MAN (1)
MAN (1)
Genesis 1:26,27; Psalm 8:3 - 9; Hebrews 2:5 - 10
JT The subject suggested for this series of readings is Man. The passages read are, as the brethren will understand, just preliminary to the subject which will, if God permit, require twelve readings. It is hoped that these scriptures will open up to us, beginning, as they do, with Genesis 1 and going on almost to the end of the New Testament in the epistle to the Hebrews. It is to be observed that the first time God said, “Let us”, it is to bring out this matter of manhood: “Let us make man in our image”. “Male and female”, it says, “created he them”, and they were to have dominion. The feminine is included in the statement in verse 27, yet the woman did not appear until chapter 2; and in that chapter we have the name “Jehovah” included in the divine titles, as if there are peculiar feelings of affection as the thought of man comes into view. Then as we shall see as we proceed, the New Testament adds the idea of Christ, the Lord Jesus, as indeed His name is; we see Jesus, because that is the prime thought to be reached, not simply man, but Jesus. Then it is to be noted in the second chapter that although the lower creatures are named by Adam, yet he found, it is said, no counterpart, his like. Adam himself, it would seem, had in mind to find some such one, but he did not find her; but God found her for him. All that leads up to the grand thought of the assembly, as Paul says, “I speak as to Christ, and as to the assembly”, Ephesians 5:32.
ABP Is the woman seen as complementary to the man?
JT Well, it says in chapter 2:20, “And Man gave names to all cattle”, Genesis 2:20. The word Man is written [p. 2] with a capital. I should have mentioned at first that there are probably twenty terms in Scripture denoting manhood, words used for “man”, which indicates in itself what a subject it is. So in this 20th verse it is said, “And Man gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the heavens, and to every beast of the field; but as for Adam, he found no helpmate, his like” Genesis 2:20. It is not said that God did not find her, but that he found no helpmate, his like. Then it says in verse 21, “And Jehovah Elohim caused a deep sleep to fall upon Man; and he slept. And he took one of his ribs and closed up flesh in its stead And Jehovah Elohim built the rib that he had taken from Man into a woman; and brought her to Man And Man said, This time it is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh this shall be called Woman, because this was taken out of a man Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and cleave to his wife; and they shall become one flesh” Genesis 2:21 - 24.
So that the subject now before us is clearly laid out in these early verses of Scripture. It also says in chapter 2 that “there was no man to till the ground But a mist went up from the earth, and moistened the whole surface of the ground And Jehovah Elohim formed Man, dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and Man became a living soul” Genesis 2:5 - 7. So that the account is made very clear to us, the second chapter adding greatly to the facts of the first chapter.
RWS How do you view the “us” of verse 26? “And God said, Let us make man”
JT The three divine Persons may be involved; otherwise it might be simply the “us” of dignity But I think it is safer to regard it that the three divine Persons are involved.
LW How should we look at what Elihu says in Job 33:4 in relation to this matter? He says, “The [p. 3] Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life”, Job 33:4.
JT That is simply a statement of facts; it might be said of Adam too; only as we come down the line to a great number of persons one of them can designate things, he can give an account of himself.
AR There appear to be two meanings to this word ‘man:’ there is one meaning in verse 26 and another in verse 27.
JT Yes; the first one may mean ‘red earth’, that is the accepted meaning of it; the note says ‘earthy’, but the word ‘red’ is alleged to enter into it. In any case it would be ‘earthy’.
AR Does ‘the Adam’ (verse 27), include the woman?
JT That involves another name still; Ish is man and Ishshah is woman.
AR Would it be right to say that the woman is included in the second word for man?
JT In the divine mind she was included in verse 26, but we can see as we read on that she was not actually included; God built her, a remarkable thing. It is the first time that we get the word ‘built’, and it refers to woman. It does not say of Adam that he was built.
RWS Is there some distinction as to that, in that male and female are created; and would it be right to say that the assembly is created?
JT Just so, it is created.
CFE Why do you think it was in the mind of God that man should be in full maturity at the beginning, ‘man’ and not ‘child’?
JT He was not born, you mean, quite so; it does not say that he was born, he was created, or made. We might say all others were born.
JTJr Much had come in prior to this reference to man. This is the sixth day, and as you pointed out, it says, “Let us”, whereas it does not say that as to prior matters on the previous days. So that you have the creation of all else up to this point till you have the cattle and then man.
JT So that the thing becomes extremely affecting because it has in mind the Lord Jesus; it has in mind the birth of the Lord Jesus; that was in the mind of God.
AR You made a remark some time ago as to why God waited until the sixth day to create man.
JT That is a question that has to be considered. Why had He to wait? But He did wait.
VCL You spoke recently as to the manner of what was good being in God’s mind. On the sixth day it says God saw that it was very good. Does that link on with this matter of man?
JT Just so. And why did He make angels before He made man? That is another question; and there is no sex mentioned as regards angels, while there is as regards man.
ANW The cattle are brought into being, apparently, the same day as man. What is there in that? “Let the earth bring forth living souls after their kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth, after their kind”. The whole system seems not to be complete until the man comes in verse 26.
JT And then the further instruction we have as to him; it is not simply a question of creation or formation, though there is formation; but in chapter 2:5,6 it says, “And there was no man to till the ground. But a mist went up from the earth, and moistened the whole surface of the ground. And Jehovah Elohim formed Man, dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and Man became a living soul”, Genesis 2:5 - 7. So that he is unique in that God breathed into him; not even his wife has the same place of uniqueness.
CAM Verse 20 says, “As for Adam, he found no helpmate, his like”, Genesis 2:20. You were referring to it just now, and to the matter of angels. Would a verse like that show how different man was from the order of angels, in that there was something in Adam which required a helpmate?
JT Clearly; “I will make him a helpmate, his like”, Genesis 2:18. God says. Although Adam himself evidently had the thought, yet God had it too, and in a fuller way than Adam; so that God had foreseen the need in causing Adam to become asleep. Thus the figure of death comes in, you might say, to bring out the figure of the assembly.
CAM I suppose it would be right to say that in creating Adam God so created him that he would not be complete without this addition?
JT That is right, I would say that.
SJM The Lord uses the same word here for building the woman as in Matthew 16 where He says, “On this rock I will build my assembly”, Matthew 16:18. Does that fit in here?
JT Yes, so that we can see that these wonderful things were in the divine mind from the very outset, from Genesis 1 right down: “on this rock I will build my assembly, and hades’ gates shall not prevail against it”, Matthew 16:18. It is not that hades’ gates shall not prevail against God, but against ‘it’. The ‘it’ is remarkable, the ‘it’ is the assembly.
GH What is the thought of “in our image” and “after our likeness”?
JT Well, image is representation, and likeness is just what the word says like God. The man represents God and he is like God. That could not be said of angels.
Rem Man is so important according to God that the divine mind called him into being; it was not as with the other creatures where God said, “Let there be light”, Genesis 1:3.
and “Let the waters swarm”, Genesis 1:20 and so forth. With man He said, “Let us”.
JT Yes, the “us” is mentioned there for the first time, as if it was a special matter, a peculiar matter, the only one of its kind really. And it points to Christ, I think.
FSC Why are the absence of rain and the absence of man put together here?
JT The absence of rain was made up for by the mist. Chapter 1:26 gives the fact that God made man; it says, “Let us make man in our image”, but we have to see that it was anticipative; we have to wait for chapter 2:5 to get the facts, as if we are given to understand that the matter is very important. It is mentioned twice as to man, in chapter 1 and in chapter 2, and in much more detail in chapter 2; and then again as to woman, how she was formed; she was formed in an entirely different way from Adam, she was built, as if we are to be reminded that the assembly is built. It is a remarkable thing.
EAL Not only was the building of the woman entirely God’s matter, but also the thought behind it, would you say? Because it does not appear here that Adam desired a wife; it does not say so in Scripture, does it?
JT It is just a question of verse 20: “Man gave names”, it says, “to all cattle, and to the fowl of the heavens, and to every beast of the field; but as for Adam, he found no helpmate, his like”, Genesis 2:20. It does not say that God did not find, but that Adam did not find.
EAL But the thought behind the building of a woman was not that of another Adam, that is what I meant; it was not to be of his own sex. Was not the thought behind it purely God’s matter?
JT Oh, quite so, but it was Adam’s matter, too, for it says he found no helpmate, his like. And his [p. 7] like would mean like himself, only in the feminine sense; as one has said, It is myself over again. So Adam might say, It is myself over again. It is a female instead of a male, but it is the same idea.
Ques In the antitype, did the Lord have any feelings like these you were alluding to in verse 20?
JT Just what is in your mind as to the antitype?
Ques I am thinking of the Lord when He came here according to the gospels, what did He find? Did He find anything for Himself, or did it await the coming of the Spirit?
JT Well, it is a question of our minds coming into action as we are here together to help each other; as to whether there is anything in the gospels that would suggest to the Lord’s mind this idea that we are now dealing with.
SJM I was thinking of the Lord seeking; He came as a merchantman seeking goodly pearls, it says; and when He had found one pearl of great price, He sold all that He had and purchased it.
JT That is good, that is a direct allusion I would say to this whole matter.
ANW Would not the beauty that He saw be but the reflection of Himself? The pearl was a beautiful one but was not that beauty His own reflection?
JT So that as I was saying — it is not my own remark — Adam could say, It is myself over again; only a woman instead of a man. We must understand therefore that the assembly is Christ over again, only in the feminine sense. So that the real idea must develop in the sense that Christ represents the masculine and the assembly represents the feminine.
JHE Does Ephesians 1 help? It says, “According as he has chosen us in him before the world’s foundation, that we should be holy and blameless before him in love; having marked us out beforehand for adoption through Jesus Christ to himself”, Ephesians 1:[p. 8] 4,5.
It was necessary that fulness might come into the matter.
JT I think that you are quite right; it is something to add to what we are talking about, and the gospels help us in this great subject.
AR Did Saul of Tarsus learn what you have been saying when the Lord said to him, “I am Jesus, whom thou persecutest”? Is that Himself over again, on earth?
JT Just so.
JTJr The idea of the image must have been on Adam’s mind when he was looking at the animals as they came; what he was looking for would not be this animal, or that. The image must have been what affected him. It was the same form.
JT And then, of course, God had to put Adam, as it were, through death; Adam must suffer; not indeed that there was actual suffering, but the figure of the thing is there, that he must go through death, as the Lord Jesus did, in order to have his wife. The Lord Jesus gave Himself for the assembly; He loved the assembly and gave Himself for it.
FHL Then we are entitled to look at the assembly without previous history or taint of sin?
JT Just so, that is good; without previous history and without suggestion of sin. It is entirely a question of God, His own suggestion, only that Christ comes into it of course.
VCL In chapter 1 it says, “In the image of God created he him; male and female created he them”, as though in chapter 1 they are both in the image of God. In chapter 2 the woman is in Adam’s likeness. Does that show the greatness of the man?
JT Just so; and then in chapter 5:1 you get a further statement, if you will read it.
VCL “This is the book of Adam’s generations. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him. Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created”, Genesis 5:1,2.
[p. 9] JT I think that is a most remarkable verse, and that is why I suggested it should be read that it should be on our minds.
FNW Is there some instruction in the fact that there is apparently no reference to male and female in regard to the other members of creation until we come to chapter 6, in connection with Noah? Does that show the distinctive place that man has in God’s mind?
JT It does indeed; and I think the more you ponder it the more you see how distinctive it is, and how it ought to touch our hearts that God Himself was thinking of Christ. Indeed He was thinking of Christ and the assembly. So Paul says, “I speak as to Christ, and as to the assembly”, Ephesians 5:32.
SW Would you say a word about man being formed? In chapter 1:27 it says He created man; in the second chapter Man was formed, dust out of the ground. I was wondering if Ephesians 4:12,13 would be in line with the formation of Man? It says, “For the perfecting of the saints; with a view to the work of the ministry, with a view to the edifying of the body of Christ; until we all arrive at the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, at the full-grown man”, Ephesians 4:12,13. I was wondering if formation enters into that, arriving at the thought of manhood by formation? The woman is builded, the assembly is built, but the man is formed. Would you say that?
JT Quite so.
ABP What distinction would you make between formation and growth? Ephesians 4 seems to carry the idea of growth, does it not? Whereas you do not have that with [p. 10] Adam.
JT I do not think the idea of growth comes in with Adam and Eve. They are full grown I would say; they are not children. It is not the idea of children but of full-grown beings, that is what the figure brings out.
ABP That is why I was wondering about the connection with Ephesians 4, because there it is “until we all arrive ... at the full-grown man”, Ephesians 4:13 it is the idea of growth there, is it not?
JT That fits in with what we are speaking of, the complete idea of full growth. Of course a child is not that, a child is born and grows up, but what God has in mind in this wonderful figure is formation. But there is creation too, and we have to distinguish between creation and formation.
AAT I notice in Genesis 2:7 it says, “And Jehovah Elohim formed Man, dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and Man became a living soul”, Genesis 2:7. Does not the “living soul” bring in responsibility?
JT Well, it brings in the idea of affection. The thought comes in first on the fifth day. In chapter 1:20,21 it says, “And God said, Let the waters swarm with swarms of living souls”, Genesis 1:20 that is to say, affections; that is where you get the idea of affections, in souls, swarms of living souls: “and let fowl fly above the earth in the expanse of the heavens. And God created the great sea monsters, and every living soul that moves with which the waters swarm, after their kind, and every winged fowl after its kind. And God saw that it was good”, Genesis 1:21. That is, the fishes and the birds seem to have come in on the same day so that we have to take something out of that too.
ANW Is the spirit linked with the divine breath being breathed into man’s nostrils?
JT I think so, that is just what it is, it is the divine breath; the spirit of the beast goes downward,
[p. 11] but the spirit of man goes upward, that is, it returns to God who gave it. But then in saying all these things we must ever keep in mind that God had His own treasure, and His own thoughts, and these thoughts are all in Christ; and in making man He had Christ in mind. The remarkable thing is that He waited until the sixth day before He brought it out.
JTJr Do you think there is something in the fact that it is among the Philippians, in the assembly at Philippi, where Paul began, we might say, the great ministry in Europe, that the truth of the Lord’s coming into manhood is brought out? He brings out there the greatness of the stoop, and the coming into manhood in the likeness of men. He speaks of the Lord not considering it an object of rapine to be on an equality with God, but that He humbled Himself and took a bondman’s form; and then it says that He took His place in the likeness of men. It is the figure of a man; He came into that. I was wondering whether the fact of all this coming out among the Philippians has point in regard to the matter before us?
JT That is very good; and Acts 16 has something to say about that too.
JTJr In regard to Lydia you mean, with the women out by the river; and then the Lord opened her heart to attend to the things spoken by Paul. Then at the end of the chapter it says that Paul returned to Lydia.
FNW Earlier it says as to their movements that the Spirit of Jesus did not allow them.
JT Yes, just so. So that all these things work out what we are dealing with. And it is remarkable, as just pointed out, that it is Philippi where all this suggestion comes out as to man.
ANW “A certain Macedonian man” Acts 16:9 is the statement as to Paul’s vision; it is [p. 12] very striking.
RWS So that God never reached finality in angels, did He? Is not man His most recent and His crowning thought?
JT And so the contrast is between man and angels; but that Man is Christ. We get it in Hebrews 1, showing that it was in God’s mind that it was Christ. Manhood was in Christ.
VCL Is it not significant that it was Paul, the one to whom the mystery of the assembly was given, who brings out the contrast between Man and angels? “To which of the angels said he ever, Thou art my Son ... ?” Hebrews 1:5. It would seem as though Paul, having the light of the assembly, also had the light of this comparison with angels.
JT And so the chapter concludes, “Are they not all ministering spirits ... ?”. That is what the angels are, “sent out for service on account of those who shall inherit salvation”, Hebrews 1:14 that is, Christians. We are the ones that are in mind. But the main thought is Christ — He is first — and our being formed according to Him.
CAM Referring to Philippi again where Paul went through the sufferings to which he alludes in the Philippian epistle as “offered upon the sacrifice and service of your faith”, Philippians 2:17 it was in that setting that the feminine side also came to light so beautifully, did it not, in Lydia and others?
JT So that I think we ought to go on to Psalm 8 now to bring out the feelings in the whole matter. Of course it is a psalm, and in order to get the fulness of it we have to go to Hebrews to bring out the mind of God in Christ.
ABP Is there some point in the fact that this psalm is upon the Gittith, which is a feminine idea? I refer to the title of the psalm, “Upon the Gittith”, the footnote refers to what is feminine.
JT Quite so. That shows that it can be worked out as to the assembly. But we must look at the [p. 13] epistle to the Hebrews to get the whole matter that is in mind before us and to bring out the idea of the assembly in this great subject, first as to Christ Himself, and then as to the assembly.
JTJr The idea therefore of redemption is seen in this section, which would be in type in Genesis, I suppose, in Adam’s sleep. The Lord partook of blood and flesh that He might annul him that has the might of death, that is the devil; it has set us free. It is a reference, I suppose, to Adam’s sleep; typically the Lord going through things to redeem us to God.
JT You cannot exactly bring sufferings into it in Genesis, but you can bring them into it eventually.
Rem Adam and Eve discredited the thought of man; but your thought is that the matter of Christ and the assembly has dignified the whole thing.
JT Quite so, that is the thing, that is the grand thought. Someone has mentioned that there is no previous history for the assembly, all has emanated from God. The assembly has no sinful history in that sense.
Ques Is the superiority of man to angels the present position of man here?
JT That is only to bring out that to which the Lord subjected Himself; He submitted to that; but He is God Himself. “The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we have contemplated his glory, a glory as of an only-begotten with a father), full of grace and truth”, John 1:14.
ANW Would it be that He was capable of dying, while angels were not? Is that the point there? For the suffering of death: it says, “made some little inferior to angels on account of the suffering of death”.
JT Quite so; it was all a scheme, a divine scheme of love. It was essential in order to bring out the divine thoughts. And so what a time God may give us as month after month passes by and we continue to look into this wonderful subject! We are to see how Christ and the assembly are really in mind in it all.
EAL It says, in verse 16, “For he does not indeed take hold of angels by the hand, but he takes hold of the seed of Abraham”, Hebrews 2:16. I was thinking of what you said earlier, the angels having been made before man, but it is God’s mind that while Adam was made first, the woman (made secondarily) would point to the assembly. So that what was secondary was of great importance.
JT What we had at Chicago would help us as to this, the recency of man, why should it be? We felt the need of touching on it, and what the sisters are as well as the brothers in all these occasions, so as to bring out what was in the mind of God from the outset; how He waited for all these centuries to bring it out; and how we should learn how to wait, and to see how things develop in the mind of God, that love is at work.
DP Is man after the order of Christ a better man than Adam in innocence?
JT Quite. Of course the Lord Jesus became a Man, and all was there in Him that was intended to be developed in man; all was there in Christ, the power to discern sin and to judge it.
Ques Does not the difference of the manhood seen in the Lord Jesus come out in the disciples’ words, “What manner of man is this, that even the winds and the sea obey him!” Matthew 8:27.
JT Just so. What a field there is before us as time goes on, if the Lord leaves us here to work it all out! What there is to be seen in Christ and in the assembly, that is to say, [p. 15] in ourselves!
TEH Properly speaking we have only the two men, the earthly, out of the earth, and the heavenly, out of heaven, have we not?
JT Just so.
AR Does Hebrews 2:5 refer to the millennium? It says, “For he has not subjected to angels the habitable world which is to come, of which we speak”.
JT Yes, the millennium is the world to come of which we speak. We are in the world in which the assembly is being formed, and the world to come is the millennial world.
Ques In the assembly we also speak of the new heavens and the new earth; is not our conversation about that world as well as the millennial world?
JT I think the millennial world is the thing that is in mind when it says, “of which we speak”.
ANW The footnote says that it was a known division amongst the Jews. Referring to that very expression, “the habitable world which is to come”, the note says: ‘A known division amongst the Jews. First’, this age ‘; and then what was to be introduced by the Messiah’. It confirms just what you are saying.
AR So that Hebrews 12 bears on the present time, does it?
JT Well, there are eight things mentioned, if you will read them.
AR “But ye have come to mount Zion; and to the city of the living God, heavenly Jerusalem; and to myriads of angels, the universal gathering; and to the assembly of the firstborn who are registered in heaven; and to God, judge of all; and to the spirits of just men made perfect; and to Jesus, mediator of a new covenant; and to the blood of sprinkling, speaking better than Abel”, Hebrews 12:22 - 24.
[p. 16] JT These are all things that will come out in formation in the world to come; that is what is in mind. They are being formed now, but they will come out perfectly, in full formation in the world to come. We have come to these things, the scripture says; it is a question now of seeing what they are and that we are to be in them, have part in them.
JTJr That is, the thing is already in our souls morally, in the assembly the thing is all there.
JT Just so. We have come to perfect things; not to half-made things but to perfect things. And we may come into them at any moment in full literality.
AR Does chapter 2 suggest that Christ is the centre of the whole system; the Man in heaven is the centre of everything?
JT That is so; you can see that Ephesians would work all that out, as part of the system. All these things are worked out in Ephesians.
ABP Are you carrying forward into Psalm 8 the thought of man and woman in the word Man? Does the question, “What is man?” embrace man and woman as the word ‘Man’ in Genesis does?
JT I think it embraces both. In Genesis God says, “Let us make man in our image ... and let them have dominion”. It is the plural immediately.
ABP So that is carried forward into Psalm 8?
JT Quite so, and then brought down to ourselves in Hebrews; brought down to our very selves.
FNW There is something that is not too clear to me yet as to the building of the woman. Is that included in the sixth day along with the making of man, or is that something additional?
JT Oh, I do not think so, it was all in the one day; it was the sixth day of creation.
FNW Chapter 2 then would be more the detail of the sixth [p. 17] day?
JT I think so; we shall have to go back and see what it says: “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the heavens, and over the cattle, and over the whole earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth on the earth”. Now go to the first verse of chapter 2; “And the heavens and the earth and all their host were finished. And God had finished on the seventh day his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and hallowed it, because that on it he rested from all his work which God had created in making it”, Genesis 2:1 - 3. Well, that is a finished matter.
ANW Verse 27 reads: “And God created Man in his image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them”, Genesis 1:27.
JT It is all there, it is in anticipation, but the second chapter has to be gone into to make the thing complete, because you get the title ‘Jehovah’ in the second chapter which you do not get in the first chapter. I mean to say that God has rights that He reserves in all that He has to say, and therefore we have to come into chapter 2 to see that the thing was completed; there was nothing to be added to it.
FNW And what you have read from the beginning of chapter 2 would show that God’s rest could not be secured until the woman was properly formed.
CAM I think you have said that chapter 2 was the filling out of the first.
JT That is a good way to put it. Surely God has a right to do that, giving, you might say, an outline first and then adding something else so that the thing is complete.
GH [p. 18] Genesis 2 speaks of moisture to moisten the whole surface of the ground in connection with the formation of man. Does this thought of moisture fit in with the present spiritual formation?
JT I suppose it does; after all, things are not all finished, not every man and woman has come in yet that is to come in as a Christian, so that we have to wait. But then God can take things up from His point of view and speak of them as finished, because He is God.
AR The fact of man in Psalm 8 including the woman is a great matter. The woman is included in Hebrews 2 also, is she not?
JT Just so.
JTJr So that Genesis 2 is not the filling out of the sun and moon, or of the earth itself, but of man. And so in Hebrews, the reference is to bring out that what God has in mind is man and woman, Christ and the assembly.
JT We come to that. It is a wonderful thing that we come to that eventually; the man and the woman; first the masculine in Christ, and then the feminine in the assembly; that is the feminine side of the truth.
AR Is that why the passage is added to by quoting Psalm 22, “In the midst of the assembly will I sing thy praises”? Hebrews 2:12.
JT Just so. There is a question therefore whether the eternal condition of things will include Israel as such because the idea in eternity is man and woman; that is the primary idea. The question is whether Israel will come into that, or whether it will be just a millennial idea. That is for the brethren to think about.
SW It was ever in the mind of God that there should be an affinity between the man and the woman, was it [p. 19] not?
JT That is right, mutual affinity.
S W. I was thinking of Exodus 2, “A man of the house of Levi”, and “a daughter of Levi”, Exodus 2:1. That can be worked out amongst us now.
JT Quite so.
ANW How far does the “all of one” go in verse 11? It says the Sanctifier and the sanctified are “all of one”, Hebrews 2:11. How far would you say that goes? I thought that perhaps it might have a link with Genesis 2 where there is that affinity.
JT We must be most careful about guarding the Person of Christ in all these things. It says, “For both he that sanctifies” — that is the Lord Himself, “and those sanctified” — those are ourselves, “are all of one”; that is, all of one kind as you might say, all of one kind. And yet the Lord Jesus is a divine Person and we are creatures. But then the thought is applied to us, “all of one”; you might add the word ‘kind’ to simplify it. But “all of one” is the word of Scripture. That is to say Christ and ourselves are all of one.
AN W. So much so that it goes on to say, “For which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren”.
JT Quite so, “... saying, I will declare thy name to my brethren”; Hebrews 2:11,12 those are the Lord’s own words to His Father in John 17:26.
Ques Where things are made subject to the Lord in verses 6 - 8 of Hebrews 2, the assembly is included in His position, is it not?
JT Quite so. And divine Persons are gracious enough to include us in the oneness with Him.
ABP Is not the deity of Christ guarded in Psalm 8 when it says, “When I see thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and stars, which thou hast established”? The sun is not referred to in that connection, it is the moon and [p. 20] the stars.
JT Just so, it makes way for Christ, regarding the sun as a type of Christ. That is what is on your mind, is it not?
ABP I thought the fact that the sun is not mentioned in relation to the work of the fingers would be a guarding of His Person.
JT Just so; the sun is needed to complete the system, the idea of the system; and what is needed is Christ Himself, He supplies what is needed.
SJM Would the fingers suggest the detailed working out of the thing, do you think? It does not say the hand.
JT Detail is good, quite so; and how much there is in the working out of God’s thoughts in the saints! What detail there is, what patience there is! And we are exhorted to “have patience, therefore, brethren, till the coming of the Lord”, James 5:7.