [p. 290] the wilderness.
JT It is Deuteronomy ground, and the Lord enters on it.
DR I suppose that the brazen serpent had been lifted up already, and the Holy Spirit had been given to the people, typically. The Lord comes in on that ground.
CAM So what we get here is the end of the pathway in the wilderness. That only is touched on.
JT That is what is touched on. It is a Man in the wilderness in the power of the Spirit.
WCR There is a word in 1 Corinthians 10:13: “No temptation has taken you but such as is according to man’s nature; and God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above what ye are able to bear, but will with the temptation make the issue also”. It is not that you escape the thing, but He makes an issue. You get gain out of it if you see that the thing through which you are passing is for your good. That is the issue.
WB-t The limitation of forty days helps, and the angels ministering to the Lord.
JT And so I think the same thing is seen in the address to Smyrna, “Ye shall have tribulation ten days”. (Revelation 2:10). The time is limited.
BTF I was thinking in closing, you might say a word or two as to the King.
JT I think what we had in chapter 3 is very plain as to what marked the King. He came down to the circumstances of the remnant, and at that point He is recognised by heaven; and then in chapter 4 He is carried into the wilderness so that it may be shown that He is capable of contending with the enemy. He is single-handed. That is what comes to light.
BTF And the saints would come under the same testing here as is delineated in chapter 4?
JT Yes.