⬇ EPUB

HOW GOD VIEWS BELIEVERS

P.A.G. It is in mind that we should occupy ourselves with how God views believers. It says in Leviticus 1:3 in relation to an Israelite offering a burnt-offering, “for his acceptance before Jehovah”. The scripture in Ephesians encapsulates what is in mind, that we are “taken … into favour in the Beloved”. These scriptures contain much important teaching, but I would like to be occupied with the Person and the glory of Christ, and with the fact that God is able in righteousness to view us as accepted in Him, “taken … into favour” in the One whom He loves most.

There is much pressure on the spirits of believers. The world around us is in turmoil and will not improve “until he come”, that is Christ, “whose right it is” to reign (Ezek. 21:27), and it will be “the time of setting things right”, Heb.9:10. The prospect of the believer is heavenly and eternal and there is a Man in the glory, Jesus, in whom we are accepted and on whom our vision should increasingly be fixed. We may touch on various features of His glory. As we take account of each feature, may it encourage us that it is in such a One that we are “taken … into favour”. May we be kept stable here in a scene of adversity, so that our outlook might not be to this world which is passing, but to what is glorious and eternal.

I would like us to be drawn together in understanding that each one who has trusted in Christ as Saviour and has the gift of the Holy Spirit, is taken “into favour in the Beloved”. It is not a future matter; it is a present thought. The enjoyment of it may be enhanced in the future when we have bodies of glory, but it is a present matter, it is available, and it is real.

R.D.P. I notice it is “according to the good pleasure of his will”, Eph.1:5. It is not only a tremendous blessing for us, it is for the pleasure of God.

P.A.G. Yes, and the “pleasure of his will” would mean that it was His sovereign choice. It is a wonderful thing to think that God chose to bless us and to take “us into favour in the Beloved” for His own pleasure now and eternally. As we grow in our appreciation of Christ, the quality and range of our response to God will increase. There is a return to God as a result of that choice that He made.

D.J.W. Does the burnt-offering include the hidden years of the life of Christ? He walked thirty years here without any public recognition, and the Father fully appreciated every day of that life.

P.A.G. The head and the fat of the burnt-offering are spoken of in verse 8, and the inwards and the legs in verse 9. It suggests that every aspect, every feature of Christ’s movements and impulses gave pleasure to God. From the moment of His incoming, there was something there before God that He had never had before. There was in Christ what justified God and gave Him measureless pleasure. We do not partake of the burnt-offering, it is not said that the priests were to eat it; it was distinctively for God, but we are to contemplate it.

D.J.W. The fact that the Father opened the heavens upon Christ showed how much He appreciated Him. It was love answering to love, was it not? I think that underlies it all.

P.A.G. The Father did not say ‘I will find my delight’, but He says, “I have found my delight”, Matt.3:17. The delight was there, it was already resting upon Christ, so when John says, “the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father” (John 1:18), that was His constant place. Every impulse came from His relationship with the Father, every thought in subjection to the Father’s will, every movement ordained by the Father, everything in perfect balance in a Man. He is distinctive, He is beyond compare.

D.B.B. In Leviticus it speaks about presenting the blood. In Ephesians it says, “we have redemption through his blood” (v.7).

P.A.G. In presenting the blood, there was a recognition of how important it was to God; presenting the blood means that it was not a momentary matter. It was sprinkled “round about on the altar that is at the entrance of the tent of meeting”, but it was first presented. There was the recognition of God’s rights in the matter. The cross answered to the requirements of His holiness, but the blood answered to the requirements of His righteousness. No attribute of God was overlooked in all that Christ was and did.

A.J.McK. Are the references to order important? Our brother has drawn attention to the presenting of the blood. You said that it was not a momentary matter; things are ordered. I was thinking about what the Lord says to the Father about His own: “They were thine, and thou gavest them me”, John 17:6. There is something beautifully affecting about the deliberate character of what God has ordered from His side.

P.A.G. It is good to see that in His operations, God does not need to react to circumstances. God’s ordering is not altered by the conditions. There was evidence of that order in Luke as the Lord Jesus began His public service: “the book of the prophet Esaias was given to him; and having unrolled the book he found the place where it was written, The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach glad tidings to the poor; he has sent me to preach to captives deliverance, and to the blind sight, to send forth the crushed delivered, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord. And having rolled up the book, when he had delivered it up to the attendant, he sat down; and the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed upon him”, Luke 4:17-20. There was order in how He proceeded, and in what He said. He chose the section of scripture that would most suitably apply to the moment. It is often commented that He did not read on to the point about vengeance (see Isa.61:2) because it was not the time for that. There was order in it all. That initial demonstration of His approach to service was marked by order.

A.J.McK. The passage in Leviticus speaks of the wood being laid in order and then the pieces of the offering being laid in order; the whole of the sacrificial work of Christ was ordered.

P.A.G. It is important to have that in mind. We spoke about the world around us being in turmoil. It looks very disorderly, and so it is: man’s administration tends sadly at times to disorder. But we are connected with what God has instituted and it is perfectly orderly and cannot and will not change. What you say about the wood is important. It has been suggested that it would refer to the manhood of Christ. It might be thought that the main point here is the offering, and that the wood is not such an important feature, and therefore we do not need to pay much attention to the wood. But there is no aspect of the Christian life or the life of Christ that can be dealt with casually. Each is marked by order. God has ordered certain things, “God is not a God of disorder”, 1 Cor.14:33. We are told that explicitly, so the orderliness of the life of Christ is an example for us.

R.D.P. They said of Him at one point, “He does all things well” (Mark 7:37); “all things”. They give illustrations of that too. I was impressed that “He does all things well”, whatever aspect of His work we consider, whatever the exigencies, whatever the circumstances, “He does all things well”.

P.A.G. There were times when they wondered at Him, “Never man spoke thus, as this man speaks”, John 7:46. But “all things well” is a limited reflection of what God found in Christ. The Spirit chose to record that remark, “He does all things well”. That is more than simply things being done properly. It suggests that whatever the Lord took up, whatever He touched, whatever He said, He added something to every situation into which He came.

R.W.McC. It says, “the pleasure of Jehovah shall prosper in his hand”, Isa.53:10. Is that what is added? I was struck that it is not only that things were accomplished by Christ, but everything that He did had something extra which was for the pleasure of God.

P.A.G. You get a sense in the scripture you quote of something that is added and increases: “shall prosper in his hand”. Even in that millennial setting it says in Isaiah, “Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end” (chap.9:7). It is a fine thing to take account of the Lord’s activities as yielding constant increase. There is in man’s hand, even in the millennial setting (we get the teaching of it in Numbers) what is seen to decline (see Num.29:12-39), but in the Lord’s hand there is constant increase. There will be constant increase until the church is taken up. We may say that it is a day of small things, but the prophet says, “For who hath despised the day of small things?”, Zech.4:10. Even in the day of small things there is increase, there is recovery, and what is added for God.

T.J.H. Would you say more about the importance of the wood? There is a reference to the wood-offering (Neh.10:34). I wonder if it could be viewed as the maintenance of where the sacrifice is made.

P.A.G. There would be no sacrifice without the wood in this setting. There would be no answer to God’s righteousness without the manhood of Christ.

T.J.H. It says the “wood that is on the fire”, suggesting that it is already there and ready for the sacrifice.

P.A.G. The fire was kept burning constantly. We see that in the scripture read about the law of the burnt-offering in Leviticus 6. There are many features we can touch upon, but it says, “A continual fire shall be kept burning on the altar: it shall never go out” (v.13). These are further features of the work of Christ, it never fails, it never recedes, it never reduces in value, “it shall never go out”. The basis of our acceptance is unchanging.

R.M.B. Please can you say what is involved in the thought of acceptance.

P.A.G. I would like your help.

R.M.B. Recalling what we have been taught as to the difference between the sin-offering and the burnt-offering, I think it has been said that in the sin-offering the sacrificial victim is identified with the guilt of the offerer, but in the burnt-offering the offerer is identified with all the perfection and acceptability of the sacrifice¹.

P.A.G. That is very helpful. Acceptance involves that we recognise that we are looked at by God in the worth of another. In order for me to be accepted, my sins and my guilt had to be taken away, and the sin-offering would speak of that. The Lord Jesus took on Himself all that attached to me and took it away, “who himself bore our sins in his body on the tree”, 1 Pet.2:24. He did that Himself. I could not have done it. In this setting, we are accepted in the One who resolved every moral question in perfection. We might ask why the sin-offering is not the first of the offerings in Leviticus, because the clearance of our guilt is essential for us to come into the blessings. But the more we understand the value of Christ to God in the burnt-offering; the more we understand in the oblation what He was to God as Man in all His perfection here in His blessed perfect movements; and the more we understand through the peace-offering what the fellowship means to God, who is faithful and has called us “into the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord”, 1 Cor.1:9. The more we recognise the importance of these things, then the greater will be our appreciation of what it meant that sin had to be dealt with, and that my sins had to be taken away. We can as it were look back to the very basis of our acceptance in Christ and say, ‘For all these things to be true my sins had to be removed’. We come to a greater appreciation of the sin-offering. As we look back on the day when we accepted the Lord Jesus as our Saviour – and how thankful we were to do so – we realise how much greater His work was than we ever knew at that time.

R.M.B Yes, and what a blessed and very liberating thing it is to understand that God has been pleased to identify us with that blessed Man.

P.A.G. I am glad you say that. One of the things that has been in my mind is that appreciating our acceptance in Christ will liberate us. Being liberated does not mean I am free to ignore what is going on, or that the things that trouble me have suddenly gone away, but it means that as accepted in Christ I am delivered from these things so that I am no longer in the forefront of my mind, and what comes before my mind is Christ, and what He has done, and who He is.

J.B.I. This is at the entrance to the tent of meeting; would you help us as to the significance of that?

P.A.G. The tent of meeting was the place where God spoke. Every aspect of God’s speaking is to be seen and heard in Christ. He has “spoken to us in the person of the Son”, Heb.1:2.

J.B.I. It is in view of our going in.

P.A.G. “Taken us into favour in the Beloved” is not simply a matter of helping us to survive what may occur down here. As you say, it has in mind that we go in. Within the tent of meeting there was the holy of holies, speaking of the presence of God; and that is available to us at any time because Christ has gone in first, He is there. So you are encouraging us that going in to what God has prepared is in itself a great deliverance for us.

R.D.P. Christ must have “the first place in all things”, Col.1:18. I was wondering if all the other offerings were offered on top of the burnt-offering. The burnt-offering was continual, but the others were on top. What underlay them all was the perfection of the burnt-offering.

P.A.G. I would encourage all to look at the law of the offerings and see how intimately one offering is connected with another. We may rightly say the burnt-offering has one significance and the sin-offering has another, and we may associate the different offerings with particular gospels. But the fact is that each offering was connected with another, no offering in that sense stood entirely alone. We understand the truth in its different aspects, but it would be missing something to say, for example, that one specific gospel was exclusively about the burnt-offering. The burnt-offering is often linked with John’s gospel, and rightly so. But are not the movements of Christ in John’s gospel precious too? The fellowship is not formally spoken of in John’s gospel, because John does not address things in a formal way, but he records the Lord’s words, “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you” (chap.15:16). He says, “A new commandment I give to you, that ye love one another” (chap.13:34). These are features of the fellowship, the practical working out of the fellowship. So to detach one offering from one of the gospels would mean that we could miss an impression of Christ.

G.J.R. Would the statement that He “gave himself” unite what all these offerings speak of? It says, “who gave himself for our sins, so that he should deliver us out of the present evil world, according to the will of our God and Father”, Gal.1:4.

P.A.G. He “gave himself”, not something less than Himself, not part of Himself. He “gave himself”. The hymn writer wrote:

‘And love that, giving all, secures

The universe for God’. (Hymn 171)

The Lord Jesus gave all. The expression is used in Matthew’s gospel, “all whatever he had” (chap.13:46). Nothing was held back, He “gave himself”.

G.J.R. It just came to mind in connection with what you were saying as to holding all the offerings together in our minds.

P.A.G. It says in Leviticus 7:37, “This is the law of the burnt-offering, of the oblation, and of the sin-offering, and of the trespass-offering, and of the consecration-offering, and of the sacrifice of peace-offering, which Jehovah commanded Moses in mount Sinai”. It does not say ‘These are the laws’; it says, “This is the law”: there is one law for all the offerings because they all speak of one Person.

A.E.M. I was thinking of the scripture, “who by the eternal Spirit offered himself spotless”, Heb.9:14. Speaking reverently, that feature of spotlessness did not suddenly come into view at the cross. It had been there all through the life of the Lord to which you referred earlier. Divine appreciation was borne witness to in the Father speaking.

P.A.G. The examination here of the parts of the offering was to bring out the perfection of what was there, not to see whether it was perfect. It was perfect, and the examination and the washing in water were to bring that out so that it could be observed that all was perfect. There was never any doubt that the offering would be perfect, it was certain. How could Isaiah be given his prophecy in chapter 53, which has already been in part referred to, “it pleased Jehovah to bruise him” (v.10), if it was not known even then that the offering would be perfect? It is in a perfect offering, a perfect Man, that we are accepted.

D.J.W. I wondered whether the ashes confirm what you have been saying. The burnt-offering was totally consumed, every aspect of the glory of Christ was honourable to the Father. There was nothing left to be declared or shown.

P.A.G. Indeed. It is striking that in the law of the burnt-offering where we read it says, “And the priest shall put on his linen raiment, and his linen breeches shall he put on his flesh, and take up the ashes to which the fire hath consumed the burnt-offering on the altar, and he shall put them beside the altar”. We might ask what it would mean to take up the ashes. We have already commented that the priest is not said to eat the burnt-offering; but what would it mean to take up the ashes? One thought is that for me to be accepted, Christ must die. There was not some other way. The burnt-offering does include the point that it is to make atonement for the offerer. That is, I have to realise that in order for me to be accepted, Christ had to die and atonement had to be made. But the fact that I am accepted means that His death has been effective and the atonement has been made; otherwise I could not be accepted. It does not end in His death, of course. The matter of His resurrection is essential: “if Christ be not raised … ye are yet in your sins” (1 Cor.15:17), and not only is He risen, but He is also ascended and glorified. But I have to realise that for me to be accepted, Christ had to die.

T.J.H. Paul said, “always bearing about in the body the dying of Jesus”, 2 Cor.4:10. I wondered if that might be an example of what you are speaking of as to taking up the ashes.

P.A.G. The apostle Paul in a distinctive way accepted that the death of Christ applied to him, and no doubt there were certain effects upon him as a result of that which led him to write, “bearing about in the body the dying of Jesus”. But one reason for not being over-occupied with the world is that it is the place where Christ died, and another reason is that we have been “buried therefore with him by baptism unto death”, Rom.6:4. The world is not our prospect or our outlook; our place is heavenly.

R.W.McC. I was thinking of the ashes being the witness. The hymn-writer speaks about the emblems being:

‘… a witness to a work complete’. Hymn 339

But the ashes would be that also, do you think?

P.A.G. We have spoken about what is added, what increases, what prospers. But nothing can be added to the work of Christ; it is perfect and it is complete. Its application is forever, there is no call for anything to be added to it. When the Lord said, “It is finished” (John 19:30), that was in part anticipative, but it is a statement that stands: “It is finished”. When it says in Romans 6 that He was “raised up from among the dead by the glory of the Father” (v.4), that is testimony to the fact that it was finished, there was nothing left to be done.

D.J.W. Does the fat suggest the completeness of the Lord’s commitment to the Father’s will in every detail? It really refers to the fact that the sacrificed animal had lived in a good land. You can see that every day the Lord’s communion was very attractive to the Father. We get that in the verse: “but I knew that thou always hearest me; but on account of the crowd who stand around”, John 11:42.

P.A.G. The Lord’s relations with the Father, as well as all that He did, were marked by excellence. There was never anything perfunctory in what the Lord did, it was marked by excellence, by dignity, by grace, by every blessed feature of His manhood. He had time for a blind beggar, He had time for a woman at the well of Sychar, and He took the time needed to bring about what God had in mind. He always had time to do what He was given to do. Yes, there was pressure upon Him: it says that the crowds “close thee in and press upon thee”, Luke 8:45. In that passage, the Lord asks, “Who has touched me?” and the disciples wondered how He could ask such a question, with so many pressing upon Him. He was, as it were, surrounded by need.

One thing I would say, beloved, is that the Lord always has time to hear what you say, and He always has time to answer. There is nothing that you cannot tell Him. There may be things that I would rather not tell Him; that is a different matter; He knows anyway, but He always has time. We may think of this scripture, “taken us into favour in the Beloved” in relation to privilege, and rightly so, but we cannot measure that favour or put boundaries on it. The favour is there to bring us into the best of what God has in mind for us, but the favour is there to keep us. A dear brother often reminded us that in Hebrews 3:1, the “Apostle” maintains the calling at its height, and the “High Priest” maintains the saints at the height of their calling. God has in mind that we should come into the best, and it is in Christ that He brings us into the best. Not only that, but God has in mind that we should enjoy that favour as having been set free from anything that might hinder us.

A.C.C. I was thinking about what it meant to Jehovah as He spoke to Moses these words that we have read today. God had waited a long time until this point, and how He views the saints was in the divine mind. In Ephesians, we go on to “taken us into favour in the Beloved”, and the translator’s note says ‘An alternative reading is, ‘the favour or acceptance in grace, which he has freely bestowed upon us’’. I am thinking of God’s side, what it meant to Him to open this up to His people, that we should be taken into that place of favour. It is not only as an object of His love, how wonderful that is, but in “favour in the Beloved”. I wondered if you could say more as to that.

P.A.G. We remarked at the beginning that it was God’s choice to bring us into favour freely. Sometimes I might do things a little grudgingly. The Lord never did anything grudgingly, and the Father never does anything grudgingly. He does all that He does because He wants to. He did it freely because He wanted the answer it would bring. He did it freely because He knew that we could do nothing to achieve it. It had to come from Him freely otherwise it would never have happened. God is the only being in the universe who has the right to act to satisfy Himself and He chose to satisfy His love because that is His nature, and He did it freely and without reserve.

A.C.C. It shows us something of the greatness of His heart towards us. We might ask, ‘Is it true that God’s heart is so great towards us?’ But what we have read of and what we are contemplating now proves to us that it is so, that God’s heart is so great towards us that He has accomplished this.

P.A.G. You said that God had waited a long time to say this, which is right, and it no doubt gave Him pleasure to do so. But He also said it in the knowledge that the consequence of so saying was what we read in Romans 8: “He who, yea, has not spared his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not also with him grant us all things?” (v.32). God knew that in saying this, He would have to deliver up the One whom He loved the most, and yet He did it freely.

D.J.W. It is interesting that after “taken us into favour in the Beloved” we have, “in whom we have redemption through his blood” (v.7). It is not ‘by’, so it is not the instrumentality that is in mind, but it is the Person that is focussed on from God’s side.

P.A.G. Yes: “in whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of offences”. In Acts 26, in Paul’s account of being given his commission, the Lord says to him “taking thee out from among the people, and the nations, to whom I send thee, to open their eyes, that they may turn from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive remission of sins and inheritance among them that are sanctified by faith in me” (vv.17,18). It has been commented that receiving remission, or forgiveness of sins, requires the gift of the Spirit². It may be said that our sins are forgiven as soon as we believe, and that is true. But to receive it, to understand that it is in Him that we have forgiveness of offences, to understand that it is in Him that these things rest and are settled, requires the believer to have the gift of the Holy Spirit. Receiving remission of sins is more than just being forgiven. ‘Receiving’ means that I recognise the Person in whom forgiveness lies, and that it changes me. Being “taken … into favour in the Beloved” should change us, but really it must change us. I remember a brother saying in relation to the scripture that speaks about being “transformed … from glory to glory” (2 Cor.3:18), that this would be a permanent change. We come together on Lord’s day morning and we experience for a moment what it is to go from glory to glory. The thought of being “taken … into favour in the Beloved”, is not only a Lord’s day morning matter, and neither is being changed from glory to glory only a Lord’s day morning matter. We are “taken … into favour in the Beloved” and having been taken in we never leave it. We are changed from glory to glory and that change is permanent. I cannot say too much about whether I am in the good of that, but I can say that in the sight of God you are in “favour in the Beloved” all the time.

R.M.B. Would it be right to say that being “taken … into favour in the Beloved” is not only an unspeakable blessing for us but necessary for the pleasure and the satisfaction of the heart of God?

P.A.G. It is important to emphasise that. We would not want to go from this conversation occupied with our blessing, without recognising that the purpose lying behind the blessing is that God should have a response. We have been taught rightly that sonship is for God; it is for His pleasure. He has done this for His pleasure: the “good pleasure of his will” (v.5) was mentioned, and it is right to keep that in mind. A local brother frequently reminded us that when we speak about these things, we should constantly be thinking of what is for God in them. Is that what is in your mind?

R.M.B. Yes, and we understand that Ephesians 1 particularly has in mind what God has done by Himself for Himself. We can understand that God once having had Christ before Him, could never find His rest in anything that spoke to Him of what was less than Christ. It must be Christ and therefore the saints have their place in Christ and with Him before God.

P.A.G. What you say is important. If you read the whole of Ephesians chapter 1 there is only one phrase that speaks about our actions directly, and that is “in whom ye also have trusted” (v.13). The rest as you rightly say is all from God’s side.

R.D.P. I was wondering about the increase and our side. There are three separate kinds of burnt-offering – the offering of the bullock, and the sheep and the birds – and you get the impression that in quantity it might be getting less and less, but the value was the same. I was wondering about our growth in appreciation of this.

P.A.G. The offering of the turtle doves or the young pigeons requires a certain adjustment, that is to say the crop and the feathers are removed, so there are certain things that the priest graciously takes away and they are cast “beside the altar on the east”. I suppose that is because they are not really consistent with the value of Christ in His glory. The sun rises in the east and these matters are set aside. It does not mean that the offering is not accepted, and if one here is thinking that they cannot do or say anything because they might make a mistake, the Lord will deal with that, and then what you do have will be retained and accepted. You will be accepted in that light. As regards the sheep or the goats, which are smaller than the bullock, the offering is said to be “on the side of the altar northward”. Northward is the side of the cold. When I read this passage earlier, it struck me that perhaps my appreciation is less than it should be because of some coldness on my part. If so, the Lord bore with that too. Think of the coldness of Israel towards Him, but He bore with it and His heart was towards them. Even on the cross, He says “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do”, Luke 23:34. He bore the coldness in order that He might secure God’s object.

R.W.McC. It was the same wood that consumed the offering whatever the level of appreciation, as you are saying.

P.A.G. Exactly. We sometimes speak about the limitation of the expression of the thief on the cross. What he said was, “this man has done nothing amiss”, Luke 23:41. But he called Jesus Lord and he recognised that He was sinless: that was enough! I say to all: if you accept that you are a sinner and you need a Saviour, and if you accept that that Saviour is Jesus and you own Him as Lord, then you are saved. We may speak about things today that go beyond that, but if you have accepted the Lord Jesus as your Saviour and repented of your sins, you are saved and there is no doubt about that. Nobody can change it, and nobody can take it away. We spoke about the work being complete; nobody can take away our salvation.

R.M.B. Does what you are bringing before us at this point suggest the need for enlargement in relation to the preaching of the gospel? Do you think acceptance is something we can speak about in that connection?

P.A.G. What you say is helpful and bears on what we referred to in Acts 26. We might be content with a gospel that speaks of turning “from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God” (v.18), and if that is the point at which the gospel preaching stops then salvation is still available. If someone turns “from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God”, then they will be saved. But God’s intention is that people who turn to the light and to God go on to receive “remission of sins and inheritance among them that are sanctified by faith” in Christ. It is most important that persons come into the good of what God has prepared for them, not least because – as you reminded us earlier – what is for God is in view. The gospel is for us, but it is not about us. The gospel is about the heart of God, and it is about the Lord Jesus. Sometimes we may fall short, and speak as though the gospel is all about man and man’s need, but the gospel has in view what God desires. God desires that “all men should be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth”, 1 Tim.2:4. How is the knowledge of the truth to come? It is “as the truth is in Jesus” (Eph.4:21), it is in a Person. The purpose of the knowledge of the truth is “growing by the true knowledge of God”, Col.1:10. It does not say ‘in the true knowledge’. What is the purpose in view? It is that we might understand what God’s inheritance in the saints is.

R.M.B. I am sure it is an exercise for all those who have part in the public preaching to be enlarged in relation to it. It is important to see that the way God has met our sinful histories and has dealt with our guilty path is really only half the story, because the gospel also has in mind that we are brought onto new ground before God. As you say, we are accepted in the worth of another Man, and that is a very blessed and glorious matter.

P.A.G. The risk in the presentation of the gospel stopping short, as it were, is that we might think that when the matter of my sins is cleared, I can then revert to whatever I was before, but that is not God’s thought for us at all. We have referred to Romans 6, “buried therefore with him by baptism unto death” (v.4), but is that the end? No, it goes on to walking in newness of life (v.4) and serving in newness of spirit (chap.7:6). God’s intention in the gospel is to secure each of us entirely for His pleasure now and eternally.

R.D.P. At the beginning of Romans, if you leave out the parentheses, the passage reads, “God’s glad tidings … concerning his Son … Jesus Christ our Lord” (chap.1:1-4). The parentheses come in the middle of that, but it is not exactly me as the object but the “glad tidings ... concerning his son”.

P.A.G. It would encourage all to maintain the scope of the gospel – and this is not just a matter for brothers who preach or those who have responsibility for the preaching, because each of us can be a testimony individually – when we realise that we are increased in our own appreciation of our place in Christ and what that means to God. If I know something about enjoying my place before God in Christ, I am better equipped to tell someone else about it and to help to lead them on into that.

D.J.W. I was thinking of the expression “taken … into favour”. Is that really enjoying “every spiritual blessing in the heavenlies in Christ” (v.3)? Is that the standard of the favour?

P.A.G. Yes. When scripture does not define something precisely, it does not justify me in saying that there is no definition, and that I do not know what the passage means; quite the opposite. When scripture does not define something precisely, we should be encouraged to find out what it does mean, and we should not limit the scripture either. We might set boundaries on things, and there is a great deal to be said for being accurate, but we should not start excluding things unless that is supported by scripture. For example, I would be very reluctant, save where scripture allows, to say what God can and cannot do. We know He cannot lie; we are told that (Titus 1:2). I am simply suggesting that we should not set boundaries, because inevitably they are set by man’s mind, in relation to what God can do, or on the extent of His favour.

A.E.M. You referred to the malefactor earlier. Orthodoxy might have said to the malefactor ‘There is not much of a developed work of God in you, you have only just come to see what is in the Man’, but the Man said, “To-day shalt thou be with me in paradise”, Luke 23:43. Does that help?

P.A.G. Yes, it does. What comes to mind as you speak is that we are considering our place as God sees us, and we should have great confidence in the work of God in persons. Think of the two on the way to Emmaüs in Luke 24: there are many verses to get to Emmaüs, but there is only one verse to come back to Jerusalem! Recovery does not have to take a long time. It does not mean you have to make someone retrace every wrong step in detail if there is repentance. Recovery is powerful, and it is the work of God. The fact that the book of Leviticus was written suggests that recovery is going to be needed and God has power to do it. We should not limit His blessings, nor should we limit His power.

R.D.P. The younger son in Luke 15 would bear that out: “But while he was yet a long way off, his father saw him” (v.20). It has been suggested the father took the house with him. All that ground to cover, the distance from the far country, is almost dismissed in an instant in that scripture.

P.A.G. The father hasted and ran. The father was looking for the younger son, and he is a fine example of recovery. We often say as to the elder son that “his father went out and besought him” (v.28). There was resistance from the elder son. We often add that the elder son represents the Jew. I would suggest that the father going out and beseeching the elder son has a parallel in the Acts where it says, “Let the whole house of Israel therefore know assuredly that God has made him, this Jesus whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ” (chap.2:36). Then in a sense the Father – in this case God Himself – besought them again, “And having heard it they were pricked in heart, and said to Peter and the other apostles, What shall we do, brethren? And Peter said to them, Repent, and be baptised, each one of you” (vv.37,38). In the Acts it is as if the father went out and besought the elder son again. Scripture is clear that “An heretical man after a first and second admonition have done with” (Titus 3:10), but in general we can afford to go and beseech again even if the case may seem hopeless. Which of us would not say we were a hopeless case? God wants us in the greatest of favour, but He wants every believer in that favour; He wants every man, woman and child in that favour. That is His desire.

N.M. We have considered the saying, “Bring out the best robe and clothe him in it, and put a ring on his hand and sandals on his feet”, Luke 15:22. I was thinking of God’s delight, how we would sense God’s delight in Christ and His delight in being able to accept us.

P.A.G. Do you think that is seen in the way in which Ananias was brought round in Acts 9? He was sent to see Saul of Tarsus, and when he comes to where he was it says, “And Ananias went and entered into the house; and laying his hands upon him he said, Saul, brother” (v.17). It is as though by the time he got to Saul Ananias understood that the Father had nothing less in mind than the best robe for him. Ananias had to be adjusted about Saul’s history, but when he got there, he said “Saul, brother”. We can well afford to regard one another as God sees us.

A.J.McK. Did Ananias show the favour of God there? I was thinking about “he has taken us into favour”. It is not only that favour has been shown to us, it has, but if He has “taken us into” it, surely the favour of God should be seen, and seen in me.

P.A.G. What you say is important; “taken … into favour” means we are in it. We are not merely entitled to it. I have a pass that entitles me to go into some buildings in London, but I am not there just now; I go in and I come out again. The point in “taken us into favour” is that we are there. And if in my own thoughts I go in and go out again it is only because of me, it is not because of anything God has done. Even if I do not feel as though I am in favour, even although my state is low, God still regards us as having been “taken … into favour in the Beloved”. We speak about the recovery of others, but sometimes the person most in need of recovery is me. There are times when we do get away. The fact is that the way back is straightforward, and the favour remains.

R.D.P. I was thinking of Moses, when he failed and called the people rebels, which they were, but God says to him, “Because ye believed me not, to hallow me before the eyes of the children of Israel”, Num.20:12. I was thinking of the matter of God being honoured, or hallowed: even though the departure of the people was quite extensive, God’s honour was involved.

P.A.G. It is an important point; honouring believers is honouring God, and that is where we can afford to start. There may be certain things we have to take account of; there will be things we cannot go on with in righteousness, but we honour the work of God in persons; we respect it because it is not of different or lower quality in someone else. We have spoken of the decline in the offerings in Numbers 29, but the quality in the sight of God was the same.

Birmingham

9 March 2024

Paul Gray

List of Initials

D.B.B. David Bodman Birmingham

R.M.B. Richard Brown Strood

A.C.C. Alan Croot Sidcup

P.A.G. Paul Gray Linlithgow

T.J.H. Trevor Harvey East Finchley

J.B.I. Bruce Ikin Manchester

R.W.McC. Rob McClean Grimsby

A.J.McK. Alastair McKay Witney

N.M. Nigel May Maidstone

A.E.M. Andrew Mutton Witney

R.D.P. Ron Plant Birmingham

G.J.R. John Richards Malvern

D.J.W. David Willetts Birmingham

Edited and published monthly by Alistair Brown and Paul Martin

Additional copies are available, free of charge, by emailing

notesofministry@virginmedia.com or paul@nofm.co.uk

27 Grange View Linlithgow EH49 7HY

Printed by Crystal Print, 22 Western Road, Billericay, Essex CM12 9DZ

← Previous 2 of 4 Next →