READINGS ON EZEKIEL (5)
[p. 94] READINGS ON EZEKIEL (5)
Ezekiel 20:1-9; Ezekiel 20:33-44; Ezekiel 24:15 - 27
JT It is thought that we should at this time cover the section from chapters 20 to 24. There is a correspondence between chapters 16 and 20, a noteworthy distinction, however, being that chapter 16 deals with Jerusalem, enlarging upon the divine service in taking her up, beautifying her, and entering into marriage relation with her, and then stresses in great detail her unfaithfulness; whereas in chapter 20 it is the nation, taken up from Egypt, to stress its history from the side of the incorrigibleness of the flesh. The chapter takes up the history in sections: they began to sin in Egypt — even before they entered the wilderness they sinned; and then as in the wilderness they sinned (the wilderness period being enlarged upon), and then they sinned as in the land; as much as to say that the flesh is incorrigible under all circumstances. It becomes a most important chapter in the book from that point of view.
Another thing which we should bear in mind in a practical way, is that this chapter calls upon Ezekiel to judge, as does also chapter 22. Verse 3 of chapter 20 says, “Son of man, speak unto the elders of Israel”, and then in verse 4, “Wilt thou judge them, wilt thou judge, son of man?” Ezekiel 20: 3,4. Also in verse 2 of chapter 22: “And thou, son of man, wilt thou judge, wilt thou judge the bloody city?” Ezekiel 22: 2. It seems as though these verses are a call to us now to have a judgment as to the whole professing position. God has judged it, but is there any one in accord with His mind? “Wilt thou judge them?” It would seem as if God, as acting judicially, brings His people, however few, into accord with His mind. We read in Revelation 18: 20, “for God has judged your judgment upon her”.
In chapter 21 we have Nebuchadnezzar as an instrument of judgment; he is relentless! In chapter 22 we have [p. 95] the judgment of what was in the city; right through the chapter we find the expression “in thee”. It is a matter of what was done in the city; not simply what the city did, but what was done in it. And then chapter 23 treats of Oholah and Oholibah, and corresponds to Jezebel; that is, it is the analogy of two corrupt women, daughters of one mother. It is the utter unfaithfulness of Israel, viewed now in its divided position in the two kingdoms, and both utterly and equally unfaithful to God in their moral relationship. Then finally, in chapter 24, the word as to the destruction of the temple in the city, the desire of their eyes as symbolised in Ezekiel’s wife. It prefigures the sorrow which would come upon them with the destruction of the system which was the desire of the eyes of the godly; it was an adornment in the eyes of Israel, and what sorrow it would be to them to have it destroyed. The disciples said, “Teacher, see what stones and what buildings!” Mark 13: 1. They called the Lord’s attention to the temple. It had a great place in their eyes, but all should be destroyed.
CAM Chapter 16 refers to a son of origin, does it not? It is somewhat similar to the word, “Behold, in iniquity was I brought forth, and in sin did my mother conceive me”, Psalm 51: 5. And the chapters which follow give the workings of the flesh in every place?
JT Yes. The history of the people, from the standpoint of their inherent guilt, showed itself in every circumstance, even in Egypt. Chapter 20 says, “Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: In the day when I chose Israel, and lifted up my hand unto the seed of the house of Jacob, and made myself known unto them in the land of Egypt, when I lifted up my hand unto them, saying, I am Jehovah your God, in that day I lifted up my hand unto them, to bring them out of the land of Egypt into a land that I had espied for them, flowing with milk and honey, which is the ornament of all [p. 96] lands; and I said unto them, Cast ye away every man the abominations of his eyes, and defile not yourselves with the idols of Egypt ... But they rebelled against me ... neither did they forsake the idols of Egypt” (Ezekiel 20: 5 - 8). That is a most striking thing. Before the law is given, by which is the knowledge of sin, while they were still in Egypt, they sinned idolatrously.
JS Is this said so that we might learn what is set forth in the New Testament — “flesh and blood cannot inherit God’s kingdom”, (1 Corinthians 15: 50)?
JT That is the thought. It is enlarged on in Romans and other portions of the New Testament, as, for instance, “by law is knowledge of sin”, Romans 3: 20. The law peculiarly brought out what was there, but this is more extended than that. It is the full picture, even before the law was given; before they were actually taken out of Egypt, they were sinning — committing idolatry and rebelling.
Ques Do divine Persons, in Their service in the gospel, teach us very early the thought of having a judgment according to God?
JT That is the thought in this section; to draw us into accord with the mind of God about sin, and what the flesh is under all circumstances. It seems to underlie Israel being taken up by God, to portray this whole question palpably before the eyes of the universe; that race has been taken up for this purpose; and that, I believe, accounts for the extraordinariness of their character, how they obtained that character, and how they continue in it to the very end, returning now unchanged to the land. But then, it is that everyone might look into his own heart and realise that is just what we all are after the flesh. It is incorrigible.
AFM It would serve as a standard of what we are as lawless.
JT Yes. That comes out in the chapter. What they were manifested itself in Egypt before the law was given. God said, “Then I thought to pour out [p. 97] my fury upon them, so as to accomplish mine anger against them in the midst of the land of Egypt” (Ezekiel 20: 8). He actually thought of doing it there before He brought them out, but He says, “But I wrought for my name’s sake”. That is the delivering side, upon which to rest; that God acts from His own point of view and defers judgment. “But I wrought for my name’s sake, that it” (His name) “should not be profaned in the sight of the nations among whom they were, in whose sight I had made myself known unto them in bringing them forth out of the land of Egypt” Ezekiel 20: 9.
Ques Would you also say that there is a suggestion here as to those to whom the gospel should be preached?
JT How you present the truth is a question of levitical skill. This teaching would help in understanding the working of sin in man. Of course, from the beginning the devil sinned, and he injected it into man; but this chapter shows how it works in man, so that, in preaching the gospel, we are to know what truth to present, and how far to go. It is levitical education in understanding, and is most important, for the preacher should have a true understanding of the working of sin in man. So this very long chapter is peculiarly intended to provide a full-sized picture of the working of sin in man in varied circumstances in which God was with him.
So, as we said, in Egypt Israel sinned; and then, verse 10: “And I caused them to go forth out of the land of Egypt, and brought them into the wilderness. And I gave them my statutes, and made known unto them mine ordinances, which if a man do, he shall live by them. And I also gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am Jehovah that hallow them. But the house of Israel rebelled against me in the wilderness”. That is the next stage — “they walked not in my statutes, and they rejected mine ordinances, which if a man do, he shall live by them” (Ezekiel 20: 10 - 13). They rebelled [p. 98] against Him in the wilderness; that is, in the presence of the laws and the statutes He had given them.
Then again, “And I also lifted up my band unto them in the wilderness, that I would not bring them into the land that I had given them, flowing with milk and honey, which is the ornament of all lands; because they rejected mine ordinances and walked not in my statutes, and profaned my sabbaths: for their heart went after their idols. But mine eye spared them so as not to destroy them, neither did I make a full end of them in the wilderness” (Ezekiel 20: 15 - 17).
Then we have a second point as to the wilderness in that the children who are later brought into the land are appealed to. “And I said unto their children in the wilderness, Walk not in the statutes of your fathers” (Ezekiel 20: 18). But then it goes on to say: “I lifted up my hand also unto them in the wilderness, that I would scatter them among the nations, and disperse them through the countries; because they performed not mine ordinances, and rejected my statutes, and profaned my sabbaths, and their eyes were after their fathers’ idols. And I also gave them statutes that were not good, and ordinances whereby they should not live” (Ezekiel 20: 23 - 25). That is, God dealt with them in a judicial way also in the wilderness.
Then it goes on to say, “When I had brought them into the land which I had lifted up my hand to give unto them, then they saw every high hill and all the thick trees, and they offered there their sacrifices, and there they presented the provocation of their offering; and there they placed their sweet savour, and there poured out their drink-offerings. And I said unto them, What is the high place whither ye go? And the name thereof is called Bamah unto this day” (Ezekiel 20: 28, 29). So that they are tested in Egypt, in the wilderness, and then their children are tested in the wilderness, and now in the land, and it is all with the same result. It is a remarkable picture of the working of sin in man [p. 99] as placed in favourable circumstances; not left to himself as among the heathen, but cultured, and in every way cared for by God Himself.
JS The law was given in the wilderness that sin might appear exceedingly sinful; in that way it was designed to help them.
JT Quite so; the sin was there in Egypt; then the law made it exceedingly sinful, and yet it went on.
RWS Is this like Stephen’s summary? He spoke of Egypt and enlarged upon the wilderness, speaking of what happened during the forty years.
JT Yes: Stephen’s address is parallel with this. It was an indictment; an arraignment of Israel; but I think there is a wider thought here; it is Israel taken up by God, given all these advantages, and yet this is the result.
AR Perhaps like Romans 3, would you say? “That every mouth may be stopped, and all the world be under judgment to God”, Romans 3:19.
JT That is the idea; so that, like Ezekiel, we are to have a judgment about it, and, of course, if we are to have a judgment about the whole world, we must begin with ourselves. What need I expect from myself? This is what I am; for I am capable of doing this very thing of which God is here presenting a full-sized picture.
WFK What would you say about the inquiry of the elders in verse 3? Must they have a proper state to inquire of Jehovah?
JT He would not be inquired of by them on account of the things with which they were going on. We perhaps make a good deal out of what the world may do in a crisis, when war is imminent, or famine, or sickness, or the like; men turn to God and pray in the churches, but of how much value is it to God? He will not be inquired of by these elders on account of their evil history.
WB-[p. 100] w Is sin concentrated in Jerusalem in chapter 16, whereas it is more extended and universal in this chapter?
JT Yes; it is more extended. I think we noted at our last meeting that Jerusalem there, as applied to our own times, is typical of the assembly viewed under Paul’s ministry. This is man as seen in Israel’s history. The son of man is called upon to judge the whole nation in view of its history. Jeremiah gives the other side; there was something there for God, but that side is ignored here. John’s ministry, viewing things abstractly, whether on the side of evil or on the side of good, helps here. This is, abstractly, Israel’s sinful history. Jeremiah quotes Jehovah saying, “I remember for thee the kindness of thy youth, the love of thine espousals, when thou wentest after me in the wilderness, in a land not sown. Israel was holiness unto Jehovah, the firstfruits of his increase”, Jeremiah 2: 2,3. That is the other side, because God had worked in some of them and, in grace, was regarding the nation favourably on account of them. This is an abstract picture of the flesh working in them.
WB-w A total exposure of what the flesh is in man!
JT That is right. It is not a mere academic presentation of the thing; it is portrayed in the history of man covering hundreds of years, and it is before our eyes today, in this race, in this city; but then it is not in them only; it is a picture of all of us. God has taken them up to show us the thing in a most palpable way.
Rem The flesh in us before we are converted is the same as that which comes out at times when we are in the assembly with the brethren. The flesh is unchanging in its character.
JT Quite so; it is the same; it is incorrigible.
JS John’s ministry goes back to sin in its very introduction — “And as Moses lifted up the serpent in [p. 101] the wilderness, thus must the Son of man be lifted up”, John 3:14.
JT That is a good point to bring up, because it goes right back to the origin, “for from the beginning the devil sins” (1 John 3: 8); and so it is the serpent that is lifted up. It is to show the origin of sin; but it is the working of it in man that is in mind.
JS So the working of sin in man necessitates the incoming of the Son of man; He is in relation to man.
JT That is right; so that we should have a judgment about it.
WB-w Why is the history traced back in chapter 16 to the Amorite — “Your mother was a Hittite, and your father an Amorite” (Ezekiel 16: 45)?
JT Chapter 16 has the same theme as chapter 20, but with a nearer view; it is Jerusalem, which is not so extensive a history as that of Israel, but it is an extraordinary thing that, in spite of the reigns of David and Solomon, the real state of things was Amoritish; that the father was an Amorite — of the cursed race. So that the Jewish history is really a tentative state of things to bring out what the flesh is and how patient God is.
JTJr Does Romans 8:3 apply here: “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, having sent his own Son, in likeness of flesh of sin, and for sin, has condemned sin in the flesh”?
JT Exactly; the whole thing is portrayed. God was waiting for this portrayal, to bring out its condemnation sacrificially in Christ. It is sin in the flesh; that is its character; that is its name in the universe before God. So that it goes on to say, “in order that the righteous requirement of the law should be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to flesh but according to Spirit” (Romans 8: 4).
Ques Do the teachings of John and of Paul coalesce in this matter of which you have been [p. 102] speaking?
JT Quite so; John gives an abstract view of it. From the beginning, he says, the devil sins; and then, “We know that every one begotten of God does not sin”, 1 John 5:18. Those begotten of God are wholly cleared of it, viewed abstractly. But regarded in his actual, or mixed, condition down here the believer has sin, for 1 John 1: 8 says, “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us”.
ABP Jehovah indicates that He was prepared to commit Himself to anything that was of Himself amongst them.
JT Yes. Of course we know from Jeremiah’s view that there were those who obeyed, as Moses and many others, and God was with them, so that we have to take this as it is. As already said, it is an abstract view in the sense that the work of God is not before us, but rather the working of the flesh, to portray it and make it palpable before our eyes.
Ques Would the judicial attitude of God as seen in Psalm 22 show the rigid position that we should maintain in regard to the flesh?
JT Quite so; God forsook Christ as taking our place on the cross.
Rem God turned His face away from Jesus judicially, and we too should have the same attitude of mind towards what is not of God.
JT God is seeking now to bring us to a judgment of the guilt of the world — the religious world particularly — so that this question, “wilt thou judge, son of man?” (Ezekiel 20: 4) was perfectly answered to in Christ on the cross. He did judge them; He had a perfect judgment of the whole matter and entered into death to deal with it sacrificially. But now as we are in the midst of evil conditions, God is asking us to judge them today. As we judge this whole matter God will deal powerfully against it. That is what I think we ought to look for.
JTJr There was no power in the beginning to cast away the abominations. “Cast ye away every man the abominations of his eyes” (Ezekiel 20: 7). There is no power in the flesh to cast evil away. Must we not learn that power lies in the Spirit, as in Romans 8?
JT Yes; “but if, by the Spirit, ye put to death the deeds of the body, ye shall live”, Romans 8:13. One important point is, to have a judgment of sin. With holy fear we should think of the Lord in the perfect judgment He had of everything as in the garden of Gethsemane: He had a true judgment always, of course, but it came out there, and He took it up sacrificially. “Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world”, John 1: 29. He took it up sacrificially, but He took it up as judging it; as having a thorough judgment of the whole matter.
Ques Would the three epistles, Romans, Corinthians and Ephesians, fit in with these three sections — Egypt, the wilderness, and Canaan? Whatever be the point reached by the people of God, sin may show itself; but the root of it is the same flesh.
JT Yes; it showed itself thus in the history of the assembly, and now it permeates the whole professing body, and the word is, “Wilt thou judge, son of man?” Ezekiel 20: 4. The Lord is calling upon us to judge it (first in our own hearts, surely), and to see the moral reason for the forsaking of Calvary. God forsook the Lord Jesus when on the cross as dealing with the whole matter; but it is important to see that Christ had a judgment about it on the cross, equal to God’s judgment, when He forsook Him.
ABP To what extent did He enter into the feeling of what sin was, when in Gethsemane?
JT He felt and measured accurately what was there. Of course, He always maintained a judgment of sin; all His teaching involved that — what the flesh was. The flesh is judged in His teaching, but you can understand how He felt it peculiarly as about to bear it away sacrificially in His own body on [p. 104] the tree.
AFM The experience was summed up in the apostle’s word in Romans 8: 3: “God ... condemned sin in the flesh”.
JT Quite so; “God, having sent his own Son, in likeness of flesh of sin” (it is flesh of sin), “and for sin, has condemned sin in the flesh” Romans 8: 3; that is, He condemned it in the flesh of Christ on the cross. Christ became a sacrifice. He was made sin. It is an awful thought, but how we need to take into our souls what the Lord entered into. He was made sin sacrificially.
CAM Would you say that this question of sin having been brought into manhood, shows where God had in mind to deal with it? When He speaks to the prophet, He says, “Son of man”. Do you think that indicates that in God’s mind there was One who was about to come as Son, who would solve this great question?
JT Exactly; it was in God’s mind that it should be solved morally in man; not in a moral sense in Satan; for though the serpent is lifted up, the moral process was not in Satan; the moral process was in Man. It is sin in the flesh, according to Romans 8, that is dealt with; not sin in Satan. He will be consigned to eternal fire, but the moral process is not in him. Christ became a Man, and in Him the question of sin is thoroughly solved on the cross. Romans 7 and Romans 8 also show how it is solved in believers.
Ques You begin to see, in the thief on the cross, the moral process in an ordinary man; and in Paul’s first epistle to the Corinthians, where sin occurring in the assembly is dealt with, all is in keeping with Romans 3, Psalm 22 and Revelation 20:10. They all connect, do they not?
JT Quite so; the thief on the cross is an excellent example. He says, “we indeed justly”, Luke 23: 41. He had a true judgment of the matter. It is a judicial thought. He judged the other man as well as himself.
[p. 105] Rem There is no moral issue with angels that have sinned. They are reserved for punishment.
JT No; there is no moral process with them at all. Their matter is settled. God has dealt with the question of sin in the flesh; it is in man.
ABP Was this history, and the appraisement of what sin was, gone into by the Lord in Gethsemane, or was it more in the general thought of death and forsaking?
JT The Lord would have it in His mind. That was written long before, but then, it was written for us. The Lord would have this all in His mind, however, in Gethsemane; the thought of sin in the abstract way in the flesh. It is sin in the flesh under the best circumstances here, that is, in Israel, under the care of God.
ABP Would it be right, in referring to the cross, to say that, although it was entered into sacrificially there, it had been fully appraised before?
JT That is important. The Lord had a perfect judgment of it before He took it on at the cross; in the state of His mind on the cross, there was a perfect judgment of the sin for which He was suffering.
JS Was it the pressure of death that was on His spirit in Gethsemane? Death, as far as we are concerned, is a penalty, but He, as laying down His life sacrificially, would feel it more keenly than any other man could.
JT He had a full estimate of what sin was in its enormity in the eye of God and the penalty it deserved, and that is what He felt and expressed: “Father, if thou wilt remove this cup from me: — but then, not my will, but thine be done”, Luke 22: 42.
JS There was a pressure peculiar to Gethsemane?
JT Yes. Satan came there, too, which should be borne in mind. “For the ruler of the world comes, and in me he has nothing”, John 14: 30. There was nothing in Christ for Satan, but still he came to press the thought of death on Him. He attacked Jesus in the wilderness at the beginning of His ministry; but at the end, he [p. 106] came back to press the awfulness of death upon Him, to divert Him, if possible, from the will of God. Think of the terribleness of that! He went through it, notwithstanding.
AR In having a judgment of sin, it is not only judging evil in the world, but judging what is in myself constitutionally. Is that right?
JT Yes; we are called upon to have a judgment of the thing. I think that is the word for us tonight — “wilt thou judge, son of man?” (Ezekiel 20: 4) as if Ezekiel was not thoroughly in the mind of God in relation to what he was condemning in his ministry. God has taken up the Jewish nation in this remarkable way to show to the whole universe what sin in the flesh is.
Rem It should also help us in the view we take of our children. We may think that they do not need certain exercises because they have not been in the world, but the flesh in them is the same as in others.
JT “The flesh profits nothing” (John 6: 63) is a mild statement. “Flesh of sin” is the full judgment of it, and the Lord Himself (one would touch it reverently) was made sin: “him who knew not sin he has made sin for us”, 2 Corinthians 5: 21.
AR Would you say what the flesh is as we are viewing it?
JT It is man’s condition, but sin, having come into his constitution, has given character to it, hence “the mind of the flesh is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God; for neither indeed can it be” Romans 8: 7. So that the process in Romans 7 brings out, “For I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, good does not dwell”, Romans 7: 18. The mind of the flesh is death, we are also told. The instruction of Scripture throughout leads to this judgment.
Ques Will you tell us the difference between what is natural and the flesh?
JT Well, sometimes they run together, but Romans 7 is the lesson for us all, as to how we reach [p. 107] this chapter in our own experience. We may reach it mentally or doctrinally, as here tonight, but to reach it in our own experience requires the process, or analysis of Romans 7. Through it we reach the judgment that “in me, that is, in my flesh, good does not dwell” Romans 7: 18. We need to learn that. There are very few of us who will admit, in a practical sense, that no good dwells in us.
AR It means its abandonment, does it not?
JT It does — a total non-recognition of the flesh. It is imperative, and it can be disallowed the more readily as we see that God has dealt with the flesh judicially in Christ. So I, by the Spirit, do it also. “But if, by the Spirit, ye put to death the deeds of the body, ye shall live”, Romans 8:13.
APT Is the sweet psalmist of Israel one of the Old Testament saints who learned this principle more than others?
JT That is right; that is what the Psalms bring out. David, I believe, is one of the best examples you can get of a man who learned it. He learned it, alas! through his failures. Psalm 51 shows that in a remarkable way, as does also Psalm 22.
FHL Does not Psalm 106 in reviewing this history go back to Egypt and lead through to a doxology? “We have sinned with our fathers, we have committed iniquity, we have done wickedly. Our fathers in Egypt considered not thy wondrous works” (Psalm 106: 6,7). And then it closes with the triumph of God. “Save us, Jehovah our God, and gather us from among the nations, to give thanks unto thy holy name, and to triumph in thy praise ... Blessed be Jehovah the God of Israel, from eternity and to eternity! And let all the people say, Amen! Hallelujah!” (Psalm 106: 47, 48).
JT That shows how faith went back in the history of the people.
WB-w Ezekiel 20: 9 says, “But I wrought for my name’s sake”, and then Ezekiel 20: 44 says, “when [p. 108] I have wrought with you for my name’s sake”. Would the first refer to the cross, and the second to the moral work in the saints?
JT I think so. “And ye shall know that I am Jehovah, when I have wrought with you for my name’s sake, not according to your wicked ways, nor according to your corrupt doings, O house of Israel, saith the Lord Jehovah” (Ezekiel 20: 44). That refers to God’s sovereign work in recovery. I suppose verse 9 would involve the passover, for they had the passover in Egypt. That dealt with sin in the flesh in type, in view of the cross, linked, of course, with the power of God exercised in delivering Israel out of Egypt. So that God had before Him throughout, in type, the judicial termination of the flesh, but you do not get that side of the truth here. This is the actual history of sin in the flesh.
JS As early as Genesis 6:13, it is said, “The end of all flesh is come before me”.
JT And so in verse 9 of our chapter, as has been remarked, God wrought for His name’s sake. God could speak thus in view of Christ’s death. “And when I see the blood, I will pass over you”, Exodus 12:13. God could go on with them on sacrificial lines. Morally, He could not otherwise do so; He could not go on with man after the flesh as such. But in the types of Christ’s atoning death the whole matter of sin was dealt with anticipatively, and hence God went on with Israel.
Rem It is very helpful to see that application of the blood in connection with the covenant in Exodus 24, indicating that God is prepared to go on with us, not on our profession merely, but on the basis of the death of Christ.
AR It also speaks of them sinning in the land (Ezekiel 20: 28, 29); God rebuked them for offering sacrifices on hills apart from the house of God. Would you say something about that?
JT That is the final feature of the indictment here, and we come to the word “Bamah”, or “high place”,
[p. 109] which, I suppose, would be seen in what was set up in the land in Jeroboam’s time. He carried on that sort of thing away from Jerusalem, but it was carried on in Jerusalem, too. It is the working of sin in high places. Today it would be such as a cathedral or a church or anything that is marked off as distinctively religious above the level of the ordinary world of sin, but as contrary to the mind of God.
CAM Do you think it is really worse than what is ordinary, in the sense that, being in “high places”, it is really nearer Satan’s domain? In Ephesians, the spirit of the ruler of the authority of the air works in the sons of disobedience. It is really above the ordinary level of everyday life.
JT I think that is the way to look at it. I believe idolatry was introduced in connection with the tower of Babel. There is nothing said about idolatry before the deluge; it apparently came in afterwards. It seems as if Satan took up the elevated idea in government which was introduced in Noah. The ark rested on Mount Ararat, giving the thought of elevation on earth. Before the flood nothing is said about mountains. It is primarily in connection with the ark and Noah that we get elevation in this sense.
CAM So that Satan was really using an attempt by men to get into the region from which he had been cast out.
JT That is the idea; and he actually got there. So the book of Revelation tells us that he is to be ejected from heaven. Babel marks man’s mind as ascending; the tower was to reach to heaven; not literally, but in the thought of man, who said, “let us make ourselves a name” Genesis 11: 4; and then religion was attached to that, but still retaining man’s will and its workings, which is always sin in principle.
AR What do you have in mind about government?
JT The idea of government was introduced in Noah. Elevation was introduced in the ark being above [p. 110] and resting on the mountains of Ararat. The ark rested there; indeed, I suppose it remained there, and may have acquired a place in man’s mind; at any rate, the idea of elevation was there. Hence the idea of the tower of Babel, the top of which would reach unto heaven, which represents elevation; not simply going up literally, but man’s mind ascending apart from God, and Satan agitating it to that end. I apprehend he thus found a footing, through the principle of government, which involves elevation. Nimrod’s kingdom began at Babel. In the history of christendom the hierarchical system is representative of the striving for elevation; climbing up. The world’s glories are eclipsed by the splendours of the head of the so-called professing church.
Ques Would you say it is professedly high and morally low?
JT It must be; for it is sin in high places.
CAM Whereas, when God fills the universe, it will be from top to bottom.
JT That is right; man, as illustrated in the building of the tower of Babel, works up.
ABP Is it the thing that is met by the Lord Jesus in John 4?
JT Quite so; “neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem” (John 4: 21).
Ques In Zechariah, the ephah is lifted up between the earth and the heavens, and the question is asked where it is to be carried, and they say to the land of Shinar. It is going back, is it not, to Babel?
JT Quite so; that is where it began. Babel is really the beginning of Babylon.
GVD Revelation 18 speaks of the sins of Babylon reaching up to heaven.
JT Yes; “heaped on one another up to the heaven” Revelation 18: 5.
FHL Do you think as to Matthew 4, that what is being said as to the high places enters into the enemy’s [p. 111] attempt, which goes from the wilderness to the pinnacle of the temple and then up to the very high mountain?
JT Yes; that is Satan’s way.
JS So that if light is cumulative, so is sin.
JT Quite so; the light of christianity is taken on by man’s mind, allied with “philosophy and vain deceit” Colossians 2: 8; and that is what christendom has turned to; Satan inflating it and energising men above their ordinary level.
AR The apostle writes to the saints at Ephesus about spiritual wickedness in heavenly places. Would that fit in with what you have here?
JT It would.
WB-w Why is Samuel linked on with Ramah (which suggests elevation) in his prophetic ministry? Would his prophetic ministry help to bring down the high places?
JT Quite so; by bringing in the idea of elevation according to God — in which Samuel lived. The epistle to the Ephesians has this in view. We are blessed with every spiritual blessing in the heavenlies in Christ. The apostle Paul went beyond any point Satan could reach. He went to the third heaven; there is nothing said about Satan being there; it is more the outer or sidereal side of the position he enters into, I understand.
Well, we must hasten on to the final section of the chapter, beginning with verse 33, where we come to God’s intervention in the presence of all this. He says, “As I live, saith the Lord Jehovah, verily with a mighty hand, and with an outstretched arm, and with fury poured out, will I reign over you” Ezekiel 20: 33. I believe He means that He will reign over us in power to preclude any uprising of the flesh. He is going to act for Himself, but He will do it in such power as to preclude rebellion. “And I will bring you out from the peoples, and will gather you out of the countries wherein ye are scattered, with a mighty hand, and with an outstretched arm, and with fury poured out; and I will bring you into the [p. 112] wilderness of the peoples, and there will I enter into judgment with you face to face. Like as I entered into judgment with your fathers in the wilderness of the land of Egypt, so will I enter into judgment with you, saith the Lord Jehovah. And I will cause you to pass under the rod, and I will bring you into the bond of the covenant. And I will purge out from among you the rebels, and them that transgress against me; I will bring them forth out of the country where they sojourn, but they shall not enter into the land of Israel”. (It is a remarkable thing that He brings the unregenerate out, too.) “And ye shall know that I am Jehovah. As for you, O house of Israel, thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Go ye, serve every one his idols henceforth also, if none of you will hearken unto me; but profane my holy name no more with your gifts and with your idols. For in my holy mountain, in the mountain of the height of Israel, saith the Lord Jehovah, there shall all the house of Israel serve me, the whole of it, in the land; there will I accept them, and there will I require your heave-offerings and the first-fruits of your offerings, with all your holy things. As a sweet savour will I accept you, when I bring you out from the peoples, and gather you out of the countries wherein ye have been scattered; and I will be hallowed in you in the sight of the nations. And ye shall know that I am Jehovah, when I have brought you into the land of Israel, into the country which I lifted up my hand to give to your fathers. And there shall ye remember your ways, and all your doings, wherein ye have been defiled; and ye shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for all your evils which ye have committed. And ye shall know that I am Jehovah, when I have wrought with you for my name’s sake, not according to your wicked ways, nor according to your corrupt doings, O house of Israel, saith the Lord Jehovah” (Ezekiel 20: 34 - 44). I think we can see clearly how the end is to be reached in power and in righteousness. He deals with them face to face,
[p. 113] and as verse 44 says, He works with them, which would imply His work in them.
AFM Would this coincide with the end of the book, where Israel is recovered, and Jehovah is there?
JT Well, this runs on to that, where it is Jehovah-Shammah — “The Lord is there”.
JS This really corresponds with the judgment arrived at by Job. He says, “I abhor myself” Job 42: 6; he becomes conscious of his moral condition.
ANW Does “for my name’s sake” suggest that God retreats into His own rights in mercy?
JT I think that is right. The recurrence of these words in this chapter is striking.
Ques What is the force of the expression, “bond of the covenant” (Ezekiel 20: 37), which is used in the passage you have read?
JT It indicates the completeness of the recovery; God is coming in for recovery. If the judgment of the earlier part of the book is accepted, there is hope; that, I think, is the way the thing stands. They accepted the judgment already indicated in the earlier part of the book.
AR Does the passage also show that whatever Israel’s attitude toward God’s “holy mountain” and Jerusalem may have been, God’s thoughts about it have never changed? The same thing applies to the assembly; in spite of the failure, recovery indicates that God has never given up the idea of the assembly.
JT Yes. When recovery is effected in any one of us, it is with a strong hand against the flesh, for the flesh is so strong in us, and we are so slow to give it up. The same spirit is in every one of us. “As I live, saith the Lord Jehovah, verily with a mighty hand, and with an outstretched arm, and with fury poured out, will I reign over you” (Ezekiel 20: 33). We thank God for that. It involves His discipline; His governmental dealings with us, so that He helps us to overcome the flesh in ourselves. But all is that we might reach His holy [p. 114] mountain, the mountain of the height of Israel, where all the house of Israel shall serve Him (verse 40).
Ques Is there not the suggestion here, too, that He has abandoned them? Do we not have to learn, that under such circumstances God will not hear us?
JT He said He would not be inquired of by them. The people must accept the state that they are in. God cannot answer us until we judge the flesh.
NP In another prophet He says, “I will allure her, and bring her into the wilderness, and speak to her heart”, Hosea 2: 14. Is that on the same line as we get here?
JT Hosea stresses the work of God in His people. In the passage before us we have His work, too. He brings them into the wilderness, into the bond of the covenant, and brings them under the rod, which means, I think, that everyone of us is counted and taken up in love for blessing.
GL Peter says, “he that has suffered in the flesh has done with sin”, 1 Peter 4: 1. Does that correspond?
JT It does; you have done with sin, as having judged it, but as having suffered in the flesh. We arm ourselves with the mind of Christ as having suffered for sins.
Ques Is there any suggestion of the epistles to the Corinthians in the verses you read, in the thought of God coming in, in His authority in Christ, and then the rod in Paul’s ministry; in love, and then the bond of the covenant following?
JT I think that is all very instructive, because it is a question of the kingdom. Romans is the kingdom in its relation to us individually; how God deals with us. It is in our favour to be ruled over with a strong hand. Then Corinthians brings in the kingdom, collectively. So that we have the rod, in the sense of severity, and the judgment of sin in chapter 5; and the second epistle develops the thought of [p. 115] the covenant.
JTJr We are told to purge out the old leaven in chapter 5 of the first epistle, but here God does it. He purges out the rebels Himself (verse 38).
Rem In the land, as returned, they loathe themselves: “And ye shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for all your evils which ye have committed” (Ezekiel 20: 43). It is not now in the sight of God only; it would be as though, at this point, our sight and God’s coalesce.
JT It is “when I have wrought with you for my name’s sake”, as we have seen.