THE BLESSING OF ABRAHAM
THE BLESSING OF ABRAHAM
In chapters 1 and 2 the apostle establishes his complete independence of men and Jerusalem. The Lord had appeared to him outside of Jewish territory, and the revelation made to him was of the Son of God. This involved a new system of things, with another centre than Jerusalem altogether. Jerusalem had a very great prestige particularly as the seat of the twelve apostles, and the tendency was to make it a centre in connection with Christianity. The metropolitan idea set in early: when it is assumed that any given place is a centre God goes out of His way, as it were, to show that He does not so regard it. The revelation to Paul near Damascus, and the movement at Antioch, furnish an illustration of this; and moral principles do not change. This epistle was written 1800 years ago, but there are conditions to which it has direct application today. The Lord did not intend to make Antioch a centre, but He intended to show He could move elsewhere. Antioch was not formed by apostolic means. It was the consequence of the scattering of the saints from Jerusalem. The testimony moved westward. Judea and Asia Minor have long since given up Christianity.
We suffer from metropolitanism. The Lord will not tolerate any pretension to set up any place as a centre.
What do you think the remedy is to metropolitanism?
The true metropolis — “Jerusalem above”. There had been a great work of God at Jerusalem, but there is nothing there now. God is now working in relation to Jerusalem above. I should have been more interested in Antioch than Jerusalem at the time Paul [p. 84] and Barnabas were sent out. If it is a question of divine principles there can be no toleration of half measures: Paul did not consult men; he got his light from the Lord direct, and his preaching connected souls with that which is above. The influence from Jerusalem tended to lead men into bondage, hence in contending with Peter, the apostle Paul was standing for the liberties of Christians. We may thank God for the bold stand made by Paul at that time.
Paul recognised the apostles and valued them: he went up to Jerusalem to make acquaintance with Peter: he did not go up to learn from Peter. Later he went up by revelation to put before them what he taught. At Antioch he withstood Peter to the face — there was no compromise. We think a great deal of Paul, but it must be borne in mind that Peter was more prominent than Paul at the beginning.
People who are ecclesiastical always deal in goods from Jerusalem. But the tent of testimony had, so to speak, moved out of Jerusalem. Paul withstood Peter to the face, for he was to be blamed. When contending for the truth, and the liberties of the Lord’s people, age and prestige must not play any part. Paul saw what was at issue, and it was most serious. It matters little whether it be Jerusalem or Rome, the principle is the same. It is the assumption of priority in connection with divine things, and the effect of it is to lead souls into bondage. The present condition of Christianity is very largely the fruit of it. Everything which we see around us has originated in Rome, where this baneful principle has had its full development. The antidote to all is Jerusalem above.
The prominent thought in chapter 3 is the blessing of Abraham. I do not think the chapter explains the blessing of Abraham exactly; I think we have to [p. 85] go elsewhere for this. The point is that it had arrived at the Gentiles in a way entirely independent of law, that is, in Christ, as having already borne the curse of the law. But then the blessing must have taken a tangible form; in the future it will undoubtedly involve eternal life; at the present time it lies in the Spirit, and can be found only among the saints.
The church stands in relation to all that has been in the past, even the thought of a people down here. God intended to have a people on the earth from among the Gentiles, and this has come to pass in the church. The gospel refers much more to what is down here than to what is in heaven. It is true that Christ is the theme, but it is Christ according to what He can do for men, and this involves what has been established down here. You could not have the gospel without the Holy Ghost down here; His presence down here involves the kingdom and the house of God. In virtue of the establishment of these in this world, salvation and the blessing of Abraham are brought close to men. It is remarkable that the first gospel address took the form of an explanation of what was down here, what was actually before the eye of man. I refer to Acts 2. Peter explains the this which had attracted the attention of the multitude. No one can read the early chapters of the Acts and not see that relief and blessing were brought close to men in the presence of the Holy Ghost among the saints; and the great theme of the apostles was that these wonderful things had come to pass through the humble Nazarene, whom the Jews had crucified, but whom God had raised up and exalted to His right hand. The existence of a great power for good down here, acting in the name of Jesus was the great point, and anything less would not have been suitable or effectual. The king might express the very best intentions in regard to Canada, but in case of an invasion his proof of it [p. 86] would be to send an army. The blessing of Abraham had arrived at the nations; they did not have to go for it,
How would that be applied?
God’s intervention is in the saints — the Spirit is here in the saints. God proposes to bless the world through the church. It was a wonderful conception that a few fishermen should be taken up, and through this means light and blessing should be diffused wherever man was. Humanity was pretty well represented at Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost, and all heard about the wonderful things of God. If the bright days recorded in the Acts of the apostles have passed away through the failure of the saints, we should all be humbled about it, and we should seek to find out from the Lord how we are to serve under the present terribly altered circumstances. You could not well locate the vital thing now at all, hence it must be with great shamefacedness and humility that the true servant would seek to preach the gospel at the present time. Prior to the coming of the Holy Ghost, God did not have a house here properly. “The Most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands”. Acts 7: 48. But on the day of Pentecost the Spirit came to the disciples, and in this way the house was established. When the Lord was here in the flesh He had no house to which to invite men; but He would have a house, and hence He built one. The house He built was great enough to accommodate humanity. There the feast was spread, and the invitation sent out in every direction. God had all men in view for blessing.
Before the Lord left the scene He provided material for the house — Acts 2. The material was prepared by the Lord: it was of His own kind — a company of people who had learned from Him. They were meek and lowly. The Spirit is in the saints, and no one can talk about walking in the Spirit who disregards the saints. In any great man’s house you will find every equipment needful for the comfort of guests, and I think this must apply to God’s house. We may be sure that there was nothing lacking there for the comfort of man, as it was originally established. I think the prodigal had an idea of this. He said there was bread enough and to spare there. I fancy he had more light than many Christians at the present time. But things have altered dreadfully. It would be difficult to find one room, so to speak, in order. Still, even the second epistle to Timothy supposes that clean vessels would be needed. God has still something to administer, and hence the clean vessels can be used. Living water is still there, thank God! Our concern should be to bring people into touch with warmth and light but we suffer from not knowing what is in the house. All that is of God down here is there, but it is exceedingly difficult to get the good of it. I think the blessing of Abraham lies in God’s house; in this way, it has arrived at the nations practically. The Father’s house conveys more the thought of privilege. The house of God is limited to the saints at the present time. Christ is Son over it. According to the first epistle to Timothy the house and the assembly are identical.
We are connected with Jerusalem above, which is our mother. The thought in Jerusalem above is freedom; it is, I think, sonship, as seen in Christ, Jerusalem above is, so to say, the true wife; she will never be cast out of the house. I think divorce is wrong morally; as a matter of fact Jerusalem above remains in the house forever. A wife who dwells in the affections of her husband is in perfect liberty in his house; if she has the least fear of ever being divorced, liberty would not exist; but as living in her husband’s affections she adorns his house, and he is known through her. In the future the heavenly city will adorn the universe, and God will be known through it. “I am crucified with Christ”. Galatians 2: 20. You could hardly connect that man with anything here. The Spirit answers to it, He links you with Jerusalem above. The Spirit is the link between the blessing of Abraham and Christ Jesus, and that touches sonship, and all that heavenly system of things in Christ Jesus. God’s ways are very simple. The apostle in going back to Genesis 12 and Genesis 22 shows that all that came in by law could not affect the purpose of God. The promise to Abraham took the form of a covenant, which could not be annulled or added to by after circumstances. He calls attention to the fact that two parties were connected with the giving of the law, but the promise to Abraham was on the part of God alone, and its fulfilment depended entirely on Him — hence it was sure. It was an unconditional promise on the part of God, and there was no possibility of breakdown in its fulfilment. After the flood Satan succeeded in capturing man, and he had also taken possession of the earth. Man was in idolatry, and the Amorite was in the land of Canaan. It was a dark period, but light breaks in, in God’s assertion of His rights. He asserted His right to man in going into Mesopotamia and calling Abram, and He asserted His right to the earth in giving Canaan to Abraham for a possession. If God had a right to Abraham He had a right to all men, and if He had a right to Canaan He had a right to all the earth.
See how the Lord Jesus Christ must feel — men dragging things down to Judaism — it misrepresents Him so. He would bring blessing to the Gentiles through Christians set free — not through bondmen. The apostle’s conduct among the Galatians was in the dignity of a son. He did not act like a son of Hagar — a miserable devotee of Judaism and Jerusalem. The blessing of Abraham arrived at the nations in Christ, but practically through the ministry [p. 89] of the apostle, who was in all the liberty and dignity of sonship This, I think, was suitable on the part of God. If a king wishes to confer honour, or if some great affair requires an ambassador, he will send his son, or some man of dignity, not a slave.
Would you say what the testimony is?
All that God intends to set forth. I like to be in sympathy with the Lord as to what is in His mind. Everything has failed in man’s hand, but God will effect His purpose. I think this is what is meant by “The foundation of God stands”. 2 Timothy 2: 19. Your only hope is Christ. All else has failed.
After Thyatira the Lord does not say He holds the seven stars; it simply says He has them, Revelation 3. He is not any longer supporting the public thing. Properly speaking church testimony is over; after Thyatira the only hope lies in the coming of the Lord. Our position is very extraordinary, and it requires constant exercise and looking to the Lord, so as to act with intelligence, but I am sure it is not right to assume to be anything public. We meet in garrets and cellars, and make the most of the situation, while waiting for the Lord. We should feel disorders among those with whom we are immediately connected, but the great public scandal is Jezebel: one does not hear much sorrow expressed in regard of her — but we may be sure the Lord feels it, and He would value our sympathy. We never have a proper sense of the ruin, only as we see what was at the beginning — a few simple people who loved the Lord.
When Christ went into the temple He said it was a den of thieves — no place for a godly Jew. It ought to be a place for all nations — a house of prayer.
One feels how little we sympathise with the Lord. That terrible woman occupying the prominent position, as it were. Who sympathises with Him in that?