"BEGINNING" (1)
“BEGINNING” (1)
JT One has thought of the idea of beginning. It may sound somewhat cumbersome as a subject, but it will show itself in time. It is in mind that we might have right terminology in our conversations; that the terminology may be intelligible and that the brethren may be on the alert to understand; for much is going abroad that is, to say the least, not clear in the sense of ministry, and the hope is that these meetings will help in the sense of clarity and in the sense of intelligibility as to Scripture; so that there may be freedom from mere novelties, and that we may be able to speak as the Bereans, who would search the Scriptures to see if these things were so. The thought is to carry the idea of the beginning; first as to Genesis 1 — the beginning of things, the creative side, leaving man out; for the idea of ‘things’ carries down through the ages and enters into doctrine, constantly added to, but still the basic things are carried through. Then it is thought the second reading should have man in mind, especially seen in Genesis 2; and in later meetings the idea of the beginning in John’s gospel and John’s epistle. “That which was from the beginning” 1 John 1:1. Other features may open up as we proceed. Man is left out of this our first consideration, and, of course, we would all feel that the subject must be incomplete and it will be incomplete, for we have to learn in part. And so it is thought that we should confine ourselves to the things of creation in this first reading and then in the second reading to bring in the great thought of man, especially in chapter 2. There may be necessary enquiries in order to indicate the completion of the subject, but it is hoped we shall be able [p. 2] to limit ourselves to the passage read. As already said, we learn in part and there can be no doubt that God has this in mind in these readings; the remarkable interest there is among the brethren as to the Scriptures and scriptural subjects, and how we are able to go on with these readings and increase our learning, for the great intent is to learn. Learn something, whatever it may be, for our gain on each occasion. Learn in part, but learn. And so we have to consider the chaotic condition that is indicated in verses 1 and 2 of this chapter and see how light came in. “But all things having their true character exposed by the light are made manifest”, Ephesians 5:13. The first day, therefore, has to be considered as clarifying the whole position.
SMcC Is it necessary to go back to the beginnings in order to get clear in our minds as to things? The Lord said in the gospels regarding a particular matter that came up with the Pharisees: “but from the beginning it was not thus”, Matthew 19:8.
JT Well, I think that is good; and what has to be added is that the beginning is not an inscrutable matter. A beginning in itself is not an inscrutable matter. Certainly the beginning of things is not inscrutable, and so we have to consider what is in mind in verses 1 and 2. These first verses are inscrutable. They contemplate, of course, what God made. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And the earth was waste and empty, and darkness was on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters”. So that before we reach our brother’s suggestion we have to touch a little on the inscrutable. The beginning in itself is not inscrutable, but God is. But when we come to the New Testament it will become more apparent that the beginning here is left. We cannot enter much on it, because it is left in chaos. Therefore, we have to seek to bring God [p. 3] into it, and see how in coming in He sheds light, and how the idea of beginnings is there and it must enter into all the created things; they became enlarged obviously as time went on, but we have to begin with the roots of things and see how they work out in the doctrine and ultimately in the doctrine of christianity.
AR Why does John start his gospel as Genesis 1 “In the beginning”?
JT There is a very great difference in the phraseology. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”, whereas in John it is, “In the beginning was the Word”. It is inscrutable and infinite, and of course, better left until we come to it properly. But we can see the great difference between the two passages in that in John 1 it is a Person of the Deity. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”. But now we are dealing with things; that is to say, God’s creation of the heavens and the earth, and that chaos had come in; therefore the need for the introduction of the positive side. Verses 1 and 2 leave us in a chaotic condition.
SMcC In relation to what has been said as to inscrutability entering into these earlier verses, do you have that in mind in relation to God in His personal existence or in relation to things? In what way are you referring to inscrutability in these opening verses?
JT Just in the sense that God is alluded to. The footnote to the word “God” reads ‘(Elohim, the plural of Eloah, the Supreme. It is Deity, God in the absolute. When other divine names, except Jehovah and Jah, are used, they will be indicated)’. And then we have indications of the terms. But we are just left here with the simple thought of God, but we are not to rest upon that. It immediately carries on in the rest of the chapter to the thought of what He [p. 4] does, what He created. And thus we come to material things, and they are not inscrutable; they are knowable.
SWP Would the word in the book of Job help us in connection with this question? “Hearken unto this, Job; stand still and discern the wondrous works of God”. And then later on in the chapter: “The Almighty, we cannot find him out”, Job 37:14,23.
JT Well, it helps as to what happened in the years that followed what is here.
SWP “The Almighty” not being found out would be inscrutability, but the works of God are what is seen?
JT That would involve a further period of time. That is to say, the knowledge of God came into being, and people had been learning. I believe that Enoch is the first one to indicate to us that the learning time had come; and of course, Job lived many years after. The flood intervenes and much else, and what we get as to Job has to be fitted in there, but not with the first verses, all indicating a period much further on than this first section.
SJH Does Isaiah give the divine intent: “Thus saith God, Jehovah, he that created the heavens and stretched them out, he that spread forth the earth and its productions” Isaiah 42:5, and also, “For thus saith Jehovah who created the heavens, God himself who formed the earth and made it, he who established it, — not as waste did he create it: he formed it to be inhabited” Isaiah 45:18. Is that the intent of God?
JT Quite. Much had intervened and the prophets come into that. Moses comes into it and others. The time of learning had come. Men were not slow; there were some who learned, but many did not. Enoch did. No doubt he represents persons able [p. 5] to learn.
ANW Is the use of the word ‘supreme’ in a way relative and should we realise that the absolute Person is behind that appellation?
JT Quite; the Supreme must be supreme to something. It is a relative term, but even ‘God’ is to be regarded as relative in a certain sense. At the same time, the idea of relativeness and abstract must be understood if we are to get anything out of our enquiry. God Himself is not relative to anyone or anything. He is abstract; He is entitled to be that; whereas as soon as He creates or has things to be in relation to, then He is relative.
SMcC In the note Mr. Darby points out: ‘(It is Deity, God in the absolute)’. Is the use of the word ‘absolute’ there the same as you have used in recent times in referring to absoluteness in relation to God?
JT I do not think so. The word ‘absolute’ is abstract really. He is absolute to something. I mean, the reference is that; it is the Absolute to something. I do not remember that I ever used the word as we now use it in recent times. We have to get the idea into our souls of God “... dwelling in unapproachable light; whom no man has seen, nor is able to see”, 1 Timothy 6:16. We have to learn to use these words and in some sense understand their application, and thus the idea of relativity in each as in touch with everything.
ABP The introduction into Scripture of the great thought of inscrutability in the Deity is to rouse our hearts in worship in view of all that has been done.
JT Quite so; in the sense in which we are able to take it on. God begins with us in great patience. We have just seen that He leaves out the idea of naming certain things, especially Satan. The time will come when it is brought in in fulness.
AB Is there something in the fact that the word ‘created’ is only in verse 1? It comes in again in relation to the sea monsters; after that we get the word ‘made’. Is there something in that for us?
JT There is; the word as to what God blesses comes under that heading. He blesses the fishes and the fowls which would indicate that He is in relation to life, even in the creation. That is, sea monsters, fishes and fowls and the like — He is in relation to that. They are something He is pleased with and something that He blesses. In verse 22 we get it for the first time: “God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply on the earth”. Now the thought arises there as to what became of the fish, and yet they have a great place in the instructive part of Scripture. They are not especially mentioned in regard of the flood, and yet they went through. There must have been something in the mind of God in regard of them in view of the flood. They would be carried through because they have a great place in the Scripture later.
CHH What is the difference between God known in the absolute and in the abstract?
JT Well, the word ‘absolute’ has a meaning, of course, which involves relativity, but ‘abstract’ does not. The word ‘abstract’ is simply that He is not in relation to anything but Himself. ‘Absolute’ and ‘abstract’ have not just the same significance. The idea of absoluteness comes into relativity. If absolute, it is absolute in relation to something.
Now coming back to these six days, which are our subject, leaving the chaotic conditions which we are entitled to do — God would not detain us, although He touches it in the prophets, but what He leads us to immediately is light. “And God said, Let there be light. And there was light. And God saw the light that it was good; and God divided between the light and the darkness. And God called the light Day,
and the darkness he called Night”. So now we are in a position to speak of the darkness around us and the need to keep clear of it and live in positive things in the realm of light; not spreading out too much but confining ourselves as Scripture does, to the beginning, the idea of light.
SWP Is there a difference between this light and the lights as in verse 14 and the great lights in verse 16?
JT The idea of light is what we have just read. “And God said, Let there be light”. In later references, we come down to things called lights, but the truth is the word as light appears. We do well to stop with the first day and see how far we can go; see how far we can accustom ourselves in dealing with things that refer to it in a limited way; learn to be limited when necessary. We are not to spread out when it is not necessary.
JH In your prayer you spoke of the lack of clarity in what is ministered, giving the clue to what you had in mind in this scripture. Have you in mind that each of these days has a feature that might well characterise the ministry?
JT Well, quite so. We are to learn to limit ourselves to any given time or thing; just limit ourselves and not be extravagant in speaking of it. We often become extravagant and lose the full sense of it. It becomes too big, bigger than it was intended to be. We are to learn to limit ourselves.
RH Is that why the beginning and introduction of evil is not dealt with here?
JT God does not plunge us into evil. He does not even name Satan. If we were teaching children we would be simple about it and begin with good things, positive things, lovely things: “whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are noble, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are amiable, whatsoever things are [p. 8] of good report; ... think on these things”, Philippians 4:8. Certain things we can think of restfully.
CAM The darkness and waste is mentioned because we have to approach the great question of light in a relative way.
JT Enlarge on that, please.
CAM The question in my mind is the reason this matter of waste and empty and darkness is brought in before we have this great matter of light, and I was asking whether this is because of the way our minds will apprehend light in contrast to darkness.
JT We are not able to. It is the infinite side of things, and we are not required to dip into things beyond us. The time will come for dealing with them profitably, and we then will not be damaged by them. These things are just left and immediately we proceed to what is positive. “And God said, Let there be light. And there was light”. We have already alluded to it: “And the earth was waste and empty, and darkness was on the face of the deep”. Well, we cannot say much; the best way is to leave that. The Spirit of God says, “And God said, Let there be light. And there was light”. We are in a wonderful realm in the word ‘light’. He is not using lights but light. The word in the plural is used later, but not yet. We have to learn to rest in light; so the word in John’s epistle is: “But if we walk in the light as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another”, 1 John 1:7.
CHH I was thinking of the term in Timothy: “unapproachable light” — that would not connect with Genesis 1.
JT Quite so.
CHH Do we distinguish between created light and uncreated light?
JT We are coming to a difficult point, because the origin of light is God. Therefore, it is difficult to use the word ‘uncreated’ in that sense; although it [p. 9] is used. God is light; that is a cardinal truth. We cannot limit that to any creation; it is God.
JWW Would you link faith with light? “By faith we apprehend that the worlds were framed by the word of God”, Hebrews 11:3.
JT Yes, I would. That leads into more than we are seeking at the moment. I allude to Romans 10 to clarify that point. We are now dealing with faith, the relation between light and faith. “So faith then is by a report, but the report by God’s word”, Romans 10:17. We ought to come back to what was said as to the relation between light and faith.
JWW I wondered if the principle of faith would be the light of God coming into the soul, so we could lay hold in a simple way, receiving what God has set out in His word. Is that right?
JT That is just what is said here. Faith comes by a report. Many of us may have in our minds that it is the act of God. Faith is the sovereign action of God; something is done by God sovereignly. So faith is there, it has to be there in the soul. But we are now linking on the word. That is one of the things instrumentally that God has in dealing with all these matters in creation. He has the instrumentality of dealing with them, and the instrumentality is the word, His word. And so in these verses we have read, “But they have not all obeyed the glad tidings. For Esaias says, Lord, who has believed our report?” Romans 10:16. That is, Israel — what Isaiah says of them. And then the apostle goes on: “So faith then is by a report, but the report by God’s word”. So that we have to think about these scriptures, both by Paul and by Isaiah and then in the scripture before us, where God comes into it. God says here. We have that in verse 3: “And God said, Let there be light, And there was light”. God says something and when He says something there is light; something has [p. 10] happened.
RH According to 2 Corinthians 4:6 there is the added thought of God shining. “Because it is the God who spoke that out of darkness light should shine who has shone in our hearts for the shining forth of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ”.
JT Quite; that is an allusion to this very passage. But we are speaking now of the idea of faith, and what part light has in it. It would seem as if before we can have things from God, that His word must have an entry. And He says something here: “Let there be light”. Let us confine ourselves to what is here. We are dealing with the first day, and it is a question of light and it comes in by the word of God.
SMcC The idea of ‘the word’ introduces the moral side in connection with us in that way. While faith is the sovereign gift of God, the idea of ‘the word’ introduces the moral side in relation to us.
JT That is good. In the gospel service we have to bear that in mind, but we want to bring God in in our dealings with men. Men are in darkness; we are dealing with a dark situation. We must bring God in; and if God is coming in, it must be by His word.
ANW The report is one thing, but God’s word behind it is another.
JT Quite so.
EGMcA Does not this first chapter occupy us with God rather than what the different words mean? “God said, Let there be light”. It is God we are occupied with.
JT That is the marvellous side of it; that in gospel service or any service we are in, we are to avoid novelties and bring God in; say something about God and bring Him into this. We have it here: “God said”, so that we have God coming in.
NB Do we not have to distinguish between the [p. 11] physical light, if it is correct to use such a term in connection with this scripture, and the moral light of God in our souls? In John it says, “God is light” and here, God saw the light.
JT The two things are combined as someone has said in 2 Corinthians 4:6. This chapter combines the two. This very passage is spoken of in that verse, and that is the moral side; “... who has shone in our hearts for the shining forth of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ”. We come down to the moral side — the most beautiful side of things — in the face of Jesus Christ.
JKP Does the apostle bring this before the saints at Corinth in the opening of the epistle — the thoughts of God as to them? But they are just mentioned; they are not opened up yet. The state was not there for it.
JT The state of things at Corinth was not such as could be opened up to. The apostle is dealing with state as to overcoming it; but then the state is not absolutely dark at Corinth; it is simply poor light, poor shining, for there was some light there. And that is how things are now in Christendom; there is some light, but it is becoming increasingly dark and the question is, therefore, how to get God in. The question now is whether we can go on and not stay too long on one day, because we have six to deal with.
FNW Is it significant that God Himself calls light Day and darkness Night?
JT He did it Himself. There is no one else there at the time. Later Adam does it and God delights in that. We have come to Adam saying things. God is Creator and loves to see His creatures, what they are and what may come out in them. And so we have to confine ourselves to one thought; that is, God. The second day refers to the expanse. We have to content ourselves with a little bit of one [p. 12] thing, but it will give us some light as to the next thing, and the next thing is the expanse connected with the beginning, too; the opening up and widening out, and yet not much said as to that. God is not pleased with it; He is not saying much as to it. But it has an interesting side. The exclusion of Satan and anything of his doing is remarkable.
JH What is in mind as to this dividing on the first day?
JT It comes out on the first and second day. It is an element we need all the time. We need to divide things. So Timothy says, “... cutting in a straight line the word of truth”, 2 Timothy 2:15, putting things where they belong, but especially dividing light from darkness. If we have to do with mixed marriages, then we have to deal with such matters and put things in their place.
EAL Would this dividing between the waters be like the dividing between spiritual wickedness and what is of God in the spiritual sense? I was thinking of Ephesians 6: “our struggle ... against spiritual power of wickedness in the heavenlies”. There is a division between that and what is of God.
JT Just so. “God saw the light that it was good”; as if He rests in that for the moment. “And God divided between the light and the darkness”. That is, God is saying it must be so. These two things must be; but we must make much of light and very little of darkness. “And God divided between the light and the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night”. He gives a name to it. So that we will have to use it later in dealing with divine things, when dealing with darkness and light. We are just, so to say, getting a clear retrospect of the whole matter; so that when the Lord takes up the man twice it says that “he saw all things clearly”. We are dealing with things now. And we want all to see, so that we [p. 13] see matters with good sight, so that we can trust what we see. If we have not got good sight we cannot be trusted.
JB Does God use Abraham in regard to that in Genesis 15? He knows what to do in reference to the sacrifice — certain things are divided and others are not.
JT It is really the understanding of the matter in Genesis 15, meaning that we have now arrived at the time of the subjective order of things. Abraham arrives at that time, the time when God can speak of things subjectively. So God leaves these things to him. It is a matter of taking certain things which he is told to take, but then he does things without being told, meaning that he is learning. Genesis 15 is the first time we get the idea of the word of God. It would take a whole meeting to go into that. We can just pause for a moment at that side and then go on to something more. We have to go back to the second day and see what it means, what the matter of the expanse means; what a wide idea it is.
JMcK Does the idea of the expanse suggest a sphere in which God will operate for the bringing in of all these things He is speaking of in view of learning of Himself?
JT I would say so; you need everything if you are to get a true perspective. We get the description of everything in these six days, the divine thought, and we must hasten on to get them all.
AR Does the second day involve our eyes — how far can we see?
JT Just so.
RRT This matter of divisions coming in so early with God too, would be a great matter in our lives, as to how we can divide between matters in our local settings; divide between this and that in administrative matters.
JT Almost every locality has these problems.
[p. 14] Almost every locality has some kind of problem that it cannot get over, and perhaps the difficulty is we do not see all things in relation to it. So here the man whose eyes the Lord opened saw all things clearly. It is a matter of clarifying things. It may be we are hindered because we do not take in everything entering into the thing.
LES “But when he is come, the Spirit of truth, he shall guide you into all the truth”, John 16:13.
JT Just so — all the truth. Very beautiful. The Spirit of God is here and we may be looking for a clarification of everything now as in view of the Lord’s coming.
WL Each day is a new beginning, you may say. In that way, is it intended to have a moral effect upon us?
JT It is. You feel the need of the moral side all the time. So it is we begin with the first day of the week and how much comes up on the Monday and Tuesday. And so now we come to the second day. We have already made a point as to certain things being left out. “And God said, Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it be a division between waters and waters. And God made the expanse, and divided between the waters that are under the expanse and the waters that are above the expanse; and it was so. And God called the expanse Heavens”. He did not wait for Adam to come and name it, but He Himself does this, and then it says, “And there was evening, and there was morning — a second day”. Let us see what is left out.
Rem He does not say ‘Good’ of the second day. It is the only day of which it is not said.
JT God does not call it good. We have to search; there is not time to search now, but one of these days is not called ‘Good’. Of others God remarks that they are good. Why is this [p. 15] one omitted?
CAM I think you have said God waited until He put the sun there, referring to the greatness of Christ?
JT I would say that; the fourth day settles the matter. It is a question of Christ in the heavens. God has made Him both Lord and Christ. That clarifies so much; everything must come down from Him because He is in the position of administration.
RWS There is no suggestion of the expanse in verse 1. Is this verse something added to that? “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”. Now there is a division between waters and waters. “God made the expanse, and divided between the waters that are under the expanse and the waters that are above the expanse”. Is that not an additional thought as to what was in the beginning in verse 1?
JT There is a great deal in that fact because of the place water has in the second day. We know how essential water is to us. Presently there may be no such need, as we are conscious of love. What would we do without water? The quantity God has placed on the earth. He can take it up by a certain means He has in His own hand. You do not see how God does that. And it comes down again; and in coming down it expresses His goodness to man. What would we do without rain? So we have the incident as to Ahab — how the heavens were shut up for three years and six months and then again opened too. God has a means in this second day of telling us of His goodness.
CHH In the book of Job it says God reserves the rain for mercy and discipline. That would be the waters above the expanse.
JT Job gives us a lot of help on those points.
RRT However good the waters may be, to get the gain of it we have God coming in and dividing [p. 16] them. Is it in the division that we come into the gain of it?
JT It is in the blessing of the thing that we get the good, because rain does come down undoubtedly. We can see the Lord is helping, as He will help as to terminology in the ministry, that we know what to say and how to say right things.
AB Would these days be in the mind of Elihu when he rebukes Job and his friends? “Let days speak, and multitude of years teach wisdom”, Job 32:7. He takes them back to the beginning in relation to God.
JT That is to say, it is connected with men of experience and what advantage they are to us. And that is what Elihu made much of. He recognises the old men, but they had to listen to a young man, too, and they did.
WMcK In relation to terminology, would you say why God names all the creations of the first three days, and then after that leaves Adam to name? God sets an example, would you say, and the animals’ and fowls’ names are left to Adam?
JT That is very good. I am glad you mentioned that. There will be an enlargement of it in chapter 2, because we come to Adam in chapter 2, Adam active. Now we are dealing with God active in these three days. This matter of the expanse we can just leave. We see how necessary it is; and we have to ponder upon things in a creative sense, and see how important this day is in the government of God. It seems to be an additional thought to the first verse: this word ‘expanse’, the dividing of the waters, seems to be an additional thought. And we can see how useful it is in the use of the waters, and what God can do with it in the expanse. And then it goes on to the waters under the heavens. We have touched that already. “And God said, Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together to one place, and let the dry land appear. And it was so. And God called the dry land [p. 17] Earth, and the gathering together of the waters he called Seas. And God saw that it was good. And God said, Let the earth cause grass to spring up, herb producing seed, fruit-trees yielding fruit after their kind, the seed of which is in them, on the earth. And it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, herb producing seed after its kind, and trees yielding fruit, the seed of which is in them, after their kind. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning — a third day”. Now we come to the operations of God in the sense of producing food and all else in the sense of vegetable life.
JWW Is Paul’s speaking at Athens to correct their terminology? They had an idol to the unknown God, and Paul in his witness brings home the first part of Genesis to their minds.
JT He does more than that. He brought the gospel into it, but in a limited way.
WL Does verse 12 suggest response to the word of God? “And the earth brought forth ...”.
JT Just so.
ANW If the heavens in verse 8 are further than the heavens in verse 1, would the earth in verse 10 be an advance on the earth in the first verse? “And God called the dry land Earth”.
JT Possibly. There is an increase in the new thing because it is a made-over thing. We have to bear in mind that verse 3 begins with something that had an existence before in some sense and is now being remade. The expanse is a new thought. God has certain operational things in His mind. “And God called the dry land Earth, and the gathering together of the waters he called Seas”. We are in the presence of creation. The Spirit of God called it a creation. It is not the idea of made or remade; it was creation; although it was remade. We may as well view it as a creation and we have to see the [p. 18] difference in it and see something that was not there in the beginning. So the thought of grass, the beautiful thought seen in the New Testament, too; “God said, Let the earth cause grass to spring up, herb producing seed, fruit-trees yielding fruit after their kind, the seed of which is in them, on the earth”. And so now we are in the presence of life, life coming forth yielding what is needed among men; it is given to man for food.
HB What is the force of the use of the word ‘cause’?
JT The earth is able to do something. We are touching the idea of life in a limited way; life in a vegetable sense, and there is power in it. You could split a rock with the power that is in it, showing the idea of power in creation comes into the earth in this sense and God can use it beneficially but He may use it harmfully, too.
CHH Hebrews 6 speaks of the earth which receives the rain and brings forth food. That would be beneficial. I was wondering if that would not bring in creation in a harmful way when it says if it does not bring forth fruit it is nigh to a curse.
JT All that enters into what we are saying. We are to lay ourselves open for great things, to be opened up to us, but we have not time to go into it. We have three days and only three hours each day and much has to be done; so it is a question of what God can do.
JH We have the features of power and freshness and variety seen in life in its simplest sense.
JT We are dealing with much that is necessary to us every day of our lives; these things that are going on in the earth, and then we come to the lights. What wonderful things open up to us. In verse 14 it is a question of light. That is what God is. That is, the main thing is settled, you might say, in these three days. And then these lights are additional,
[p. 19] going over the ground again, so to say. And then the fishes in the fifth day and the cattle on the sixth day. We must just limit ourselves to the time we have. We have to go over all this in these three days and this is what we have to deal with, so we have to go on, and we have to see that lights are set in the heavens. Then there are the two great lights which God made. Is not God calling our attention to the beautification of things and how illumination comes into it? He is the Father of lights, James says; not of light, but lights, as if it is God coming into it and having pleasure in it. There were many lights in the upper chamber.
CAM Does that bring in the family idea? It is not only the ordinances in the heavens.
JT Just so; the Father, the Son and the Spirit, all involved.
CCT Is the earth in view in regard of these lights? “And God said, Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens, to divide between the day and the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years; and let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens, to give light on the earth”. Is the earth in view in regard of this?
JT Well, indeed. God saw what was needed was this one thing — light, and not only light, but a variation of lights. And so we have, of course, to think of the position, the heavenly position, and the position on earth and the position in the millennium, too. We have to think of all these things and what lights may be involved in them. Now we have the light of the assembly in relation to the economy and we have to learn to make the most of it.
GMacPh Is the idea of new creation set forth; God coming into creation in a new way, so that He may be known?
JT What lights we have in the beginning of Genesis! The truth opened up in the sense of light [p. 20] or lights throughout the years. We have the dispensation involved after the flood and what light was unfolded in that. Then the patriarchal dispensation had much light, and the Mosaic dispensation, and the kingdoms. But nothing has been so clarified before. So that how rich the field is for us. How God is opening it up as we are restful and waiting upon Him. “The Lord will give thee understanding in all things”, 2 Timothy 2:7. So in Luke 24, “He opened their understanding to understand the scriptures”. That was in view of this dispensation. He can open our understandings.
JAP Would the assembly come into the fourth day?
JT I would think that is so, for the assembly is seen in these lights — the disposition of God in causing light to shine. The assembly, of course, is being reserved in the counsels of God for a long time, but now it has been disclosed according to Romans. When that is out, everything else is out. We have to get the truth of the assembly to get the whole truth. The whole truth as to the millennium and the eternal state is out when you get the truth of the assembly.
SMcC So in 1 Corinthians 10 Paul is writing to the saints “upon whom the ends of the ages are come”. I suppose every era or epoch really has a reflective bearing on the assembly in that way?
JT Quite so. What thoughts are there; how we have the key for the unfolding of the truth; the key of knowledge. You can go back and open the storehouses and David comes in in that way in his ministry with the number twenty-four to show how things are dispensed departmentally, and so God comes in so that we might learn how to come into it, and He opens our understanding to understand the things that are in that store.
CHH Would the psalmist have that in mind when he says in Psalm 19, “The heavens declare the glory of God”. The assembly does more than declare it; she has it in Revelation 21. She comes down as having the glory of God.
JT “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the expanse sheweth the work of his hands”, Psalm 19:1. What did you have in mind?
CHH The glory attached to the assembly.
JT We come back to the assembly actually in the heavens now, because Ephesians contemplates that we are made to sit down in the heavenlies in Christ. We can go back and see what Psalm 19 discloses as to the heavens. The Lord Jesus is seen there as a Bridegroom going forth from His chamber and rejoicing as a strong man to run a race. We can see the beauty of all this because we have the key of knowledge and we can open the Scriptures.
AHP How do you understand the stars here? We have three subdivisions, sun, moon and stars.
JT He makes the stars also. That brings ourselves in. “They that are wise shall shine as the brightness of the expanse; and they that turn the many to righteousness as the stars, for ever and ever”, Daniel 12:3. “Star differs from star in glory”, 1 Corinthians 15:41. The individual saints are in view, I believe, especially at the time before the Reformation and immediately after it. There may have been the darkest period and yet there were luminaries, stars to be seen.
SJH In Philippians it says, “... among whom ye appear as lights in the world”, Philippians 2:15.
JT The Philippians were up to it collectively.
JWW The stars shine in the night. Would they be as the two witnesses in Revelation 11?
JT Just so. The whole of John’s ministry opens this up, making way for individuals, for power in individuals, for light working in individuals. I believe the whole period right on from the Reformation is in mind, and light in the earth would seem [p. 22] to be in mind. We are not left without some light.
CHH “For star differs from star in glory”, 1 Corinthians 15:41. That would refer to personalities, whereas the heavens declaring the glory of God would refer to what is collective?
JT That is good. “For star differs from star in glory”. That is an individual thought.
RRT Is the thought that rule is not so definitely connected with the stars. “And God made the two great lights, the great light to rule the day, and the small light to rule the night — and the stars”. That is, the matter of rule is emphasised with the great and the small light and then there are the stars.
JT And therefore with Paul in the shipwreck, the stars did not appear. And they had a terrible time; no light at all to navigate by.
SJH Would this bring in the principle of authority in relation to Christ and the assembly and the gifts?
JT I would think so. The stars afford something in the way of guidance. They are a feature in the great system of truth; something to go by, to navigate by, because Paul comes in in that sense. I do not know much of the idea of navigation, but I can see the stars must be of great value, for even when there is no sun or moon displayed, when he sees the stars the navigator can tell where he is. He has some idea of regulation, of the depth of the water, and so on. All these things have to be in mind as they help us to understand what is here, and what is to come later on.
CHH All forms part of His universal testimony to all men.
Ques Are all these exercises in view of clarity in such matters as these? God, as reference has been made, did not create the world in one day; He took six days. We deal with each matter promptly as it comes up in our local gatherings. Is that [p. 23] right?
JT Well, yes; we learn in part as to how we use method. 1 Timothy helps us as to the younger men, how to learn, how to learn to divide up the Scripture; because there is an order in the writing of Scripture. We read, “Every scripture is divinely inspired, and profitable for teaching, for conviction, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the man of God may be complete, fully fitted to every good work”, 2 Timothy 3:16, 17. Well, that is the principle; to learn in part things as they come; not all things at once, but to try and take the days as they come and use them rightly.
HB Is that why the apostle uses the word, ‘outline’?
JT “Have an outline of sound words”, 2 Timothy 1:10. Not all I hear, but sound words.
FNW Is ‘sound words’ in mind in the expression ‘after its kind’, and ‘after their kind’?
JT Yes; you can tell what kind people are; what is their real origin, and judge relatively. That is to say, you can go back in their histories, tribal histories. God has granted that idea in the way of what comprises humanity divided up in tribes. Some tribes are not affected by the truth; and you can tell what they are by what is said of them.
DMacd Sound words would be plain speaking. Sometimes statements have a double meaning. Sound words would not.
JT Just so. They are wholesome. Whatever a man says you are not puzzled by it. If there is light in it you would not be puzzled.
ETP Would the outline of sound words suggest the need of a pattern as David gave to Solomon?
JT Just so, as in any leading man God has raised up from the beginning. He has raised up certain in the sense of leading men of God, and that comes down to our day. “Remember your leaders who have spoken to you the word of God”, Hebrews 13:7 [p. 24] Then we are exhorted to consider what they say. This is a very important matter, to consider men God has used. Even if they are gone. Thank God their writings remain and we consider them. So the sound words would come to light in these men; those marked by sound words that you can go by; you can trust them.
SMcC In Acts 20 Paul reaches the climax of his ministry in relation to his service at Ephesus, and it says, “there were many lights in the upper room”. The chapter would show the leading place Paul had in relation to the ministry in all that succeeds.
JT There were seven of them mentioned. They were in his company; that is, characteristically representing the work of Paul; and their names are given, and among them is a Berean. You might wonder why it says that; it is the word Scripture has for that kind; the kind of man needed at all times.
SMcC Is it important in the matter of the dispersion of light there should not be division amongst us but co-ordination, as the stars in relation to the leading lights in the system of Genesis 1? These lights are in relation to Paul in Acts 20. There were many lights. Is that in regard of the dispersion of light in the ministry? I was thinking how the enemy would work on the line of divergence even in regard to the dispersion of light.
JT We should all think the same thing, the Spirit of God having His way with each. If you follow the facts, you can see He has a way with Him, taking up things and certain persons at certain times, and they have certain characteristics, and these characteristics are guides for us. So that if they have an established character we do well to bear that in mind, and not to ignore it altogether, and not to say so-and-so has too much prominence. Let us see what is there and what the history is. So that what we [p. 25] have is deepened according to the Spirit of God in each. Let us see what each one is in His mind.
AHP “Canst thou fasten the bands of the Pleiades, or loosen the cords of Orion”? Job 38:31. Could we view ministry that is from God in that light?
JT We cannot bind it, but we are glad it is there. These things cannot be limited. They are there. So you are thinking of the sweet influences among the brethren. They will not mislead you.