THE GLORIES OF CHRIST APPREHENDED IN ASSEMBLY SERVICE
[p. 194] THE GLORIES OF CHRIST APPREHENDED IN ASSEMBLY SERVICE
JT What is in mind is to draw attention to the greatness of the mediator, the increasing greatness of the mediator, in this book — that is, of Moses — seen particularly in this chapter; and the distinction made between him and all others. The word in verse 1 is “Go up to Jehovah”. The others do not go up to the mountain. Verse 9 says they went up, without specifying the place, it is more the idea of ascension or elevation, but after verse 12 the mountain is mentioned frequently. Jehovah saying to Moses, “Come up to me into the mountain, and be there”. In the verses at the end, the mountain is spoken of a number of times as that into which Moses was called and went. In verse 18 it is said he “went into the midst of the cloud, and ascended the mountain. And Moses was on the mountain forty days and forty nights”.
For general instruction it may be remarked that Exodus has the service of God in the wilderness in mind. The word earlier was, “ye shall serve God upon this mountain”, and the message to Pharaoh was, “Let my son go, that he may serve me”. And as in the wilderness they are at first led by Moses, but chapter 19 says they are moving. “In the third month after the departure of the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt, the same day came they into the wilderness of Sinai: they departed from Rephidim, and came into the wilderness of Sinai, and encamped in the wilderness; and Israel encamped there before the mountain. And Moses went up to God, and Jehovah called to him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel: Ye have seen what I [p. 195] have done to the Egyptians, and how I have borne you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself. And now, if ye will hearken to my voice indeed and keep my covenant, then shall ye be my own possession out of all the peoples — for all the earth is mine — and ye shall be to me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation”.
This message conveyed the mind of God as to them, and then we are told later (verse 17), that “Moses brought the people out of the camp to meet with God; and they stood at the foot of the mountain”. So that God is in mind; and the mediator has led the people out of the camp to meet with Him: he is serving the people and God in that way. He brought them out of the camp to meet with God. Much intervenes before we come to this chapter 24, which is the end of a section; what follows has to do mainly with the rearing of the tabernacle, and service in an official sense; but in this chapter, while God’s service is in mind, it is less official, and youths instead of priests are officiating; but Moses is particularly signalised. It is helpful in view of assembly service to see how God would make room for Christ in our service. He is anointed with the oil of gladness above His fellows. We get that in the Psalms — love active towards Him, as in Psalm 45; in this psalm He is greatly signalised in His personal dignity and attractiveness.
So we may see that more scope should be given, in the service of God, to Christ personally, ascriptions of praise to Him in relation to His functions in the assembly, and the glories that attach to Him there. The sanctuary is provided typically — from chapter 25 to the end — but running through the teaching of the book of Exodus is subjugation, that being affected in us; and in that connection, recognition of the glories of Christ. The sanctuary is seen fully in the end of this book; as the tabernacle was set [p. 196] up, the glory of God filled it. All is seen ready for God, and He enters, and is to be served there. The Minister of the sanctuary is needed for this, anticipated in chapters 28 and 29.
FI Is your thought in referring to chapter 19, where it says, “they stood at the foot of the mountain”, that to rise to the top of the mountain we have to see the position that Christ has as Mediator?
JT Well, that is how the truth stands. The line of ascension is marked by Him, and Jehovah in speaking to Moses says in verse 1 of chapter 24, “Go up”; that is in relation to others; but as to himself only we have added, “Come up to me into the mountain, and be there” (verse 12). It is his place — Christ’s place, typically — as over against Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu and the elders.
WHR Who would the others who were in ascension with him signify?
JT Well, Aaron is not yet constituted priest, but the order mentioned is Aaron and his two sons and the seventy elders. They would represent the saints, ourselves, as in the type, going up. That is, the service of God takes that course. “Go up”, it says, but not to any place. The place is not specified, but the principle of going up to God. “Go up to Jehovah”. Yet in verse 12, Jehovah says to Moses, “Come up to me into the mountain, and be there”. As to him, the mountain is specified all through from verse 12 to the end of the chapter, marking off the distinction of Moses as over against the others. Christ goes beyond us in the service, having a definite place above — “and be there”, Jehovah says to Moses. He is on our side and brings us out to meet God on our side, but He has personal distinction, which is in our view in these chapters strikingly, to call forth, I think, the affections of the saints to Christ in His varied glories, relations, and offices in the assembly; and it seems to me that the brethren are [p. 197] not making enough room for Christ in this sense. We proceed immediately to the Father (in many instances, at least), whereas more scope is needed to bring out the relations of Christ to the assembly, and what He is in it; His varied glories there, as I said. The assembly normally is able to sustain the glories of Christ, as they are sustained in heaven.
AEL What is the thought in verse 1, where it says, “... and worship afar off”? What form would worship take? Would it be adoration simply?
JT It would be an inward movement Godward, and a corresponding outward movement or attitude. The word generally used in the New Testament implies prostration towards another in fondness or affection in a reverential way. The expression, “... worship afar off. And let Moses alone come near Jehovah”, would of course carry with it the dispensation, but still God said that He had brought them to Himself, and the thought was to have them near to Him, as we learn elsewhere. But He makes the distinction here that they were to worship afar off. He is calling attention to Moses and his personal distinction, hence we need always to have impressed upon us Christ’s dignity as standing with us.
FI Do you mean that the worship of God cannot properly be carried out unless we have before us these varied distinctions of Christ?
JT Well, we are at a disadvantage unless we make room for them.
JM Would the cup bring before us the Lord’s glory as Mediator of the covenant?
JT It does. He is Mediator of the new covenant. That is one of the glories of Christ. There are varied glories, and the assembly should be the home of them, as it were. Heaven is of course the home of them — they are seen fully there — but the assembly should be a sort of reflex of what is [p. 198] in heaven.
JM In the assembly we are introduced into a scene of glory.
JT That is the end in view, glory to God in the assembly in Christ Jesus. That is, it stands “in Christ Jesus”, but it is for God’s glory. What is said as to Lazarus at Bethany was, “This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God may be glorified by it”, John 11: 4.
The Lord’s supper stands in relation to Christ. It is not the Father’s supper, and it is not God’s supper, and it is not the Spirit’s supper — it is the Lord’s supper; and the section in Corinthians that teaches us as to it is full of lordship, of authority. I believe that the end in view is that Christ should be before us in a subjugating way, but still in His glory as well. In the tabernacle there are glories — varied glories of Christ, and of God.
AEL So that it is the death of the Lord we announce; the One they have refused as Lord, we recognise.
FS Are you specially referring to His glory as Mediator, or to all His glories?
JT All His glories. Of course, it is the Mediator here, we are dealing here with the type; but take the scriptures that have especially in mind the glories of Christ — John’s gospel, for instance; see the number of titles under which Christ is presented in the first chapter, and how He is apprehended and spoken of. “I have seen and borne witness that this is the Son of God”, one says (verse 34); another says, “thou art the Son of God, thou art the King of Israel” (verse 49). The epistle to the Hebrews is very striking, it is full of the thought of the glory of Christ; and Hebrews has the service of God in mind — John has, too. These scriptures, or sections of scripture, have in view that the saints as loving Christ should be full of His glory — full of the greatness of the Person — and in His supper these things should come into [p. 199] view. The same thing is seen in the book of Revelation — the ascriptions of praise to the Lord under varied titles.
FI Will you help us a little as to the expression of this. You have said that these things must be in view in relation to the service of God. Well now, in our service to God is it that we have in our minds these glories, and are able to give expression to them in relation to God, or is it that we give expression to them to Christ Himself?
JT First, to Himself.
FI What part of the service in relation to the Lord’s supper is this connected with?
JT We begin with the Lord as He is above. We begin with Him there. And what should come before us, whether we speak of it or not, is the manner of His reception up there. Of course, the position is that He has been rejected here. There is no place for Him in the world, but He is accepted up there, “... received up in glory”, Scripture says. “God has been manifested in flesh, has been justified in the Spirit, has appeared to angels, has been preached among the nations, has been believed on in the world, has been received up in glory”, 1 Timothy 3: 16. The Scriptures enlarge on His place above. We ought to begin with that; if we love Him we ought to begin with the thought of heaven’s honour, the honour lavished upon Him above. Raised from the dead by the glory of the Father and received up in glory; glorified by the Father; all these things are facts as over against His rejection down here.
Well now, we are proceeding into assembly service and it is the Lord’s supper. It is a public matter, it is a dominical matter, too, and the Lord comes into view in these varied aspects. As He has been received above, so He is to be received below. We should not be behind the angels in our reception of Christ. We have in mind that He is to come in,
[p. 200] and so we speak to Him accordingly. And then we look at the bread — it alludes to His love for the assembly. He did the will of God in His body, but He also devoted Himself unto death in love to the assembly. And it seems that we should keep in mind that the glory shone in circumstances that were its very opposite. It shone out in His service here, and as entering into death. And then He is Head of the body, the assembly, and He is Priest. He is to be apprehended in all these lights. And then as we come to the cup, He is Mediator of the new covenant, and He is Son of God — Hebrews stresses that, that the Son of God is the Priest; and then He is Minister of the sanctuary.
So that we are led on in that way, we move on in the service of God into the area known as the sanctuary, and the idea of going up appears. Moses led the people (chapter 19: 17), out of the camp to meet with God. They had encamped before the mountain, that was proper, but then there was a leading out of that. They are not led into another camp, but “to meet with God”, and the upward movement of Exodus 24 shows that.
FI If, as we have been helped in regard to the Supper, the first thing that is before us is the breaking of bread — we should start with it — should the place that Christ has in heaven be before us before the breaking of bread, should it be in our minds?
JT Yes, in our minds. It is in contrast with all around. He has been rejected here, ignominiously; it is not only that He has not His place as Lord, as Head, but He has been ignominiously rejected — the cross and the grave were in hatred accorded to Him. Well, we accept that position. We move towards the Lord’s supper in the acceptance of that solemn position, and it ought to solemnise us. The anointing enables us to be dignified in the recognition of that state of things. But then the rejected One [p. 201] here is accepted above. He is exalted. He was carried up into heaven, and received in glory there. He is by the right hand of God exalted, being made Lord and Christ! All these statements of Scripture so rich and full and varied, should be always in our minds, but particularly as in assembly; we should be full of these things. If we were to go up into heaven literally, we should find that it is full of them, all intelligences there are full of them! The Spirit enables us to have them in our minds.
Now, such an One comes in. It says in the Psalms, “Lift up your heads, ye gates, and be ye lifted up, ye everlasting doors; and the King of glory shall come in”, Psalm 24: 7. I suppose that is in Jerusalem, and in a way it is in the assembly. It is the greatness of the Person who comes in. I do not think that the place He comes into there is heaven, it is rather Jerusalem itself — how He should be received in the coming day. But now He says, “I will not leave you orphans, I am coming to you”. He comes in. Canticles shows that the assembly would be full of admiration of Christ, and able to describe Him. Well, that is the One who is coming in. “Let my beloved come into his garden ...”, Song of Songs 4: 16. That is the One — and if anyone asks about Him, one who is of the assembly can describe Him.
We have in mind that He is coming in, in all these glories. Love attaches all these glories to Him. Heaven does, and the assembly should do so, too. So that as He is apprehended, as come in in a spiritual way, we must give scope for the movement of assembly affections towards Him, and for His affections for us too. Of course, it is the service of God we have in mind, and He has it in mind, but still He has His place. His supper is first — it is the Lord’s; it is not God’s nor the Father’s, it is the Lord’s supper. So that it is the time for reciprocal affections between Christ and [p. 202] the assembly.
AFL You are speaking of the effect of the breaking of bread especially.
JT Yes, and then the cup brings in the thought of the new covenant of which He is Mediator, and in connection with that we have not only that He is Mediator of it, but He is the Spirit of it; “where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty”. All that comes out in relation to the cup. It is by Him, “even as by the Lord the Spirit”, 2 Corinthians 3: 18.
It gives a wide range for the Lord’s services towards the assembly, and the assembly’s response to Him, before we proceed to what is in mind, namely, the service of God as such.
JFC The service of God is not immediately in connection with the cup?
JT As scope is given for Christ and the assembly, it follows on. It is the Lord’s cup. The references to the Lord in 1 Corinthians 10 and 11 are very striking. Why should we ever connect the name of the Father with the cup? Scripture does not. The covenant is God’s covenant with His people, not the Father’s covenant.
PTW I suppose what we have in the cup is “the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord”, Romans 8: 39.
HS To whom do we give thanks for the cup?
JT To the Lord. Although if one gave thanks to God for His love as seen in it, I should say, Amen, but it is peculiarly connected with the Lord.
Then there is another thing — Christ’s God, what He is to Christ. That is not the God of the covenant. There is no covenant between Christ and God. So that we are on a higher level when we speak of, “my Father and your Father”, and “my God and your God”. The covenant is, “I will be to them for God, and they shall be to me for people”, Hebrews 8: 10. It is not made with us directly, but with Israel and Judah, though of course we are brought into it.
[p. 203] In the epistle to the Corinthians the new covenant is connected with gentile believers, with the assembly. Christ is seen as the Spirit of it. It is seen on a higher plane than in Hebrews, which contemplates believers among the Jews. Those called would be those called amongst the Jews, and the word eternal would be in contrast to the temporal inheritance that they had come into. Whatever the inheritance, it is of an eternal nature. Hebrews stresses that. Hebrews 9 goes beyond the thought of the covenant to the fulness of Christ’s death, His sacrificial death, and all that flows from it in the gospel. The new covenant is in Hebrews 8. Chapter 9 gives enlargement and goes wider, speaking of the whole bearing of the death of Christ. Chapter 10 continues this, returning to the new covenant — all to the end that the saints should be free to draw near to God.
AEL “Now to appear in the presence of God for us”; is that the termination?
JT Yes.
WHR When the Lord says, “I am coming to you”, is it general when we are taking the Supper, or is it after we have taken the Supper?
JT It would be through the memorial — the calling of Him to mind in the bread and the cup. John brings it in, none of the other evangelists do. “I will not leave you orphans, I am coming to you”, John 14: 18. It comes in after He mentions the Comforter; He says, “If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will beg the Father, and he will give you another Comforter, that he may be with you for ever, the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see him nor know him; but ye know him, for he abides with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you orphans, I am coming to you”, verses 15 - 18. I think John gives us that to show what we may count on in the last days. The Lord comes in in relation to the Comforter.
[p. 204] John is the only one who calls the Spirit the Comforter, and it is very comforting for us in these last days that He continues with us. He will be with you for ever, the Lord says; and it is in that way that He comes in. He does not come in corporeally as He did in the early days of christianity, as in 1 Corinthians 15. John does not contemplate that. He contemplates Him coming in in a spiritual way in virtue of the Comforter being here; but nevertheless He comes, and I am sure we have realised it. As spiritual, we discern Him.
WHR Is that to be realised when we are together in assembly?
JT Yes. When David inaugurated the service of God he put several psalms together; he made selections from them, making one suitable for the occasion (1 Chronicles 16). It is a question of spiritual understanding, so as to put things together. The Lord says in relation to the Supper, “This do for a remembrance of me”. The original word for remembrance is used four times, Luke 22, 1 Corinthians 11, and Hebrews 10. It is a peculiar form, see note on 1 Corinthians 11: 24 (New Trans.). Why should it be that? Obviously, spiritual understanding would say, The Lord must mean more than that I should remember Him as I remember any other person. He means that there is an active power in the mind to call Him in in relation to the memorial He left with His disciples. Spiritual understanding would further say, Then the Lord’s supper is just when He would come in. We should expect Him to come in. We have that in mind, and He has it in mind.
WHR We are calling Him into presence in our spiritual apprehension.
JT There is power in the renewed mind, the Spirit helping. It is not a great mental effort. You might be able to recall a dead relative or friend, or a living one, but he is not conscious of this; but Christ’s [p. 205] relations with the assembly are of a vital, organic character, the Spirit being the active medium, and the Lord can thus become present as opportunity on our side offers. People speak of remembering the Lord in His death, but that is not the thought in the Lord’s supper; there is no such phrase in the Scriptures. It is a living glorious Person, viewed as absent from us, that we remember. Through the Spirit He can come to us, as He promised, making His presence very real. It is Himself, not a representative, an angel, as in Old Testament times.
HS Do we bring Him in in contrast to the action of those who cast Him out?
JT Quite so, from our side; He comes in also.
AWR It is where true affections are in flow. He says, “If any one love me ...”, John 14: 23.
JT Yes. The Spirit is given on that ground — “if ye love me”, the Lord says. It is a question of the state of the saints. If the state be right there is power in the mind to bring Christ in. He is livingly in the mind by its own action, but, as already said, He also comes.
GE Would not the Spirit occupy us with the varied glories of Christ on different occasions? We would start with the greatness of His personal glory, but we could not take them all up; there is a great variety.
JT See what is opened up to us! Heaven is opened up to us in the assembly. The Lord begins the subject by saying, “If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will beg the Father, and he will give you another Comforter ...”. A real Person, even as the Lord was — a wonderful thing. The idea in the word “Comforter” is one alongside of us, looking after our affairs; if we are defective in our minds, He will help us. He is ever on our side. If things are to be adjusted, He will do that. By Him we say, “Lord Jesus” in the assembly, and by Him we say, “Abba, Father”. He is also the Father’s Spirit, by whom we are strengthened inwardly. And it is by Him that the Lord is the Spirit of the new covenant actively, as seen in 2 Corinthians 3: 17, 18.
JRW “I will not leave you orphans, I am coming to you” — is that to be realised by us now?
JT That is what we had this morning. What did we see of His glories today? What was impressed on your mind as in the assembly? You cannot expect to see all His glories at a given time; we are not great enough, but He would always present Himself in a distinctive way. In John 17 He speaks of our being with Him to behold His glory.
JM Do you think the Lord would engage us with this immediately after the Supper?
JT I think there should be scope for it, but sometimes a hymn is immediately given out to the Father. We should be richer and fuller in our service if we had more scope for the Lord, so that He is seen gradually as the Minister of the sanctuary.
JFC The psalm you mention speaks of David giving thanks through Asaph and his brethren.
JT Quite so. Christ praises God now in and through the assembly.
Rem The writer to the Hebrews pieces a number of scriptures together.
JT Yes; the whole of the first chapter is taken from the Psalms, showing what is in mind; it is the service of God.
AWR At the end of the psalm in 1 Chronicles 16, all the people say “Amen”.
JT Yes, all the people.
JM After the Supper we have been in the habit of giving out a hymn to God in relation to the covenant. Do you think more room should be made for the Lord Himself?
JT That is what we have been saying. Exodus shows how the Mediator becomes magnified. This [p. 207] chapter, Exodus 24, calls attention to him in a striking way: Verse 1 says, “Go up”, omitting to mention the word “mountain” as the place they were going to. They were just to “go up”, which in the antitype is a moral thought which should be always present with us. The Lord’s supper is in the court of the tabernacle; the testimony of it can be seen by others but going up is a spiritual matter. The position thus ceases to be local, it becomes universal.
PTW Matthew 26: 30 says, “having sung a hymn, they went out to the mount of Olives”.
JT Yes. That is elevation, and it is departure — they went out from the external position in which the Supper is celebrated.
WHR Would that hymn be to God or to the Lord?
JT Well, as it was then, even the giving of thanks by the Lord would be to God, or the Father, possibly to Jehovah — the Lord would not give thanks to Himself. But it is the teaching governing the Lord’s supper that we are now considering. This is in the epistles. We can never understand the gospels till we understand the epistles, and in the teaching as to the Supper, it is called the Lord’s supper. That is what we must go by. In celebrating the Lord’s supper His absence is contemplated, but it being His supper, we speak to Him.
JM One is sure that, the Lord having come in (if we are conscious of it) we should be engaged with Himself, His glories included.
JT The book of Canticles is intended to help us, and it shows how love in us takes account of His varied glories. The feminine speaker does not speak to the Lord directly, but the assembly can speak directly to Him. He speaks to her in the Canticles, but she does not speak to Him — it is more of Him, as the dispensation is different, and she has not full liberty. But now we speak [p. 208] to Him.
FI When does the Supper end?
JT Well, we should not cut it off immediately after the cup. The collection is in keeping with it, and there is no reason that I see why we should not go on to speak to the Lord, so as to get all that we are capable of at the moment, so as to be enriched for the great final thought — glory to God in the assembly in Christ Jesus; and the suggestion there is praise in power. I believe the preposition “in” implies this. We move on with Him amongst us, so that His power is effective. “To him be glory in the assembly in Christ Jesus unto all generations of the age of ages”.
JRW There is no place too high for Him in heaven.
JT He has gone beyond all the heavens. That agrees with what we are saying: in Exodus 24 Moses goes away beyond the others, and you have the place; “Come up”, says Jehovah, “into the mountain, and be there”. That points to the Lord’s personal distinction.
SMW You were speaking of subjection as a very important thing.
JT It is concurrent with the glory of the Mediator in this book; there is gradual subjugation. In the last chapter everyone, typically, is in his place functioning, so that there is no need now for Moses; that is, as exercising subjugating authority. He cannot enter; the glory fills the scene. Subjection is complete.
AEL How do you use the word “subjugation”? Subjugation what to?
JT Well, when the Son has made all things subject, He Himself is subject (1 Corinthians 15). That is one of the functions of the Mediator, to effect subjugation — we are to be thoroughly subdued. So that every item of the tabernacle is functioning, it does what it should do. It is one of the most important things to notice. It says, “Moses finished the work”, and the glory comes in then (Exodus 40: 33).
Rem The antitype of Christ as Minister of the sanctuary is Moses, not Aaron.
JT No. Service in the tabernacle is hardly seen Exodus. It is the tabernacle set up by Moses. It Christ from the divine side, not from ours. Aaron is the minister of the sanctuary; he is seen in this way in chapters 28 and 29, but his service is properly seen in Leviticus.
AEL Moses always had access, Aaron was limited.
JT Yes, so that Moses is Christ more than any other in the Old Testament. It says, “The form of Jehovah doth he behold”, and of no one else is that said.
WHR In giving praise to Christ would He be free to take His place and lead us?
JT Well, not only is there subjugation, but we are enriched. We are full of the thought of His glory, and He now has us in the scene of glory, and we ourselves are “all glorious”, because we are “transformed according to the same image from glory to glory”, 2 Corinthians 3: 18. That is what He is aiming at. “All glorious is the king’s daughter within”, Psalm 45: 13. We are absorbing the glory as we are occupied with it.
WHR He would take His place in the midst, in our expressions of praise to the Father.
JT Yes, He has a suitable company now in which to sing to God.
AEL What does it mean when it says, “whence it is needful that this one also should have something which he may offer”. Hebrews 8: 3?
JT Well, that is to some a difficult question. Hebrews has in mind christianity as the new heavenly order of things in which Christ is High Priest, as compared with the Jewish system and its high priests.
[p. 210] What Christ offers as High Priest characteristically is thus spoken of as Himself (chapter 7: 27 and chapter 9: 14). The truth seems to be that chapter 8: 3 takes up the subject of Christ’s offering in its fulness, as developed in chapters 9 and 10. The new covenant is connected with it, having in mind that we should draw near to God.
AEL In the last chapter we read “By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise ...”, chapter 13: 15.
JT It is “By him therefore let us offer ...” So Peter says, “... to offer spiritual sacrifices ... by Jesus Christ”, 1 Peter 2: 5. Of course it is true that He takes what we have and presents it, but Hebrews in the main deals with what is initial and fundamental in christianity, and this particularly as to offerings, and hence the “somewhat” of chapter 8: 3 must, as a high priestly offering, be more than what can be obtained through the saints.
WHR Does the Lord then lead on to the family thought?
JT He does. Sonship comes in. That links on with Solomon’s part of the service, where sonship is in mind. Solomon is the son, Moses was never viewed in that way, nor Aaron either. When we come to the family side it is seen in David and Solomon.
But what is said in our chapter is very interesting, from verse 12 to the end. It says, “Jehovah said to Moses, Come up to me ...” He said at first (verse 1), “Go up to Jehovah”; and then (verse 9), “Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel went up”. But in verse 12 Jehovah says, “Come up to me into the mountain, and be there”. You see the distinction, the personal distinction, there. “Come up ... and be there”, the mountain being mentioned as the place.
AEL He is there [p. 211] representatively.
JT Yes, the whole passage shows that he is; and Jehovah says, “I will give thee the tables of stone, and the law, and the commandment that I have written, for their instruction” (verse 12). All that is in it, but we are just touching now on the difference between the first going up where there is no mountain mentioned, and the second going up where the mountain is stressed; it is Christ’s own place, and by personal right too. It involves the covenant and the fulness of the blood of the covenant.
PTW This is all on the ground of the spiritual conditions being there with the company?
JT Yes, but we would not have time to go further into that. We are touching specially on one point, the place that should be given to Christ personally in the service of God, and how this chapter shows it.
FI “Moses went into the midst of the cloud”, going where no one else could go.
JT Joshua, of course, went up, but he is only an “attendant”; he is not viewed here as representing the saints.
Pages 212 - 488 — “Notes of Readings in New York”, 1938 (Volume 143).