THE PRAISES OF ISRAEL (1)
THE PRAISES OF ISRAEL (1)
JT I have been thinking of the praises of Israel, that is, the service of the assembly Godward, as may be seen in the gospel of Luke.
It will appeal to every heart here to be reminded that the Lord in the greatest sorrow Psalm, as forsaken of God, speaks about God inhabiting the “praises of Israel”, and in that same Psalm in resurrection, having declared God’s name to His brethren, says He would sing in the midst of the assembly to Him; the remaining part of the Psalm being full of the idea of praise. I believe too it would be recognised that Luke, of all the evangelists, furnishes us with what peculiarly answers to this, and not the least, in that he formally links on with 1 Chronicles — this book linking on with Exodus, where the praises of Israel begin — chapter 15. We have there a song by Moses and the children of Israel, extending on to David’s ministry; in that song the sanctuary is viewed in an objective way, not in an experimental way, for they were not yet in the land; but in Miriam’s refrain there is the indication that there should be something experimental, however little, in the service of God. The place the women have in Exodus 15 in this service suggests what we get in Luke, and we see in chapter 1 the prominence these chosen female vessels have in the service Godward.
The title of Psalm 22 (Aijeleth-Shahar) is feminine, showing that in the hour of His deepest sorrow the Lord had results for God in this sense in view. This is fully developed in the assembly. As we proceed, the Lord, I think, will show us that this gospel is progressive in this feature — as in others.
[p. 293] These remarks indicate what I had in mind. The Lord has been helping us in regard to Himself, as to His Person and the other Persons of the Deity, with a view to a clearer apprehension of God — the Father, the Son and the Spirit, and this would have in view that there might be a fuller and more intelligent note in the assembly.
AN I do not quite catch the connection between Chronicles and Luke; would you make it clear?
JT In 1 Chronicles you have the twenty-four courses of priests inaugurated by David, and they are alluded to here in the ministry of Zacharias, who is said to be “of the course of Abia”, verse 5.
HES Are you suggesting that Luke’s line is subjective and that the subjective line is progressive?
JT Well, it has a subjective result in view. We should bear in mind what was remarked as to Exodus 15, that the body of the song there is objective, leading on to entrance into Canaan and the ministry of David and Solomon. So we are not restricted in our service Godward to what is purely subjective, or it would be very small. The first contribution to the praises of Israel gives the idea. The objective has prominence, and then Miriam, who is said to be “the prophetess, the sister of Aaron”, takes the tambour, and the women of Israel follow her with tambours and dances. She answers practically in the first two lines of the song, and thus intimates that that is about the extent of the spiritual stature of the people.
To make the thing clearer, verse 19 is interposed, to make way for what Miriam says. It is not poetic, as will be observed. The song ends in verse 18, and then we have the historical statement: “For the horse of Pharaoh, with his chariots and with his horsemen, came into the sea, and Jehovah brought again the waters of the sea upon them; and the children of Israel went on dry ground through the midst of the sea”, Exodus 15:19. That is a plain statement of fact; and then it says, “Miriam the [p. 294] prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took the tambour in her hand, and all the women went out after her with tambours and with dances. And Miriam answered them, Sing to Jehovah, for he is highly exalted: the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea”, Exodus 15:20,21. That is really verse 19 rendered poetically, and that is as far as they had gone. So that, whilst Luke suggests the subjective side, it is not wholly so, because we shall see that the praises encircling the inscrutableness of the Deity in chapter 10 and the spiritual environment of the assembly in chapter 19 involve heaven; “Peace in heaven, and glory in the highest”. God would have His people instructed spiritually as to the whole scope of His mind, and He looks also for some subjective response.
JHT As to the inscrutableness of the Deity, are you referring to verse 22 of chapter 10, “no one knows who the Son is but the Father, and who the Father is but the Son”?
JT Yes. I hope we shall take it up in a subsequent reading, but I refer to it now to show the extent of the praise, that it is not necessarily bounded by our experimental knowledge. Of course, when Christ praises the response is complete.
EuR Do your remarks bear on the title “the Word” in verse 2?
JT The introduction of “the Word” here should be carefully noted. No doubt most of us have observed that Matthew and Mark begin with “Jesus Christ”, and Luke and John begin with “the Word”. The opening statements of all the gospels assume that the Persons or things to be treated of are already generally known; there is no suggestion that they are not known. Whether it be in Matthew or Mark, Jesus Christ is assumed to be already known by those who are to read, and Luke and John also intimate plainly that the Word — the Logos — is already known by those who are to read. Much is to be said about Him that was not [p. 295] known, but it is assumed that He is known by this title, for there is no explanation given of it.
HD'AC Is not that the case in the beginning of Genesis: “In the beginning God ...”? There is no explanation.
JT Exactly; and so Jehovah in Genesis 2.
DLH Is there any term that applies to God in the absolute?
JT “I AM” is enough to link us with the Absolute, indicating that the Absolute is there, and is to be regarded apart from other considerations. That He exists is the great dominating fact, and He may be referred to by appellations provided by scripture. But these are relative.
DLH Then do you view the term “Elohim” as standing in relation to creation?
JT Yes, clearly; the meaning of it would imply that He is the supreme One, the One to be worshipped, already known in this way long before Genesis was written.
HD'AC Does it not involve His being worshipped? When you think of God you must think of worshipping Him.
JT Yes, to be worshipped by creatures. Worship would have no place between the divine Persons themselves viewed in the absolute. I believe some of our thoughts have been loose, and no doubt are so still, as regards God and as regards divine titles and names. The names given without explanation, such as Elohim, imply that God was already known. The Holy Spirit was operating from the first overtures of God in the creation; He is seen hovering over the waters, and then striving with men; He was there from the outset and working in the hearts of men such as Adam, Abel, Seth, and Enoch. He would give them intelligence as to God in so far as it was in keeping with that time, and they would speak accordingly. The Spirit was [p. 296] always operating, so that men were in relation with God intelligibly, and when the Scriptures were written these titles were taken up. Others are given formally in Scripture, with their significance attached to them.
JD With regard to the expression in Genesis as to the Spirit of God hovering over the face of the waters, do you think that is a Person in the Godhead?
JT Yes, He is mentioned in a personal way.
WCG How far back does the expression, in Luke 1:3, go; “From the very first”?
JT That with which he was “accurately acquainted from the origin” I understand refers to the origin of Christ as Man here; that is, Luke views the Word and His activities in His ministry here historically. John speaks of Him as already known as the Word (for He gives no explanation of the title), in relation to His deity. Luke speaks about “eye-witnesses of and attendants on the Word”, showing that His service here was under the eyes of certain ones; they were eye-witnesses of and attendants on Him.
JS Would you say that John begins with Jesus as known here — the Word?
JT Yes, One known here. As Luke alludes to Him in relation to His ministry, John alludes to Him as in the Deity in the past. He says, “In the beginning was the Word” — not “from”, but “in”; in Luke it is “acquainted from the origin”.
EuR Does it link on with Hebrews: “having had its commencement in being spoken of by the Lord, has been confirmed to us by those who have heard”, Hebrews 2:3?
JT Yes, and with John’s epistle: “That which was from the beginning”, 1 John 1:1.
HEF Does the expression in Luke carry us back to His birth, or to the commencement of His ministry?
JT His birth, for Luke proceeds to speak of that, so that we get the incarnation here in a fitting way.
[p. 297] Luke has in view our feelings and our affections, and brings out the incarnation in the most touching manner.
AN What is the thought in Luke connected with the Word, as distinct from John?
JT I think we ought to link it on with our present subject.
AN “The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we have contemplated His glory, a glory as of an only-begotten with a father)”, John 1:14. It would not be quite that line here.
JT Luke gives more what He was openly in His ministry; he speaks of eye-witnesses and attendants on the Word; the idea conveyed was there, and was witnessed. We need to be educated, therefore, because the term “the Word” implies, among many other things, great accuracy as regards the mind of God.
Ques Is there any thought of the Word in Colossians 1? Would the “image of the invisible God” be linked with the Lord being here?
JT Surely that is what is alluded to; it is Christ as in manhood. You cannot grasp a divine Person in absolute Deity; you cannot see Him, He is God. He is the invisible God Himself, viewed thus. It is in manhood that you get the image.
PL You spoke of spiritual accuracy in connection with the thought of the Word; have we that in Colossians: “Let the word of the Christ dwell in you richly, in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another, in psalms, hymns, spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to God”, Colossians 3:16?
JT That should help us. The “word of the Christ” governs the passage, and it fits in peculiarly in Luke, for he speaks about writing with method. This is seen in “psalms, hymns, spiritual songs”.
AL Does David’s first reference to the ark in Psalm 132 link on with the thought in Luke? “We heard of it at Ephratah”, he says, that is connected with Bethlehem Judah.
JT “We heard of it”; that enters into the idea of the Word here. I have no doubt that David’s remark would enter into the whole of Luke, that is what He speaks of, the ark in relation to the service of song. John does not present Christ as the ark in that relation, but as overthrowing Jordan; but Luke presents the ark in relation to the service of song, and that is how David regards it. As soon as he brings it to Zion he lays tribute on the Psalms to secure a suitable ascription of praise. We ought to see that the ark is here in the Babe, in Christ, in relation to the service of song; we thus have the link with 1 and 2 Chronicles, as we were remarking.
Luke proceeds immediately to tell us about Zacharias and Elizabeth and their relations to the priesthood; that they were really of the priestly order, and that Zacharias was serving. Everything was apparently right outwardly. Personally he was a righteous man and his wife was a righteous woman, and he was offering incense according to the order of his course, and the people were all praying outside. As we might say, everything is in keeping with the requirements of 1 Chronicles, but then heaven is concerned about the underlying condition and, I think, the Lord’s present word to us is in regard of that. Gabriel is on the right side of the altar of incense, suggesting that God is to have the best, and he challenges Zacharias as to his state of soul, in the most tender way, saying that God had heard his prayer. He says, “because thy supplication has been heard, and thy wife Elizabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John”. Now this is what we ought specially to notice at this enquiry. Everything is right outwardly, and the angel assumed nothing different; he assumed that prayers had been made and that they had been heard, but what develops shows there is unbelief in spite of the outward order. The Lord has been greatly helping the brethren in regard to order, as the apostle said to the Colossians,
“rejoicing and seeing your order”, but there may be something underneath, that in time will nullify all.
That Zacharias is unbelieving, might appear to be a small matter. Possibly he had forgotten his prayers; the time had long passed when he might reasonably have expected an answer to them, but heaven does not forget, and all things are possible with God; although it might have seemed a small matter that he had forgotten, the thing is so serious that he is to be dumb for a season. Surely all this is to remind us of the importance of seeing to the underlying state in the meetings, as well as seeing to the public order.
FSM Is there a link between the expression in regard of David that “he appointed certain of the levites to do the service before the ark of Jehovah, and to celebrate, and to thank and praise Jehovah the God of Israel”, (1 Chronicles 16:4), and what is stated here, that Zacharias was fulfilling his priestly service before God, and the end of this gospel, where the saints are found praising and blessing God? Was the underlying difficulty removed?
JT That is what I hope we shall come to; but I think we may take Zacharias as a sort of allusion to Israel as failing in the praise. They will come into it again, as Zacharias does here. At the end he takes it up beautifully as his tongue is loosed, but in the meanwhile others come in, for the praise is to go on, so that we have Elizabeth and Mary joining in the “praises of Israel” most beautifully, and Zacharias has to wait. Praise waits for Jehovah in Zion; it will come in time, but in Psalm 22 the Lord begins, not with Israel properly, but the assembly, as the word used in Hebrews indicates. I think we may regard Elizabeth and Mary as answering to this, the assembly coming in before Israel.
PL Would the thought that he resumed his praise on the eighth day suggest that Israel will finally come into line with [p. 300] heaven?
JT I think so, when the promised son appears: “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given”, (Isaiah 9:6). When He comes in they will know it, and the “praises of Israel” will be resumed in Zion. In the meantime we may regard Elizabeth and Mary as suggestive of something higher and more beautiful, peculiarly feminine. I do not know of anything more touching than the visit of Mary to Elizabeth in the hill country, to a city of Judah. It brings out what is proper to the assembly, the peculiar sensitiveness of the instrument, so to speak. And “as Elizabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit, and cried out with a loud voice and said. Blessed art thou amongst women, and blessed the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For behold, as the voice of thy salutation sounded in my ears, the babe leaped with joy in my womb. And blessed is she that has believed ...” That has to be regarded as over against Zacharias; it is in connection with faith, as the Lord said to Thomas, “Blessed they who have not seen and have believed”, (John 20:29). Peculiar sensitiveness is suggested in the response of the babe, as the sound of Mary’s voice fell on the ears of Elizabeth, as she says, “the voice of thy salutation”.
DLH Why is it said “a loud voice”?
JT I suppose the loud voice implies depth of feeling. You get it frequently, especially with the Lord Himself.
DLH You get it occasionally in the Psalms: “I cried unto Jehovah with my voice”,(Psalm 142:1) as if there was a loud voice.
JT All this is to be noted as preliminary to the great subject before us, uniting these women as it says, in “the house of Zacharias”, in the hill country, in a city of Judah. Then the salutation of Mary conveys,
[p. 301] we may say, spiritual affections, because Mary has been already instructed by Gabriel that her kinswoman Elizabeth was with child. The link between them in what would draw out their mutual sympathy is thus established from heaven. It enters into the constitution of the assembly, what we are as divinely instructed, and how, being instructed, we come to understand that others are also in the like case, so that mutual sympathy is begotten, and relationship: “thy kinswoman”, the angel says.
EG Is there this wonderful sympathy between the mother and the babe? It says that the babe “leaped with joy”.
JT As I was saying, it implies the constitution of the assembly, what the body of Christ is, as worked out in 1 Corinthians. That epistle, among many other things, has in view the formation of the instrument. The tuning is in chapter 15, after we have the Lord’s supper and the truth of the one body; the working of the Spirit in the body; then love; then the order in the persons speaking in the assembly, and those who should not speak, that is, women; and then the resurrection tightening up the chords; and then the sentiments connected with the first day of the week in chapter 16. I believe Corinthians has all that in view, and there is a suggestion of it here in the babe and Elizabeth. There was a salutation from one who reflected the angel’s instruction, and so we are in the realm of spirituality of the highest order, corresponding to the sensitiveness in the persons who form the assembly.
JTS Would the word, “I will declare thy name unto my brethren”, bring in mutual relations and sympathy in view of, “in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee” (Psalm 22:22)?
JT Exactly. I suppose Mary Magdalene, as she received the message from the Lord for the brethren, would be amongst them in the most sisterly way; she would not be there in any official way; the very initial [p. 302] idea of the organism would preclude her taking an official attitude, but she would be amongst them in delightful simplicity. It says, “Mary of Magdala comes bringing word to the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had said these things to her”, John 20:18. There was the essence of simplicity, and yet the greatest possible things would be conveyed in her words. There would not only be the words, but the beautiful feminine feeling of Mary Magdalene permeating, as you might say, the whole company; the whole scene in the upper room would be impregnated with that atmosphere. That is how it would work normally, if the Holy Spirit were here; the house would be filled, as in John 12; and I believe all that shows how practical the idea of the organism is, how the Lord would put us into touch with each other by His communications, as the angel said to Mary, “Elizabeth, thy kinswoman ... this is the sixth month to her”. Then it says that the angel departed from her, meaning that Mary is left. Now what will she do? She did not tarry, but “rising up in those days, went into the hill country with haste, to a city of Judah, and entered into the house of Zacharias”.
HMS Is not this word of Elizabeth the first inspired utterance in Israel since the prophet Malachi? Does it not show that the time of praise waiting in silence for God is coming to an end, and that He is going to hear the voice of praise again in Israel? Would it not be very acceptable to God that this woman should call the unborn Saviour, Lord: “the mother of my Lord”?
JT I think that is right. Whatever is unwritten we have to leave, and this is the first record we have after Malachi. It is introduced as in those still viewed as the remnant of Israel, but the organism that was in view is clearly intimated. The impulse is from heaven, because all that entered into Mary’s salutation, you might say, was from Gabriel — the wonderful things [p. 303] about the Lord and about the incarnation. We have not very much about the incarnation in our service of song, but I believe the Lord would help us to dwell on the marvellous mystery of the incarnation. The first word of the angel to Mary is, “Hail, thou favoured one! the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou amongst women”, Luke 1:28. Then she feared, and he said, “Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found favour with God; and behold, thou shalt conceive in the womb and bear a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus. He shall be great, and shall be called Son of the Highest; and the Lord God shall give Him the throne of David his father; and He shall reign over the house of Jacob for the ages, and of His kingdom there shall not be an end. But Mary said to the angel. How shall this be, since I know not a man? And the angel answering said to her, The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and power of the Highest overshadow thee, wherefore the holy thing also which shall be born shall be called Son of God. And behold, Elizabeth, thy kinswoman, she also has conceived a son in her old age, and this is the sixth month to her that was called barren: for nothing shall be impossible with God”, Luke 1:30 - 37. Now, it seems to me that the infinite substance, as I may call it, that enters into all that, enters into Mary’s salutation. It is heavenly impulse, but in such richness, involving so much as it alights upon the ears of Elizabeth, that it enters into her whole being, and the being of her unborn child. It seems to me that the Lord would press upon us as to this great subject, the spiritual sensitiveness that belongs to the organism, that is to be used as an instrument of God’s praise.
EJMcB Is it worthy of notice that all this transpires while Zacharias is dumb, that Mary has the light of the coming in of the Son of God, and when Zacharias recovers his speech he speaks of the horn in the house of David? Is not the great subject of praise now connected with the Son of [p. 304] God?
JT Elizabeth says to Mary with a loud voice, “Blessed art thou amongst women”. Of course, we must make due allowance for this extraordinary person, but it suggests what the saints are to be to us, what anybody is to be to us who brings us light, and whose spirit is impregnated with heavenly thoughts about Christ: “Blessed art thou amongst women, and blessed the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” That is, Elizabeth is duly cognisant, and sensitive, and appreciative of the salutation of one so honoured; it has come through Mary, but it is the “mother of my Lord”. Still unborn, but to her, He is “my Lord”.
WCG Would you say that is a practical example of what you have referred to, as the means by which the underlying state is helped? Did these women not practically carry out the “more excellent way” referred to in Corinthians?
JT Making all due allowance for the actual circumstances, we can see how one saint affects another. It promotes the thought of the assembly. In the one instance we have the Holy Spirit operating — Elizabeth is said to be filled with the Holy Spirit, whereas there is nothing said about Mary being filled by the Holy Spirit. Her contribution to the “praises of Israel” is rather a calculated composition of one already formed in the knowledge of God. Like David, she draws from spiritual sources, as is seen in her language. As David restored the ark, he drew from the Psalms; it was not an impromptu contribution, but something thought out spiritually; and that, I think, is the side we see in Mary. In the assembly we get immediate promptings from the Spirit, and when we have that there is the sense of a touch, an impulse; but then there is the production of the instructed. The Lord speaks of “the tongue of the instructed”. God looks for that; as was said, “five words with the understanding”.
RB-n You mentioned the principle of unbelief [p. 305] in Zacharias showing the weak state there, unsympathetic with what God was about to do; have we in the women the suitable subjective state, with the result that they are found sympathetic with God and what He is doing. They voice intelligent praise and salutation.
JT I think we may learn that from Mary and Elizabeth. Elizabeth salutes Mary, “Blessed is she that has believed”, and then, besides believing, Mary was subject . “Behold the bondmaid of the Lord; be it to me according to thy word”, Luke 1:38. That is the basis of intelligent priestly service in the assembly; whereas on the other hand, in Elizabeth you have the promptings of the Spirit effected or initiated by Mary’s voice. Initiation is really with Mary, she is an instructed one; and then Elizabeth is a ready vessel of the Spirit. What is said of her here suggests the necessity for readiness in the assembly. She hid herself five months, she is very comely in her ways; and she is ready for this occasion, and then she gives her contribution; but Mary’s is more the calculated, instructed side of service in the assembly.
MWB Would these two cases illustrate what you were saying earlier about praise being the outcome, not only of what we have reached subjectively, but also of that which might be produced as under spiritual impulse according to the light received?
JT Exactly. We must ever make allowance for the action of the Spirit in the assembly, for the service of God today is not a ready-made service such as they had in Israel, or such as in the established churches around us. We have general principles to govern us, but the Holy Spirit is with us, and Elizabeth represents how the whole organism is capable of being stimulated by a spiritual touch; and then with Mary we have the formal instructed contribution which is proper to the assembly, because it is the place of spiritual intelligence, as well as the place of feelings and affections.
PL Would the Maschil Psalms be on the line of instruction, and then, “I have restrained and composed my soul, like a weaned child with its mother”. (Psalm 131:2) — would that be the tender sensibility that would respond to spiritual impulse?
JT Yes. I am glad you mentioned the Maschil Psalms; they run through the Psalms and represent what is seen in Mary. Mary employs scriptural language, and I believe that is another side of the subject, that the Lord would instruct us as to the kind of language to be used in the service of God.
AN Would you get the two things in the expression, “communicating spiritual things by spiritual means?” (1 Corinthians 2:13).
The things are there to be communicated by spiritual means.
JT Just so. The first reference to the Spirit in Corinthians is in chapter 2, and it is to bring out that divine things are revealed by Him: “Things which eye has not seen, and ear not heard, and which have not come into man’s heart, which God has prepared for them that love Him”, 1 Corinthians 2:9. Then we have the mind of Christ, which would imply the means of thinking and speaking. Then in chapter 3 you get the Spirit in the temple; His presence amongst us implies that the temple of God is here, and so the Holy Spirit is linked on right through to the end of the two epistles, finishing up with the “communion of the Holy Spirit”. He is the power of the service. He forms and instructs us so that we should have the “tongue of the instructed”, that we might know how to speak, as it says, “five words with the understanding”.
JAP Is the thought that Mary’s contribution was less subjective than that of Elizabeth?
JT It represents what we were saying, that the service of God must necessarily include the objective; that is to say, God would have us take in the whole range of His thoughts. I have no doubt that is one reason why the Word — Logos — is introduced here,
[p. 307] and I think Mary is more that side. It is to her credit to say that; she was spiritually equal to grasping the position, and had such a knowledge of Old Testament language that she could bring it in and apply it beautifully.
EuR Does her expression, “God my Saviour”, link on with Exodus 15, and the latter part of her contribution with 1 Samuel 2?
JT There is a beautiful link there with Hannah’s song which is called a prayer, showing what a lowly, subject, dependent woman she was, but the language is really that of a priest throughout. 1 Samuel 2, is a great contribution to the “praises of Israel”, and Mary has that in mind; it is not with her the impulse of the Holy Spirit in the believer, but rather the Colossian point of view where the Holy Spirit is only mentioned once, intimating that His work is more in view than Himself; this is to bring out what the assembly is as formed in spiritual intelligence.
JJ Would Mary’s going to Elizabeth and unfolding this wonderful fact of the incarnation be similar to the second chapter of Philippians that Paul could write owing to their sympathy and sensitiveness?
JT Yes; the state of things at Philippi warranted that.
JHT You have said that the Psalm that David delivered to Asaph and his brethren was a collection from the Psalms — is that in your mind in referring to Mary’s contribution here?
JT Yes, it is the intelligent side. What David did in inaugurating the service of praise was necessarily dependent on an underlying condition, that the spirit of praise was there. What is the use of a form of service unless there be the substance underneath? That is what is indicated in, “Blessed is she that has believed”. Then she is subject, and she also shows that she is able to analyse inwardly, because we have to do that whatever the instrument; she distinguished between her soul and [p. 308] her spirit, as will be observed in Luke 1:46, 47. To discern in oneself the difference between the soul and the spirit points to spiritual ability. 1 Chronicles 15 greatly stresses “the due order”, what God required, but besides that, as 1 Chronicles goes on to show, there was great spiritual ability — at least typically — in Israel, in the persons instructed in song. As many as four thousand singers are spoken of, so that in the inauguration of the courses by David, the material was there. Elizabeth, as we remarked, represents the sensitiveness in the assembly that would discern a spiritual touch; that is, someone says something that is spiritual, that he has received from the Lord, and it is discerned; we are moved by it, and then room is given to the Spirit to operate in relation to it. Here the babe is included — a most remarkable thing. There was room for the Spirit to act uninterruptedly in Elizabeth at this juncture, and then we have the intelligent setting out of the thoughts of God in scriptural language by Mary.
MWB Do you think the two cases would illustrate how those younger in the faith would take up appropriately the praises of God in the assembly, whereas those instructed would be able to speak to God more intelligently?
JT That is what we may see here. Elizabeth is capable of being touched, and that ought to include all who in self-judgment give scope to the Spirit, so that He is not interrupted. Here it extends even to the unborn babe. Well, no one in the assembly can assume to be less than that, yet the unborn babe is affected. The suggestion is of the capability of being affected in the assembly, compare 1 Corinthians 14:30.
FSM It is the pleasure of the Spirit to use spiritual substance in the praise of God, and that would be an incentive to have more spiritual substance, not only to communicate and help one another, but primarily for the service of praise. It is significant that both Elizabeth [p. 309] and Mary, and then Zacharias later, and Stephen, all exhibit a spiritual knowledge of the Scriptures.
Ques Do you connect the ability to be touched with the soul, and the instructed contribution with the spirit?
JT Yes. The soul is what we might call the lower affections, and the spirit that which is nearer to God. They are both in perfect harmony here.
ER In Psalm 22 it says, “The meek shall eat and be satisfied; they shall praise Jehovah that seek him: your heart shall live for ever”, verse 26. I thought that contains a principle with regard to feeding, that you must be satisfied before your heart can praise the Lord.
JT Very good; it fits in well with the Lord’s supper. In Matthew and Mark the Lord speaks of eating, and in these gospels the hymn follows the Supper.
CET Was this account written for one already instructed, but in order that a contribution might be the result?
JT That is a good suggestion, for it was written to one person. Luke gauged the stature of Theophilus, and the Acts further written to him would be in the same relation. The introduction to the Acts shows that Theophilus was learning, because in it Luke drops the epithet “most excellent”. Reduction is required if we are to lay hold of the great thoughts in these two books. The Acts, beginning with “the former treatise”, goes on to speak about the Lord presenting Himself alive to the disciples whom He had chosen, and then assembling with them. It seems as if we should lead on to that in our inquiry, to the idea of the Lord presenting Himself alive and then assembling with them. Theophilus, as he followed Luke, would say, I would like to understand how the Lord assembled with His own, and that in resurrection.
HES Is the suggestion that what is official in Theophilus and Zacharias gives place to what is [p. 310] spiritual?
JT Yes. Reduction was needed, especially in Theophilus. Luke evidently understood that it had taken place, so that Theophilus was capable of accepting another great treatise on this subject — “concerning all things which Jesus began both to do and to teach”, Acts 1:1.
PL Would it be right to say that presenting Himself living to them after He had suffered would touch the soul more on the line of Elizabeth, and then the assembling forty days with them secure the spiritual instruction for which Mary stands?
JT The suffering side gives tone to the service. I hope the Lord will keep Psalm 22 in our minds throughout these meetings, for the sufferings are what give tone to the assembly’s service.
WRP Have you any thought as to the fact that Elizabeth was old and well stricken in years, and that Mary was a virgin and of course young? What bearing has this on the two states that you have been bringing before us?
JT I suppose the old people in Luke denote the system that was passing away; but this gave occasion for God to show what He could do in spite of human weakness. The new system is suggested in Mary and the babes; all is to be fresh and young, but linked with the old. Indeed, I suppose we have a suggestion as to older brothers and sisters, how that in old age they bear fruit, and that links on with the coming generation — “another cometh”.
FGW Is there the thought that Elizabeth and Mary begin with Isaiah 8:18: “Behold, I and the children that Jehovah hath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel”, and when the Spirit of God links Psalm 22 with it in Hebrews 2 there is the added allusion to the thought of the Sanctifier and the sanctified all of one? Have you the development of that in Elizabeth and Mary?
JT Exactly.
[p. 311] Ques You spoke of Elizabeth being filled with the Spirit, and Mary as the virgin. Is the latter suggested in Paul saying to the Corinthians that he would present them “as a chaste virgin to Christ” (2 Corinthians 11:2)?
JT Yes; and added to that is the instruction that the letters to the Corinthians had in view. I believe Mary represents this side also.
JJ Is there any reason why Paul does not develop the expression “the Word” that we get here?
JT I do not know. One has thought of other expressions in the gospels that are not developed in the epistles. Perhaps the Lord will help us as to why they are not — such expressions as “the Word” and the “kingdom of the heavens”. Nor do you get the title “Son of Man” developed. We should enquire why it is.
MWB Referring to what you said earlier about “the Word” linking it with the Lord in His infancy, is there in this the expression of God as come down in such lowly grace?
JT That is a feature of it. Not that the Lord Jesus was doing anything in babyhood, but the thoughts of God were there. Though expressed by others, the thoughts of God are immediately in evidence. These chapters show how the thoughts of God are brought in by Gabriel, and then by one angel to the shepherds, and then by the multitude of the heavenly host. The thoughts of God were all there, so “eye-witnesses of and attendants on the Word” would include all that.
DLH So Simeon says, “Mine eyes have seen thy salvation”, Luke 2:30. “The Word” was there for him.
JT And how beautifully he opened up the mind of God about the Lord as he had Him in his arms!