ELEMENTS OF THE CHRISTIAN DISPENSATION (1)
[p. 51] ELEMENTS OF THE CHRISTIAN DISPENSATION (1)
2 Kings 4:1 - 13; Romans 8:1 - 17
JT It seems clear that these chapters in first and second Kings afford us in type elements that go to make up the Christian dispensation so that they link on with Romans. What has engaged us has been that the rights of God were represented in Elijah; firstly, in regard to his ministry among the people, and secondly, in regard to his being placed in the heavens. God is entitled to act in this way, and what flows from it is that it is for the benefit of man. The ministry of Elisha involves a complete change of conditions on earth in principle. The new cruse and salt introduced changed the source of things. Things are dealt with in their source and this means that, whilst for the moment individuals only are being affected, yet the earth will be affected. Things will be changed and the word new, I think, indicates that things are to be new. The principle of the new, I think, is worthy of note, because God’s great thought is expressed in this: “I make all things new”, Revelation 21:5. That necessarily begins now in individuals, so that in Romans 6 we have “newness of life” and in Romans 7 we have “newness of spirit”. The manner of our life is new and the manner of our spirit is new. You have the thing in principle.
AFM You would regard this fourth chapter as the climax of Elijah’s ministry?
JT I think it embodies it. Other features follow, but I think the fourth chapter embodies all from the destitute widow of a prophet’s son to the man from Baal-shalisha. It would cover, you might say, the whole of Paul’s ministry, from Romans to Ephesians.
[p. 52] BTF What would you say the widow represented?
JT She is the wife of one of the sons of the prophets; it is evident that her husband did not leave her provided for. I suppose he would represent the old order of things.
ANW Did he become a debtor under the ministry of Elijah?
JT Under the legal system, I should say. There was no supply. What came out in connection with Elijah was that the meal should not fail nor the cruse of oil waste until rain came, whereas here it is an abundance. There is no stay to the oil until all the vessels are full.
FL In connection with Elijah, there is that which speaks of Christ here in His humanity. There was the meal as well as the oil, but here the meal is gone. Christ in His humanity, as in the days of His flesh, is gone to another place, so that it is oil. It is the day of the Spirit. Everything now depends on the Spirit, and everything is apprehended in the Spirit.
JT The meal comes in after the oil here.
FL Yes, at the end of the fourth chapter.
CB Could we apply the principle today of the oil continuing until every vessel is filled?
JT Surely; that is the point of it now. It is the abundance of things in Christianity. That was what I thought might come before us, the character of the dispensation, how on God’s side there is abundance and that as a result there is response as seen in this great woman. She not only pays her debts, but affords protection and shelter and hospitality in every way for the testimony of God.
AP Why is it a woman in both these instances: that of Elijah in 1 Kings 7, and Elisha here?
JT Because it is a question of the state of the people. Characteristically, Christianity accords [p. 53] subjectively with what is presented objectively. The great woman of Shunem here typifies this.
AR You spoke of recovery in regard to the second chapter. What you are saying now involves more than recovery, does it not?
JT It does not go beyond what man should be on earth. That is, recovery involves that man here on earth answers to God’s original thoughts as to him.
AR You were speaking about making all things new.
JT While that leads on to the eternal purpose of God, yet the principle of newness must be introduced even for recovery. In Romans it is a new manner of life in each of us, and a newness of spirit. Your body remains what it was before. That is not made new yet, and your outward environment remains what it was before, but your manner of life is changed and your spirit is changed. These two things are new.
PHP I was going to say it is the new thing in the old surroundings.
CAM Up to Romans 8 the idea of newness seems to be concurrent with something old, does it not?
JT The environment is old; the circumstances in which you are remain what they were before. They are not altered, nor is your body altered. You are still dependent on food and raiment as you were before, only that the body comes under the control of the new.
JT I thought it might be helpful if we were to see how the source of things is altered, in the “new cruse” and the “salt”.
PHP Superseding Jerusalem, do you think?
JT Yes, I think so. What was wrong was not the situation, but the source, the motives that governed the situation were wrong.
[p. 54] BTF Do you think the oil here represents the power of the Spirit, as seen in Romans 8?
JT Yes.
FL The Lord spoke of new wine in new vessels. That was what was to mark Christianity.
PHP Would that suggest John 20 in the way of the door being shut? There was a new cruse formed and the salt was in it, and now things proceed from that point.
JT That is right, that is the source of things, as it were, and so the disciples are sent out from that point.
HC Referring to what was said about recovery and new creation, I was thinking of Lazarus. He was raised, but does it go further than recovery?
JT John 11 speaks of life from among the dead and Romans is not exactly that. We are regarded as alive here on earth, alive in sins, and the ungodly are said to be justified in Romans. “Him who justifies the ungodly”, Romans 4:5. That is, the believer is taken up in his historical position on earth, and justified. God justifies him through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, and in the light of the resurrection of Christ, not his own resurrection, but the resurrection of Christ. He is justified by faith and has peace with God, although his circumstances are not altered, nor his bodily condition. That is how the truth is presented.
FL Romans gives us the idea of a “new cruse”. Elisha, on returning to Jericho calls for the new cruse. Morally it was Jerusalem. In another sense Jerusalem was “Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified” (Revelation 11:8) but here we have a different point of view. There is a new element in the old place. Therefore the gospel had a historical connection with Jerusalem, but ultimately it took up a totally new position.
JT Quite so. The situation was pleasant. [p. 55] The coming in of the Holy Spirit into the saints brought about what was new, but what was there was available really for Israel. Power had come in to rectify things, and that is the ground on which Acts 2 and 3 stand. The disciples were to tarry in Jerusalem till the Spirit came, and the gospel was to begin there. This was God’s grace to Israel.
CAM What I would like to know is what the cruse means?
JT Historically, it refers, I think, to the one hundred and twenty to whom the Spirit came at Jerusalem. It says: “Bring me a new cruse, and put salt in it. And they brought it to him. And he went forth to the source of the waters, and cast the salt in there, and said, Thus saith Jehovah: I have healed these waters: there shall not be from thence any more death or barrenness”, 2 Kings 2:20 - 21. I think that refers to the attitude of God at Pentecost.
PHP Does not the interest lie in the fact that he does not create a new spring, but heals the waters at the spring?
JT I think that is God in grace taking things up as they were before He regards them as reprobate. It was all there for recovery for Israel. The salt refers to the preservative element in the saints. All was available for Israel on the ground of repentance. This chapter, 2 Kings 3, further sets before us the abundance of God’s grace; how that, notwithstanding that conditions were wrong and the alliances formed with Jehoshaphat and Jehoram, and the King of Edom, victory and blessing come in through the prophet.
CAM Would not Stephen be a sort of illustration of what the cruse is? The salt was in him. Would that be right?
JT I think so. The saints were surely all a representation of it. I think any one who reads the second of Acts will see that the principle of preservation [p. 56] was there. Things were preserved. The element of corruption was not yet there. “The water is bad” (2 Kings 2:19) it says. “I have healed these waters: there shall not be from thence any more death or barrenness”, 2 Kings 2:21. I suppose there were deadly principles there at Jerusalem, whereas what the Spirit brought in at Pentecost was life and fruitfulness.
AAT How is the woman with the pot of oil connected with the new cruse?
JT Well, I think in chapters 2 and 3 the Spirit sets before us what we would call objective principles, namely, the new cruse and the victory afforded through the prophet in chapter 3. We come here in chapter 4 to what the believer has. Typically it is what he has. The woman was quite ignorant of the value of what she had. In that way it connects itself with Romans 8, because the point in that chapter is to show what the believer has in the Spirit. In Romans 5 the Spirit falls into line with other things. There is a group of things in the fifth chapter that are the result of what is objective, the light, and the Spirit is amongst them; it says, “The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by [the] Holy Spirit”, Romans 5:5. There it is rather the medium by which the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts, but the eighth chapter is to show what the Spirit is to the Christian.
AAT I notice this chapter speaks a good deal about the oil as a type of the Spirit, whereas in other instances the Spirit is typified by “running water”, the “springing well”, etc. Would you open out the difference?
JT What the oil represents here is its marketable value. It is a commodity which may be sold. It is the value of it, I think. The use you put it to is the point here. It is a mercantile figure, the oil is a commodity of value; it is to be traded with, and evidently the first thing is how much of it one has;
[p. 57] then you begin to trade, you get vessels, and enlarge the capacity.
BTF Would the thought come in about ability to fulfil the requirements of the law?
JT It does. It comes in after you have the capacity enlarged. There is nothing said about selling it until the capacity is enlarged for it, because it would not have brought much, you know, as she had it.
CB Water does not make your face shine, but oil does.
JT You see she says to him; “Thine handmaid hath not anything in the house, save a pot of oil”. Now the seventh of Romans is the widow, I think, and her husband has not left her anything. I suppose the husband may be regarded as the legal system. She was destitute and in danger of being in bondage with her two sons. So the eighth chapter comes in as taking up what she had in the house.
AFM I was going to remark that in the fifth of Romans, to which you referred, we have the Spirit of God spoken of as the Holy Spirit; He is seen from God’s side, but in the eighth chapter He is spoken of as in the believer and characterising him. I was wondering whether the pot of oil would refer to the latter. The Spirit as such has been given, but when you come to get the vessels and the pouring out it is rather the eighth chapter idea. Would you go with that?
JT Certainly. The eighth chapter designates the Spirit in different ways. It is to show the way in which the Spirit, as it were, may be turned to meet all contingencies in the believer’s history. First of all, it is said that “The law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free”, etc., Romans 8:2. That is one point. This woman was not free. That is quite evident.
AP But still [p. 58] she had the Spirit.
JT She had something in the house that was, as we know now, the Spirit typically, but she was in ignorance of it. She was in danger of being in bondage and certainly not at liberty in her feelings, and yet all the while there was the means in the house of discharging her obligations if she only knew how to use it.
FL Is it not important to see that while this has an individual application, yet in a broader way it really shows forth a side of the assembly? That is, the widow indicates a feature of the assembly now. The assembly got into a great condition of poverty, and the testimony was in danger of being surrendered, of getting into bondage as it were, but all the time the oil was in the house, the Holy Spirit was there. What was needed was the knowledge of the thing, and it needed that there should be light brought in so that advantage should be taken of what was “in the house”. Now that has come to pass; the enlightenment has come; and it is seen that there is abundance; and liberty has come in.
JT That is very excellent. It makes the point of the vessels even more obvious.
FL So the vessels are brought in as a continuous supply, they are brought in from around and become vessels of the Spirit and contribute to the enlightenment of the assembly, and, as contributing to the enlightenment of the assembly, the testimony is set free.
JT So the point is to make room for the Spirit.
AFM Would that be the revival of Paul’s ministry?
JT I think the truth of Christ in heaven, as Head, on the one hand, and on the other hand the Spirit on earth commensurate with that position has been opened up; so that if room is made for the Spirit you have response to God, you have that which God seeks. It has been remarked that the [p. 59] Old Testament is demand, which is true; it is demand without supply, whereas the New Testament is the supply; whether it be in Christ personally or in the assembly, there is supply Godward. As our brother has been pointing out, the truth of the Holy Spirit had been so obscured that the fact of His presence was hardly recognised at all. In fact it is not recognised today, except in a doctrinal way, in the ‘systems’. There is no room made for the Holy Spirit; whereas the truth that the Holy Spirit remains here has been made clear, and the point for us is to make room for Him; and the more room you make the more you will have, as we have seen in the type before us.
WLP Would you not think that would apply to the present day recovery of the truth?
JT It applies all the time I think, whether it be you, or myself, or Christians generally; everything subjectively hinges on our making room for the Holy Spirit.
PHP So it may even apply to a meeting like this.
Ques In seeking to help believers, would you raise the question as to whether they had received the Holy Spirit or not?
JT Surely; that is what is needed.
Ques If one were applying for the privilege of breaking bread, would that be an important question to put to him?
JT I think so. Some here have been exercised about that very point; that is, as to whether the applicant has established a link with those already in fellowship. It is not simply a question of your having light, but have you a link with those that are already there? One idea in the tabernacle was that it was formed of several parts, bound together with taches of gold; these refer to the affections formed [p. 60] by the Holy Spirit in the saints. So that, whilst one may not be very intelligent as to the reception of the Spirit, what you would look for is that link. Is there a link with the Person?
FL I hope we shall dwell on this point a little, as to the Holy Spirit. At the outset, in the early chapters of the Acts, we see great emphasis on what was of the Holy Spirit. Stephen, “being full of [the] Holy Spirit, having fixed his eyes on heaven”, Acts 7:55. Stephen looked stedfastly into heaven, being full of the Holy Spirit. Now, as we are warned in the apostolic writings, there was a departure from that. Then throughout the history of the assembly the truth of the presence of the Holy Spirit was lost. The oil was there in the house, but it was lost practically. Then at what was called the Reformation, the reformers missed the road. They took the inspired Word and instead of connecting it with the Holy Spirit, they connected it with the freedom of men’s minds. They said, We have the Word and our minds are capable of interpreting it, but they missed the mark as to the Holy Spirit. Now in the light that God gave eighty or ninety years ago, through Mr. Darby and others, one great feature was the recovery of the truth of the Holy Spirit, what there was in the house, and we cannot do more of importance than to emphasise at a meeting like this, what there is in the house and how it is increased as room is made for it. In touching this we are touching very deep things, and things that are more than anything else vital to the testimony with which we seek to be connected. Would you go with that?
JT Yes, indeed, very much. I was thinking, while you were speaking, of the creeds which have been formed, binding the things of God by a creed is the very opposite of making room for the Holy Spirit.
BTF Do we reach the climax here individually [p. 61] for the Christian in the first instance, and is there progress in the chapter after that?
JT There is progress as we come to the Shunammite, but there is a good deal in the verses that follow the first verse as to how the believer comes into the benefit of the Spirit. Elisha here represents the light, the mind of God, and he says to her: “Go, borrow for thyself vessels abroad from all thy neighbours, empty vessels; let it not be few; and go in, and shut the door upon thee and upon thy sons, and pour out into all those vessels, and set aside what is full”. Now that is the light. That is what the prophet says, and it is well to observe it because it is the way to arrive at the benefit. We have to be regulated by the light. Then it says: “She went from him”, (now we have the believer’s side) “and shut the door upon her and upon her sons: they brought the vessels to her, and she poured out. And it came to pass, when the vessels were full, that she said to her son, Bring me yet a vessel”. That is, she was not content with what she had. She was prepared for more, but he says, “there is not a vessel more”; and then it says, “the oil stayed”. That is the position here. What the widow was told to do is what every believer should do, shut the door in view of this precious element, and be alone, as it were, with God about it. I think that is how you get the enlargement.
ANW And the point would seem to be to get vessels.
BTF But then you only get here that she is able to fulfil the claims upon her.
JT The statement is that the oil stayed. Now the woman needs more light so “She came and told the man of God, and he said, Go, sell the oil, and pay thy debt, and live thou and thy sons on the rest”. So that now you have the light as to what to [p. 62] do, and it fits on, as I understand, very perfectly with the eighth of Romans, because the seventh chapter shows that the speaker was left without any means of discharging his obligations. He comes to this, however: “I thank God, through Jesus Christ our Lord”, Romans 7:25. He thanks God. He has light. The experience of deliverance really begins with thanksgiving. You are thankful for the light that has come in in an objective way in the work of Christ, and then the eighth chapter is additional light as to what the Spirit is to the believer. Here the prophet says to the woman, “Go, sell the oil, and pay thy debt, and live thou and thy sons on the rest”.
HC Would the faithful servant rightly using the money that was left to him correspond with this? He traded with it and made more for his master, while the other kept it. We are given the Spirit and are supposed to use it in that way, is that the idea?
JT I think the passage you quote from the gospels refers to what one does for Christ. It is subsequent to this. The great woman might answer to that, but primarily it is a question of what you can do for yourself by making room for the Spirit. You are in straits. I do not suppose, that in all Christendom, there is a single believer who is not recognising the Spirit, who can pay his debts. They may do their bit in regard to this world, as they call it, but are not really discharging their moral obligations, that which refers to God and that which refers to the Lord’s people. These are the obligations that are imperative, whatever else may be done.
AFM I think it would help if you would go back to this question of the door. She closes the door upon herself and upon her sons. Could you give us a little practical word as to these vessels, [p. 63] etc.?
JT That is the secret of power. The Lord referred to it in His ministry. “When thou prayest, enter into thy chamber, and having shut thy door, pray to thy Father who is in secret; and thy Father who sees in secret will render [it] to thee”, Matthew 6:6. Before you can have any dignity outwardly there must be this secret exercise with God. I believe that is what is here and perhaps it is the explanation of the want of power with many of us, that we live on what is public. We live in public, draw on the meetings, which, of course, is right so far as it goes, but we have to “shut the door” and be alone with God about things.
AFM Where do the empty vessels come from?
JT I think there is expansion in our souls as we are with God. Paul says to the Corinthians, “Ye are not straitened in us”, 2 Corinthians 6:12. That is, there was plenty of room in him for the activities of the Spirit, “But ye are straitened in your affections; but for an answering recompense, (I speak as to children,) let your heart also expand itself”, 2 Corinthians 6:12 - 13. Enlargement is in self-judgment, because that chapter, 2 Corinthians 6, shows they were cramped by worldly associations at Corinth. So he says, “Let your heart also expand itself”; I believe it is by the abandonment of worldly associations and the like, and as you are alone with God, that you get spiritual expansion.
WLP Still there is always a limitation to our side.
JT Quite; the Holy Spirit is a divine Person, and although each believer receives Him, no one is great enough to receive wholly. He abode in an absolute way on Christ, and He resides wholly in the assembly.
FL I hope it is not diverting, but I am greatly interested in what is coming out. What is true in the individual, as it is being opened out from this chapter, is true also in the assembly; and the [p. 64] counterpart of it, as I see it, is that the state of the assembly is the reflection of what is true of the individuals in the assembly. If the assembly is straightened and in a bad condition, it is but the same thing as saying that the individuals are in a bad state. It helps, I think, to see how the assembly condition depends upon the individual condition.
JT That suggests to my mind what marked Sardis: “I have not found thy works complete before my God”, Revelation 3:2. I think the secret of that was that the Spirit was not recognised, because we cannot answer to the mind of God aside from that. It is because of the recognition of the Spirit that works correspond with the mind of God. Now the same principle, I think, appears in the foolish virgins. Outwardly they were all virgins and they had all fallen asleep, too, but those who had the oil did not come short. They reached the Bridegroom, whatever may be said about their sleep, and it is said they fell asleep, they reached the end. They did not fall to reach the Bridegroom. The oil did not fail. To go on in the Revelation to Philadelphia, you have there what corresponds with the mind of the Lord. He does not say anything to Philadelphia about incompleteness. To be short or incomplete spiritually is to be really on antichristian lines, because that is just what marks the antichrist; that he is incomplete. His number denotes that he is incomplete spiritually; six hundred, three score and six; and the number of his horns denotes that he is incomplete administratively, ten instead of twelve. Now it seems to me that the foolish virgins and Sardis are in that way on antichristian lines. They are incomplete because the Spirit has not been recognised, whereas Philadelphia and the wise virgins, although we have to admit great failure, reach the end, the divine end, and they are recognised. Those that had the oil went in [p. 65] to the marriage.
ANW Why were the wise virgins not permitted to sell their oil, as in this case?
JT I think the figure is that there is no hope for those who do not have it. It is rather to show the hopelessness of the case of one who neglects the Spirit. You cannot get it from another.
ANW They tell the foolish to go and buy it.
JT Whilst the assembly period remains, of course, the Lord counsels those in need to come to Him to buy. The foolish virgins evidently did not go to the Lord about things; instead of that they went to the wise virgins to get help. But the time was short, and as they went to buy, the Bridegroom came and they were left outside.
AR Would you be free to say that Romans 7 involves the Spirit; that is, has the person referred to there the Spirit?
JT I would not say that, because in the main the passage refers to a time “when we were in the flesh”; but certainly verse 4 implies the Spirit “Ye also have been made dead to the law by the body of the Christ, to be to another, who has been raised up from among [the] dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God”, Romans 7:4. That is a Christian, but then he goes on to speak about a past state when in the flesh, the motions of sins wrought in us; that is a past state, and he speaks of that at length. It has often been remarked that the seventh chapter of Romans is like a psalm of experience. The end to be reached is stated at the first, and then the process by which you arrive at it.
AR You would not compare the seventh of Romans with what you have in the house.
JT I only referred to it as the widow state, the law had not afforded a supply.
FL The seventh of Romans rather indicates one who is the subject of a work of the Spirit. That [p. 66] is, the Spirit is working with that one, but he is not indwelt with the Spirit.
JT Quite, that is that particular section of it which has been pointed out.
AP Are there not Christians who have the Spirit and do not know the value of it? Would that not be like the seventh of Romans?
JT It would in measure, but we must accept the fact that the major part of the chapter describes the experience of one who was not in the Christian state at all; it was “when we were in the flesh”.
AFM Do you not think many who have the Spirit go through the experimental part of the seventh of Romans after receiving the Spirit?
JT That has often been remarked, and it is, in measure, true. This woman is very much in that state. But the portion of the chapter we have been dealing with does not refer to imperfect Christian experience, but to the experience of one who did not know redemption and so had not the Spirit.
BTF Would you enlarge upon what is said of the widow and her sons?
JT Romans 8 shows how she pays her debts and lives. The Spirit is said to be life. It is also said: “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. The point in it is to show what the Spirit avails for. That is, I apprehend, that one discharges one’s obligations in the power of the Spirit, which one could not have done under the old husband. With the new husband, Jesus Christ our Lord, Romans 7:25, you have supply; you have means of discharging your obligations. That is, you love God and you love your neighbour as yourself, which the law demanded. Surely a Christian does that.
AFM That is paying your debts. What is living on the rest?
JT It goes on to say, “If ye live according to flesh, ye are about to die; but if, by the Spirit, ye put to death the deeds of the body, ye shall live”, Romans 8:13. That is by the Spirit, who is the means of life; and then it says, “If Christ be in you, the body is dead on account of sin, but the Spirit life on account of righteousness”, Romans 8:10. I apprehend it is in view of righteousness; so righteousness in a practical way is the fruit of life in this sense.
FL One might illustrate it from the natural sphere. In my daily experience I should meet all my obligations, business, family, and the like, and then when that is all attended to what is left over I live with. Where do I go? That indicates my living, what I do with the excess. If I am a politician I go into politics. If I am a follower of the Lord I turn to His interests and His people. I live on the excess in a way. I mean that is where I turn in my freedom after obligation is fulfilled.
JT That is the idea of living; it is a question of the bent of the mind, of the desire. And what about a Christian? What do you desire to live on? The Shunammite woman says here: “I dwell among mine own people”. She did not want any conspicuous place in the world. She did not wish to be spoken of to the king, nor to the captain of the host. She was content to be with her own people.
Rem She appreciated spiritual people.
JT Yes, she was “hospitable, a lover of goodness”, Titus 1: 8.
ANW Is righteousness paying your debts in a moral or material sense? Is that the full extent of righteousness?
JT It seems to me that Romans is a question of adjustment; first adjustment of man’s relations with God, and then of his relations with men. For all this the necessity for the possession of the Spirit [p. 68] is evident. Having the Spirit, the believer can be practically righteous and he can live to God.
ANW What is your highest interpretation of righteousness?
JT Well, it is that one is here like God. “He put on righteousness as a breastplate” (Isaiah 59:17) is said of Christ. That is how He garbs Himself as it is said in the prophet, and I am corresponding with Him, and I am putting on righteousness. This marks the Christian. In the earlier part of the epistle God puts the garb of righteousness on me. He gives me righteousness on the principle of faith, but I put on righteousness by the Spirit. That is what I apprehend. I think the Shunammite, this “great woman”, is putting on righteousness like God. She is not paying debts; she had no debts to pay; but the widow had debts. Righteousness with God is not paying debts, because, we might say, He owed no man anything. It is a question of His rights in mercy. “I will shew mercy to whom I will shew mercy”, Romans 9:15. When your debts are all paid and things are adjusted in your soul, you want to be like God. As David said, “that I may show the kindness of God” (2 Samuel 9:3) be like God. Romans, I think, has that in view, that a Christian is like God here in the way of righteousness.
ANW So even the sacrifice of his body is reasonable and right in the twelfth chapter.
PHP And the Shunammite’s supreme act of righteousness was to build a chamber on the wall. That was righteousness.
JT That is, she was abounding in liberality, but her liberality took the form of caring for the “holy man of God”. If we have means, then to care for those who are concerned about the testimony of God should be our special exercise.
FL What you were saying suggests the verse,
“[p. 69] Be ye therefore imitators of God as beloved children”, Ephesians 5:1. I mean acting like God.
AFM Would you regard the first woman as representing life, and the second as life more abundantly? I was thinking of the word ‘great’.
JT The Shunammite so far does not go beyond Romans, as far as I see. She has not as yet found an object outside of herself according to the passage. Subsequent history brings in a new object, for her affections, but for the moment she is a great woman, and uses her means for the benefit of the testimony, and is content to dwell with her own people.
AFM That is life rather?
JT That is life according to Romans 8.
PHP She is what you might call a Roman Christian. When she gets an object outside of herself she passes into Colossians.
FL I think she reaches the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus in a way, because she will not accept anybody but Elisha when her son is taken. Life is in him; it is in connection with him. She discerns that he alone can bring in life.
JT And see what taste she had in selecting furniture. She considers for the man of God who is to occupy the chamber. He is a holy man of God. She perceived that by his walk, which shows that she had discernment. The passage reads: “she said to her husband”. Notice how she recognises her husband. “I perceive that this is a holy man of God, who passes by us continually. Let us make, I pray thee, a small upper chamber with walls, and let us set for him there a bed, and a table, and a seat, and a lampstand”. That is the furniture, which shows good taste, I think.
FL We would say our houses were very poorly furnished if we only had those things.
ANW Yet she was wealthy.
JT [p. 70] Yes, but it does not say what she might have had. What I wish to point out is that she thought of what was suitable to this man. She had right instincts as to what was becoming to the testimony.
CB It indicates what is necessary for a holy man.
AFM What does the furniture signify?
JT I do not know what they might be in detail, but at any rate they were befitting in her mind a holy man of God.
Ques Do you not think we have men of that type today, who are prepared to lay down their lives for the brethren?
JT I would not like to say much on those lines, lest we might be considered as taking too high ground, but I believe the recovery of the light of the Spirit, and the recognition that we may give to the Spirit, will bring about at the end of the dispensation what marked the beginning, not in quantity, but in quality. I believe the testimony we have in Revelation shows that the end will afford that which marked the beginning in the principle of it.
AFM Going back to the little chamber for a moment, it says it was on the wall, it was elevated; and then the bed might suggest rest, the table food, the candlestick light and the stool meditation or discipleship.