BONDMEN OF GOD (2)
[p. 18] BONDMEN OF GOD (2)
Revelation 7: 1 - 8; Revelation 11: 15 - 18
JT It may not be known to all, some not having the better translation, that the word “servants” in these verses is more properly “bondmen” — that is why they are read. It is thought that we should revert to chapter 1 in order to see how the bondman who was selected by the Lord, and to whom this book is signified, speaks of God, by the Spirit. He writes to the seven assemblies (verse 4), “Grace to you and peace from him who is, and who was, and who is to come”; and in verse 8 we have a further announcement: “I am the Alpha and the Omega, saith the Lord God, he who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty”. The Lord has been helping His people in regard to God, both as to His absoluteness, which is beyond us to comprehend or even apprehend, and also particularly in His relativeness as come into revelation through the incarnation of one of the Persons of the Godhead; and it is significant that, in the introduction to this book, we should have these allusions to God, first “who is”, and then “who was”, and then “who is to come”. God is thus alluded to, first, as nearly as possible for our apprehension, as to what He is absolutely — He who is; then what He is historically — He who was; and finally what He is prophetically — He who is to come.
Over against this we have, in the symbols of the living creatures in chapter 4, verse 8 — “they cease not day and night saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, who was, and who is, and who is to come” — the historical side as to God is presented first by them, what He has been in relation to the creation. The reference in chapter 1 is significant, that the bondman selected by the Lord begins with God, as we may say, as nearly as possible in the absolute, and if the gain of the help the Lord has given has [p. 19] been absorbed, there will be this more inward understanding with us as to God. In the book of Exodus, to which we have alluded already, we have, in Moses, a ministry corresponding somewhat with John’s, that is, a ministry flowing out of the peculiar revelation made, Jehovah telling Moses to say, “I AM hath sent me”; Moses was to be representative of that, not simply of God as known historically by the fathers — what He was, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, but of God “who is”. He is Himself, aside from being the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He is greater than what is known of Him historically. In our giving of thanks in the assembly, as a rule, we are more conversant with the historical side, we speak of what is historical rather than of what God is. Now Moses was conversant with God as no one else was, evidenced by his writings in the Pentateuch, and in the first ascription of praise that we get (we may say the introduction of assembly service in type) (Exodus 15), we have the first mention of Jah, which is an allusion to the great name revealed to Moses, but evidently a suggestion of a special insight that Moses had spiritually as to God. (See foot-note in the New Translation.)
I thought we might begin with that this time, that we may follow on in what God is doing and be equal to these great matters in the Apocalypse. This book is not something brought out; it is not a declaration, but a “revelation”, and it contemplates we have been saying, bondmanship, but also spiritual capacity, because the Lord spoke to the overcomer in Philadelphia about His God, as if there would be understanding, not simply of God in a general sense, but of His God, that is, God known by man according to what God is.
Ques Would God being all in all connect with “him who is”?
JT I think that is right; you allude to 1 Corinthians 15: 28. He is all in all, meaning that everything is filled with Him, it is not a mere objective thought there as to those who are blessed — He is all in all.
Rem I was thinking of your remark that we appear to know more about God in a historical way, than as to what He is.
JT Yes. Of course, worship is acceptable to God, whatever its measure, for He is seeking it — He is seeking worshippers whatever their measure — but I think this opening contemplates a great measure in those who are able to speak to God as He “who is, and who was, and who is to come”. In verse 8. God Himself speaks, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, saith the Lord God, he who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty” — He adds that very comforting thought.
Ques What do you mean in saying, that God all in all is not objective?
JT Well, in one sense God is always objective, but I mean the two thoughts are together. He is all, but in the sense of being in all, that is, every vessel filled. In the new man “Christ is everything, and in all”. God is all as in us, the vessels are filled completely; there is no vacuum, nothing unfilled, in eternity. I only wanted to begin with this great thought that the brethren might have in mind in our present reading what God has been doing in helping us as to Himself, especially in regard to our worship, because (and it is a remarkable thing) this book is marked by the thought of the worship of God. As I said, the selected bondman addresses the assembly in this way, saying, “Grace to you and peace from him who is, and who was, and who is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne; and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth”. Then there is the ascription of praise, “To him who loves us, and has washed us from our sins in his blood, and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father: to him be the glory and the might to the ages of ages. Amen”. Then, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, saith the Lord God, he who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty”, as if to confirm what the bondman had said by the Spirit and to secure everything — He is the Almighty.
Ques Would you say more on the thought of knowing God in an historical way?
JT Well, it is not to be despised at all, we must have the historical, and that is seen in Exodus, the first ministerial book. The revelation to Moses includes the historical side, but his commission was from the “I AM”. He who is, as we get it here; but He said at the same time, “I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob”, that is, the cumulative thought is there, always carried through, but the Lord Himself said, “Before Abraham was, I am”, not ‘I was’, but “I am”, carrying the great thought of God down. We have alluded to the place the historical side is to have in our service; of course it is to be valued, we cannot be without it, it involves the cross, it involves the testimony that has come to us, but then there is the great thought of “who is”, and we should inquire whether we have spiritual power to speak to God viewed in that way.
HPW Have we the two put together in the two quests of Moses? He said first, “shew me now thy way”, Exodus 33: 13 — would that correspond with the historical? And then, “shew me thy glory” (verse 8). Would that be God Himself?
JT Yes, that helps. It requires the incarnation God to be seen in the sense of His glory, but in principle, the revelation made to Moses at the bush is what we are speaking of — “I am”. The first great contribution for the service of God in song, it seems to me, involves an inwardness with Moses who is the leader of that song; it is alluded to indeed in this book as “the song of Moses”. There is an inwardness in it, and the singers are carried far beyond where their feet were at the time — not only to the abode of His holiness, which would be in the wilderness, in the tabernacle, I suppose, but into the place which He had prepared for Himself to dwell in — He would bring them there; that opens up all that we have in David. Even in Moses himself, in Deuteronomy 32: 39, much is made, as will be seen in the New Translation, of the title, the Same — it is the Deity. You get “Jah” used by Moses, in Exodus 15, and you get “the Same” in his great poetical contribution in Deuteronomy 32. Singing seems to me to be the leading mode of God’s service, because it involves spiritual emotions, these giving the Spirit more scope.
FI Is your thought that we should sing to God, referring to what He is in Himself?
JT Well, we sing to Him as made known, of course. He is declared and revealed; the declaration is one thing (John 1: 18), and the revelation is another, which is usually to individuals or groups of persons; but then He has come. “No one has seen God at any time”, but John says that “he that abides in love abides in God, and God in him”.
HC Moses said in Exodus 15, “Who is like unto thee. Jehovah, among the gods?”; in Deuteronomy 32 he says, “He is the Rock, his work is perfect ... Just and right is he”. Is all that in the sense of the present greatness of God?
JT I think so.
AWR In 2 Samuel 7, David says, “And now, Lord Jehovah, thou art that God, [p. 23] and thy words are true, and thou hast promised this goodness unto thy servant”.
JT Yes — “Thou art that God ...” He was there, as it were, surrounded by God, and sitting before Him. It is in such circumstances that we get the deepest thoughts of God, they may go beyond what we have reached hitherto. But as reaching these conceptions in spirit, we move towards them. Exodus 15 is a pattern for us; the singers go far beyond what they have reached experimentally, but their contribution is a known thing in the service of God henceforth. What Miriam and the women said represents the experimental side. What Moses and the children of Israel say is more objective; but in the song the Spirit of God had scope, and hence greater penetration as to God and His purpose was attained.
AR When you speak of God in the absolute, do you include Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?
JT Not under those titles.
AR Do you include in your mind the three Persons?
JT Certainly, but those three names belong to Them in the economy in revelation.
AR I was thinking of how you are suggesting that we might address God as such, the God who is, that would include the three Persons in the Godhead, would it?
JT We have to make allowance for the change involved in the economy. In service Godward two of the Persons are on our side, that is, we are served by the Spirit of adoption and we are served by Christ as the Minister of the sanctuary, so that Ephesians says, “through him” (that is Christ) “we have both” (Jew and gentile) “access by one Spirit to the Father”. It is through Christ, by the Spirit, we have access to the Father, and the Father is addressed [p. 24] as God.
AR I was thinking of God in the absolute, as you speak, not exactly of God as the Father, but the God “who is”.
JT We must include the three Persons if we speak abstractly, but I think we ought to learn to regard Them as Scripture presents Them in the relations into which They have come: “to us there is one God, the Father, of whom all things, and we for him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him”, 1 Corinthians 8: 6. Christ has brought us in, but the Father is God as the objective.
FI As to addressing God in the absolute, can you have the three Persons before your mind thus?
JT You say, addressing God in the absolute; it is just a question as to how far we can apprehend God in the absolute — I do not think a creature can. But it is plainly shown in Scripture that the Trinity existed before creation — that is, in absoluteness, yet there was nothing for Them to be related to.
FI It is a question of what has been brought out, declared or revealed, that you are in a position to rise up and offer praise or worship to God in that sense, as that God.
JT Yes — “who is”; but I would have the Father in mind if I were in assembly and speaking to God — in fact at any time. It is through Him — that is, Christ — who has taken a place alongside us to serve us and to serve God, it is “through him we have both access by one Spirit to the Father” (Ephesians 2: 18); that is, I think, the proper setting for the service of God. The Father is the “one God”. You say, Well, it must include the others. But why should we say that, when They have come into an economy in which two of Them are viewed as in an inferior position, which They have taken in order to carry out the will and service of God? I do not think we should attempt to circumvent the position.
[p. 25] When you address God, you address the Father — “to us there is one God, the Father”, but at the same time it is plain that the Son and the Spirit are in inscrutable equality with the Father.
FI So that, when you address God you still have Him in view as the Father?
JT Well, it is how He is known. The title “Father” belongs to the relative position, but He is same Being. We can apprehend the idea of Father and apprehend Him as God. The title God conveys the idea of the Deity as understandable by man; it denotes the understanding men have from God, as to Himself, that He is supreme and has all authority, and so forth; but what is behind that we have to leave. He has come out to us in the relation of Father, which is intelligible to us, and all that He is enters into that, and I speak to Him as Father with that in mind.
Ques Does the order in John 20 help? The Lord says first, My Father, and then My God. Would you have the Father before you in moving up to the higher position — you go that way?
JT God is the final thought, you mean?
Rem Yes, but reached through the Father.
JT That is what I was thinking, the idea is progressive, the Lord beginning with “my Father”, a very intelligible thought, for they contemplated Christ as an only One with a Father. Then you go on from that to “my God”.
Rem I suppose we have always to remember that there are certain things that have been revealed and that are available to us; there are also certain things that are secret, as it says in Deuteronomy 29: 29; those are not available to us. We are to take advantage of what is revealed, and to leave the other as God has left it.
JT That is, I think, what we are being helped in. The statement as to God, abstractly, is that no [p. 26] one has seen Him or can see Him; it is not exactly that He is secret, but the creature cannot see Him.
HB The glorious greatness of God is behind all that is revealed.
JT Yes. The idea of Father is intelligible; the Son is contemplated as with Him.
WA What would be involved in the last verse of Ephesians 2 — the saints being “builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit”, and then the thought “God is a Spirit”?
JT It refers to the way He has come in to dwell with men, all that belongs to the economy; it is God dwelling here by the Spirit.
Rem To address God intelligently, we must know Him as in the economy.
JT Yes, it is Christ’s Father and Christ’s God. So, in the book of Revelation, we have the Lord speaking to the overcomer in Philadelphia about His God four times over in chapter 3. I am only detaining the brethren on this point so that enriched, as is fitting, we might consider the book of Revelation. The bondman selected is a known and trusted one, one whom Jesus loved, and he brings God in and gives Him His place as God, and Christ His place as the Christ, and the Spirit His place as the Spirit — the seven Spirits that are before His throne.
Rem One who is in the bosom of Jesus would have the ability to bring that out.
HB There is an ascription of praise to God on this line in the last chapter of 1 Chronicles, as David addresses God according to His greatness apart from what is historical.
JT I think that in both Moses and David, and indeed in all the leading servants you get this. The more spiritual we are the more we shall seek to touch it, and will touch it — this ascription of praise or worship to God because of what He is. Think of what it must have been to God to look down here [p. 27] those who could speak of Jesus according to what He is! The prophets could all anticipate that.
We might just approach chapter 7 — as to this matter of the bondmen being sealed by the seal of the living God. We have them in chapter 1, fully represented in John, apostle as he was, now the bondman; then we have them in chapter 2, the enemy seeking to corrupt them through Jezebel; she teaches these bondmen to commit fornication and to eat idol sacrifices, so that it is a warning to us, as taking up this attitude of bondmen, that we are still exposed to the corruption of Jezebel’s religious influences. In chapter 7 God is beginning over again in relation to Israel, and they are viewed as His bondmen. The four angels are seen “standing upon the four corners of the earth, holding fast the four winds of the earth, that no wind might blow upon the earth, nor upon the sea, nor upon any tree. And I saw another angel ascending from the sun-rising, having the seal of the living God; and he cried with loud voice to the four angels to whom it had been given to hurt the earth and the sea, saying, Hurt not the earth, nor the sea, nor the trees, until we shall have sealed the bondmen of our God upon their foreheads”. God is sealing His bondmen, but it is with the seal of the living God. This was called attention to this morning as over against other marks that are put upon men, and are so prevalent today.
SS Would it help to see from Acts 2: 17 that bondmen and bondwomen are brought in as being sealed with the Spirit of God?
JT That is a passage that fits into our scripture, too, for the seal of the living God implies something of the Spirit, and this passage in Acts 2 is suggestive of a divine call now for young men and young women, and men too, bondmen and bondwomen, to come into what God is doing. Here we have the “seal”, so that the bondmen of God are marked off — [p. 28] it is the seal of the living God. They are alive in some sense, not dead, not following with the stream of trade unionism and all those other isms that are stamped upon men; there is a very loud testimony against it all now, yet many are held in these unions; they have their own mark, their own characteristic stamp.
SS One would be thankful if you could help us a little on that line, particularly having regard to the fact that many of us who are in particular callings, are often obliged to join societies of professional men, that we might be able to operate in the professional world.
JT Well, I think there is light enough amongst the brethren on the matter; what is needed is courage to suffer, courage to go forward in what is right and accept the consequent sufferings. I believe the way out, the way of deliverance for every one of us, is in the acceptance of the consequences of faithfulness to the truth, and that involves suffering. Of course, as to associations as in all else God is infinitely fair, and He treats each item by itself, as we learn in the prophet Amos, “For three transgressions ... and for four”; God takes each matter up by itself and regards it by itself, so that we ought to be discriminative, and not to be too general in our classification. If we are in an association that is murderous, there is no question about that, it is utterly out of keeping with the christian profession.
EG Is that why we have had the greatness of God brought before us, so that we might have power to withstand all these influences?
JT Verse 8 of chapter 1 is encouraging in that way — it is “the Almighty”.
HB A word that comes in in Corinthians is very encouraging in that connection: “I will be to you for a Father, and ye shall be to me for sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty”, [p. 29] 2 Corinthians 6: 18.
AEL In 2 Corinthians 1 we are sealed and anointed — “He that establishes us with you in Christ, and has anointed us, is God, who also has sealed us”. Could you tell us the difference between the two in connection with what we are saying?
JT That is an important passage, as linked on with what we are engaged with. “He that establishes us with you in Christ ... is God” — a very great thought; then, “has anointed us” — God has done all that. He “establishes us with you”; the minister is linking himself on with the saints, carrying them along with him indeed. 2 Corinthians is to show, among other things, that the minister, to be effective, is to carry the brethren along with him, not to rule over their faith; he is established with them by God, and anointed, too, by God. Then, God has sealed us. Anointing is for testimony, for dignity, power; sealing is to show ownership, that we belong to God and this gives Him His place. Then the third thing is, “given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts”, that is, to set us up, enriching us with what is needed to support us in this position.
HPW You made a reference to the word as to Philadelphia, “I will write upon him the name of my God”, and I was wondering whether having the seal of God in their foreheads would show the uncompromising character they take up, seeing the dignity that is put upon them as having the name of God upon them. Would it help in connection with unholy associations such as trade unionism and the like?
JT I thought so. I think it is over against what we shall come to later in the mark of the beast. It is not only that it is wrong to have the mark of the beast, but God makes definite issue with it in chapter 14. What you allude to links on with what we are saying, only, of course, the idea of writing, as applied to an overcomer in Philadelphia, would mean [p. 30] that he is material for such writing as that: “the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven, from my God, and my new name”. There is the additional thought of the writing material; it is remarkable material that the overcomer in Philadelphia affords; he is not an ordinary believer, but an overcomer in those circumstances, and evidently he is impressionable, one upon whom the Lord can write such exalted names.
Ques What is the thought in being sealed in their foreheads?
JT Intelligence is involved, I think; but it is prominent, that which can be seen; that is, you are not a unionist privately or secretly, you are not one at all, because you have this in your forehead; you want to be consistent with this seal.
HC Would it be consistent with the apostle’s word, “Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity”, 2 Timothy 2: 19?
JT Yes. It is iniquitous for a christian to be linked with an association that is murderous in its spirit. A christian is to respect what is rightly due to man and to think of God’s rights in relation to himself and others.
Rem The mark of the beast is on the hand as well as the forehead.
JT He is taking on, not only the mental ability of the people, but also their physical ability; they are taken on wholly for his use.
HWR Is it important to note the words, “the bondmen of our God”?
JT The thought is used much here — “our God”, and we need to remember that; not simply “God”, but “our God is a consuming fire”.
Ques He has power to deal with everything most drastically. Is there any connection between this [p. 31] and the engraving of the names on the high priest’s shoulders and breastplate?
JT This is more ownership; the other is engraving in precious stones, meaning that the saints are cherished in the affections of Christ, each according to his name. I suppose it is the tribes in testimony, because the actual names are not given in the breastplate; the twelve tribes are there, but according to sovereign arrangements not according to their birth, which would allude, I believe, to the position of the tribes as encircling the tabernacle; it is taking account of them down here, how they are supported in that relation. On the shoulder-pieces, it is according to their birth, but the names on the breastplate inside, I think, correspond with the positions of the tribes in testimony outside, so that they should be supported in dignity according to the counsels of God; they are set there according to divine counsels, not according to their birth. Here it is the bondmen of our God, and the administrative number is intensified, not only twelve, but twelve times twelve; that is, God has His bondmen now to carry on; and He is going on in a large way, and in those who are entirely amenable to Him, not controlled by other influences, such as unionism. That is what christians ought to be in this world. This, of course, is Israel in the future in view of millennial testimony, but we ought not to be behind them, they are entirely His in view of the great administration that is opening up. It is a great triumph that God has these, and the winds are held up till He carries out this sealing.
EG What is the significance of the angel ascending from the sun rising?
JT The allusion, I think, is to the dawn of another day. The west is the end of something; the rising of the sun is always full of hope, spiritually it is what God is going to do now, and there is [p. 32] assurance in the fact that He has His bondmen and He is sealing them and they are numbered — He has made a selection. Notice, it is “out of” in every case, that is, they are taken out for a purpose and taken out of all that is contrary to God. They are entirely for His will — the manipulative number twelve means that.
WH Would the representative number from each tribe represent that there is an answer to the truth in every feature of it?
JT Yes, the divine thoughts extending back to Genesis are to be worked out in spite of all. “These are the twelve tribes of Israel”. They begin in Genesis, and God has never lost sight of them; now He has got them and they are His bondmen.
AEL Why is the tribe Dan omitted?
JT Dan introduced apostasy into Israel, possibly that is the reason. The twelve tribes will be there, but his name is not given.
Ques Is the expression “out of” an exercising word?
JT I thought so — that, is why I mentioned it. Certainly I do not want to be in anything that is contrary to this seal. “Sealed out of” — I suppose the tribes will be there in an external way; they are now going back to the land in unbelief, but God is going to make a selection, and this will be the fruit of His own work in them.
Rem I was thinking of brethrenism in itself — it may be the bondmen of God will come out of that as out of everything that is set up.
JT Yes, brethrenism may merge into Edom; that is really what it is. Brethrenism as a recognised religious sect on earth takes on the character of Edom; and God says at the end of the Old Testament, I hate Edom. It is not a question of christians individually, but the thing itself, according to the principle and history of it.