STRANGERSHIP
STRANGERSHIP
Exodus 18: 1 - 4; Hebrews 11: 8 - 16; Isaiah 56: 3 - 8
JT I was thinking of strangership, in a practical sense. It is well to keep it in mind that believers are so regarded, especially when surrounded by attractive creative features. Moses and Abraham are singled out in these scriptures as exponents of the thought. They both link up their strangership with their families, Moses, as it were, injecting the thought into the name of his son Gershom; he would be in the family, and the thought would be stamped upon the family. The naming of Gershom is spoken of in Exodus 2, and here: “For he said, I have been a sojourner in a foreign land” (verse 3). Abraham dwelt in tents with Isaac and Jacob, we are told, “the heirs with him of the same promise”, maintaining his strangership. It does not seem to have included Esau. Esau was a man of the field; he would not take on the thought. Young people do well to keep in mind these things, because the field is attractive, the country is attractive. According to Mark, the two who were going out, I suppose the same two as Luke speaks of as going to Emmaus, were “going into the country”, whereas Simon the Cyrenian was coming out of the country. But Moses comes first as illustrative of how a man’s faith and his principles are interwoven with his family. Joseph’s two boys also represented his faith and experience. These parents help to show how families of believers are maintained in the attitude of faith. “Manasseh” is ‘forgetfulness’. Joseph was enabled by God to [p. 143] forget his natural relationships. And then there is “Ephraim”, ‘fruitfulness’, showing that he was fruitful even in those circumstances, outside his natural relationships. Moses helps us as to those who have part in the service of God as strangers here, so that of his two sons, the one would be a constant reminder of his strangership, and the other of the power of God in that, “Eliezer” meaning ‘El is my help’.
Isaiah shows how those who accept strangership and limitations in a natural way, “the son of the alien” and “the eunuchs”, come in for better things than nature can afford in God’s house. So that we are “no longer strangers and foreigners, but ... fellow-citizens of the saints, and of the household of God”. Ephesians 2: 19.
HEF I judge that you think there is a danger that those who live in surroundings such as we are in might find difficulty in keeping up this thought of strangership.
JT If you grow up in a place, even though you may be a christian, you are apt to think you are of it. In a certain sense you are of it; God owns you as such. He recognises the Corinthians and the Galatians by their respective names, but that is only to bring out what He can bring about in a locality. For instance, “The assembly of Thessalonians in God the Father”, shows they were not in Thessalonica characteristically as of it but outside it as “in God the Father”. That is the balance.
HEF What would bring about the condition of strangership with us?
JT Hebrews shows how it came about with Abraham. It says, “By faith Abraham, being called, obeyed to go out into the place which he was to receive for an inheritance, and went out, not knowing where he was going. By faith he sojourned as a stranger in the land of promise as a foreign country,
[p. 144] having dwelt in tents with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise; for he waited for the city which has foundations, of which God is the artificer and constructor”. I suppose obedience is the thing. We know there was more than that, for the God of glory appeared to him there: that is, God reveals Himself, and reminds you in one way or another that this is not your place, however fair it may seen to be — “thy land, and ... thy kindred, and ... thy father’s house”, Genesis 12: 1.
FD Is our experience something like Daniel’s? We are found in a country, not our own, and we really belong to another scene. His exercise was that he should not defile himself.
JT Quite so; and he opened his windows three times a day, and prayed towards the place that belonged to him. Our windows are opened towards heaven. The Lord Jesus lifted up His eyes to heaven, and prayed, and said, “Father!”
HEF I suppose what was of the greatest value to Moses was in another country.
JT Of course he fled from Egypt; he was known as an Egyptian in Midian; but he was not known at all. The fact is, the world knows us not. Jethro’s daughters thought he was an Egyptian, but in truth he was an Israelite. He had recognised his brethren in Egypt, and by so doing had got into trouble, and fled. He was coming into his calling: he was thoroughly Israelitish in his birth and calling but not in his upbringing, for he was brought up in Pharaoh’s house; but he came into his proper setting, to his brethren, Abraham’s seed. He came out to look upon his brethren; he accepted the reproach of Christ.
HEF Although he broke down, he was thoroughly committed to that people, and to the God of that people.
AH It says of him, “Esteeming the reproach”. Do we lack in that, in having an estimation of that which is associated with what God has honoured?
JT Quite so: it was “the reproach of Christ”, too.
FWW So the stranger got great blessing by keeping near the people of God; that is to say, he would be sharing their reproach.
JT He does not isolate himself: he cannot sustain himself in isolation. Is that what you have in mind?
FWW Yes, and there are scriptures which speak of him as being linked up with the people in the feasts — “thy stranger that is within thy gates”.
JT Moses went out to look on his brethren.
AH Referring again to the country: I suppose you would say that where, in the government of God, a brother’s circumstances are set, the Lord would help him, and all in such circumstances; but as leaving the city and coming into the country as an objective, he would hardly expect divine support in that?
JT Quite so. There is a good deal of that in the large cities. We can, perhaps, have sympathy with young families and their parents; yet it is a challenge to us whether we are going into the country, or coming out of the country, as going back into that city where God’s testimony is. Emmaus, I suppose, would have been a comfortable place compared with Jerusalem; but the manifestation of Christ set the two in movement back to the city, not for its own sake, for the country is safer for young people than the city as a place of the concentration of evil; but if God has something in the city, as He had at that time in Jerusalem, that is the place to go to.
SBF It says of the Levites that they dwelt in the cities.
JT That was part of their inheritance, viewed from the standpoint of Hebrews 11. They had [p. 146] forty-eight cities ordered for them by God as their inheritance; and also the sacrifices formed part of their inheritance. They were able to maintain their heavenly calling in that way; they had no part in what was of the earth in that sense.
JHB You referred to Exodus 2 in connection with the name given when Moses’ son was born — Gershom — how he said, “I have been a sojourner in a foreign land”. In saying that, would he include the period which he spent in Egypt?
JT I think that he alludes to Midian. I should not think, however, that he regarded Egypt as his land; but Israel was then there; it was still the time, as you might say, of forgetfulness. Joseph began the history in Egypt by calling the first of his sons, ‘forgetfulness’, forgetting the natural; then there was fruitfulness notwithstanding. I should think Moses would be on that line yet. That is, it is the position of Christ among the gentiles today, where He is not at all linked up with His “father’s house” naturally. Israel; that is forgotten — a very touching thing for us. Joseph said that God had made him to forget his father’s house, involving an actual change of state in the man — a remarkable thing; and there is fruitfulness in that position of forgetfulness. That is our position. We are forgetful in the light of Christ; and the history of Ephraim would show that fruitfulness has the first place with God. Moses would be on that line: that was the place of forgetfulness, although the promises would come into his mind. He was brought up in Egypt in Pharaoh’s house, being called an Egyptian by Jethro’s daughters, for the world knows us not. It was a complex state in Moses — as in every one of us — because he had some light as to the calling, and the promises made to the fathers.
JHB I was thinking of the fact that he said, “I have been a sojourner”, not exactly ‘I am’.
JT That had been his experience; it is an experience we need to cultivate.
JHB I was thinking that he had come to identify himself fully with the people of God as a chosen people. He would take a spiritual retrospect of his time in Egypt, and instead of glorying in it, as a man would naturally, because of what had attached to him in Pharaoh’s court, he views it as only a place of sojourning and strangership. He would no longer glory in anything connected with the circumstances in which he had been, but would be as much in his mind a stranger in thinking of it as the children of Israel.
JT You could by extension bring all that into it. What does he say in Midian in Exodus 2? “I have been a sojourner in a foreign land”. That would undoubtedly mean that Midian was not his own land — immediately, anyway. He had never been in any other but Egypt as far as facts go; so whether he regarded Egypt as foreign is a question; so long as Israel was there, it was still the time of the 400 years of Genesis 15; it includes the whole period from Abraham down to the exodus. It was always that. Even Abraham himself was a stranger in all that. So by extension it is so: strangership attaches to the whole position. But Joseph’s exercise is different; it modifies that because he is going to forget in Egypt his father’s house. We get in him the history of Christ as at the present time. He is forgetful of his father’s house; yet there is fruitfulness. So the gentiles would be fruit for Christ in His forgetfulness. Joseph does not call it a foreign land. Typically the gentile world is Christ’s now. We read in Genesis 41, in connection with the naming of Manasseh, “For God has made me forget all my toil, and all my father’s house”; and then, as to Ephraim, “For God has caused me to be fruitful in the land of my affliction”. It is not strangership with him, but [p. 148] forgetfulness of what is natural, and fruitfulness in that forgetfulness. Moses’ realisation of strangership was in Midian.
WM Does the name he gives his second son suggest the gain he got from strangership; firstly, in the knowledge of God, and, secondly, in salvation from the world power?
JT Quite so: “The God of my father has been my help”; and he comes back to the thought of his deliverance from Egypt when the second son is born. The first son only is mentioned in Exodus 2, but the second son here is regarded as symbolising God: the word ‘Eliezer’ means ‘El is my help’, and he says, “The God of my father has been my help, and has delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh”. So that there are the two things, the one in Joseph is forgetfulness: God does that; He enables one’s state to be changed, and one’s outlook, and then in that forgetfulness there is fruitfulness. And Moses has in strangership the realisation of divine help, God effecting deliverance from Egypt. Egypt had now become adverse; at least it was so in Pharaoh before Moses left it. But the present bearing of it all is the acceptance of strangership; it involves the support of God, and deliverance from the moral elements in the world. There are the creative conditions that are good in themselves. God gives us all things richly to enjoy, that applies to these country places in measure. But then there are moral elements. Heaven delivers us from the natural, the merely good things of earth; but the moral thing is what we need to be delivered from particularly; and Moses says, God is my help for that! “... And has delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh”.
BF What particularly have you in mind as to the sword of Pharaoh, and as to what is moral?
JT I was linking up the whole system of Egypt with it. In Exodus it was a question of God’s power.
Moses specifies “the sword” which would be Pharaoh’s vengeance on himself, if he could execute it.
FI So being linked up with the moral side, in connection with what the world takes on, really means in relation to us death from the point of view of what is spiritual?
JT Yes; God has made the country wonderfully; it is for His pleasure, and in due time it will come into it in a way as part of the general inheritance, as Canaan was to be for Abraham, but the acceptance of it now tends to death.
Ques You used the expression ‘injecting it into his family’; is that a challenge to us particularly as having children growing up?
JT I think it is, because Egypt is a starting-point of family deliverance. The word was, “And delivered our houses”, Exodus 12: 27. Moses had that in mind undoubtedly in naming his sons. The faith of the father would permeate the family in these two names. You would not go to the world to borrow names. The distinction of the children would be in carrying the idea of the father’s faith. Of course the names distinguish them; names are arbitrary now.
Rem So that if we have taken up strangership for ourselves, it would be a challenge to us as to whether we are prepared to maintain it with regard to our children.
JT Every time Moses looked on Gershom, he would be reminded of his early days, of what feelings he had, say, in Midian. He was alone there having fled from the face of Pharaoh; he sat by the well, and these women came to have their flocks watered. We can all understand how strangership would be in his soul. His brethren were not there. There is never much said of Zipporah: Moses is perfectly subservient to Jethro, but there is never much intimated as to affection between him and Jethro, or even between him and Zipporah. It is all a state of [p. 150] things that is not final, a tentative state of things. And Moses would always hanker for the full thought of the divine family; so that when he had sons born to him, they, of course, are that; they would have their father stamped upon them. So when they were going out of Egypt — if we take Egypt to be a place of strangership, they would be intelligent and feeling in what they were doing. It is well to have children intelligent, ‘What does my name mean, father?’ would be a good question for the children to ask. Moses would say, That name means ‘strangership’.
Ques Would it be sustained by dwelling in tents, as we read in Hebrews 11?
JT Exactly; in that connection Abraham dwelt in tents with Isaac and Jacob. It is significant that it does not say a word about Esau, because he was a field man, a cricket man, a tennis man; he did not enter into this. He would view Isaac and Jacob from that standpoint.
SBF Moses had God’s promises to the fathers; in that connection he went to look on his brethren. His heart was somewhat linked up with the brethren.
JT Quite so; that is what we are told about him. It is wonderful the way the Spirit of God clothes his movement as accepting reproach; it was the reproach of Christ as well because the reproach of Christ would be the reproach under which his brethren were at that time. They were slaves; they were looked down on in Egypt.
AH It would appear that Moses’ two sons went back with Zipporah to Midian and remained there. They did not have the experience of going out of Egypt with the children of Israel.
JT In Exodus 18 we see Zipporah and her two sons, and her father too, coming in favourably, as moving now toward the people of God. They had not passed through the Red Sea; they had not had Egyptian experience at all; that is another matter.
[p. 151] This refers to the work of God by itself, for the work of God in you as you leave the world is regarded by itself. These four persons were an addition to the camp here. They did not come through the Red Sea, but they were a positive addition.
HEF You mean by that, I judge, that we can take account of the work of God in us from that standpoint.
JT Quite so; that leads up to the marital position of the assembly viewed as Eve.
HEF You mean it is the light of it coming into our souls at that point?
JT Quite so; because typically the Spirit had come in in the previous chapter through the smiting of the rock, meaning that the Spirit came in through the sufferings of Christ, and has eternity in view. With the Spirit comes Joshua for the first time, a most interesting thing, for Joshua represents Christ in view of eternity, involving a most spiritual standpoint.
HEF Then this is the beginning of what you have spoken so much of as the marital thought?
JT Yes, and as linked on with the final thought.
HEF So it comes in early in the history, but is not developed yet?
JT Quite so, because the covenant was not yet formally set up. The marital thought is there, but alongside of it, and preceding it from chapter 17, is Joshua. Joshua runs through, entering into Canaan, representing Christ viewed wholly from the spiritual standpoint.
HEF So, while that thought might come into our minds early in our seasons together, it is not perhaps definitely followed out at that point.
JT You say, ‘perhaps’; you mean it may not be, but it may be, too. As types, Zipporah and the two sons go through Jordan, but there is no water in Jordan when Israel goes through.
[p. 152] HEF What I meant is that we do not exclusively follow that thought up; other things come in, too.
JT Yes, indeed; and, of course, the marital thought covers much more than Zipporah here, as Moses’ wife. What you bring in is well to notice. We have the beginning of the eternal state of things. Moses does not represent that, and all Jethro contributed did not represent that, because he was helping Moses from the standpoint of government. But Joshua and the family, these two boys, represent spiritual experience that would abide.
HEF So you bring in the two thoughts, the two boys and Joshua.
JT That is right, and, of course. Jethro himself has a place here. He is remarkable. It is a source of a great river which branches out. The side of authority is seen in Moses and Jethro recognises it; the wifely thought is set forth in Zipporah, and the family thought in the two sons. These go through, the wifely thought and the family thought. Joshua represents the spiritual element governing all that which will gradually increase.
WCC In that connection, would you have Rahab too?
JT She comes in, but she does not go through Jordan even. It is the work of God again, on a higher plane. The testimony is cumulative; we have to watch all these elements coming in as threads in the whole fibre. Some disappear, for Moses does not go into the land; but others do, especially Joshua, because he represents Christ viewed spiritually, not authoritatively.
Now, coming to Isaiah, we have persons who accept their strangership: “the son of the alien, that hath joined himself to Jehovah”, and then the eunuch who says he is a dry tree, but there are the modifying allusions which fortify them in the new place, “The eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and [p. 153] choose the things that please me, and hold fast to my covenant, even unto them will I give in my house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off. Also the sons of the alien, that join themselves to Jehovah, to minister unto him and to love the name of Jehovah, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from profaning it, and holdeth fast to my covenant; even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer; their burnt-offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar: for my house shall be called a house of prayer for all the peoples”. Isaiah 56: 4 - 7. That is wonderful for us! The son of the alien and the eunuch are both under limitations outwardly and publicly; but they are brought into God’s house, and the sons of the alien that keep the sabbaths, and hold fast to the covenant, are brought to the holy mountain as well. That is an abiding thing.
Rem This would be a particular encouragement to young people who have the experience of seeing much of what they would naturally look for dried up.
JT That is the way young people speak if they are unspiritual. What are we getting out of all this? We want to go into the world a bit!, and that sort of thing. This chapter is for them.
FI So keeping the sabbaths, and holding fast to the covenant is not the end; it is in being brought to the holy mountain.
JT That is the thought, which is an abiding one, alluding, I suppose, to Exodus 15: 17, “Thou shalt bring them in, and plant them in the mountain of thine inheritance”.
HEF Would you say a word as to keeping the sabbaths and holding fast to my covenant, as leading on to the holy [p. 154] mountain?
JT I think the sabbath is mentioned for the first time formally in Exodus 16. Of course, it is mentioned indirectly in Genesis 2: but for the believer it comes first in Exodus. We are brought into it. It is first mentioned in relation to Christ as the manna, and it is stressed later in view of the material for the house, and with a view to what is introduced in those chapters following Exodus 25. It would mean one is able to rest in faith in a spiritual environment. Naturally I would like the world; I would like to absorb from the world, and keep in touch with all that is current in the world. People sit down in the evenings, and spend their time with the paper, the novel, the histories: they absorb all these things. They absorb the world, and become formed in that, I think keeping the sabbath would mean that I would absorb God’s world. It becomes part of me.
HEF You are restful in another system.
JT It would mean that I read the Scriptures, pray, meditate, get to the meetings, of course; but especially that in quietness and restfulness of spirit I absorb all the wonderful things God has brought in in Christ. The pattern shown on the mount is all in relation to that. The keeping of the sabbath is greatly stressed in this part of Exodus.
HEF I am greatly interested in that reference to keeping the sabbath preceding the bringing of the materials for the tabernacle, as though bringing the materials would be dependent on our being restful in that system.
JT Quite so. You absorb.
HEF So you have not only got the thing objectively, but the thing is formed in your soul.
JT Quite so: you take it on.
FWW Does Moses coming to the mount of God suggest that?
JT Israel encamped there, too, it is divine provision, a place of divine resources. You [p. 155] take them in.
HEF What about holding fast “my covenant”?
JT For us, that is the Lord’s supper; we come into the thought of covenant. It is an elementary thought, but it is stabilising. You are holding your relations with God firmly in the covenant; it is your side.
EHF Would “choose the things that please me” be on the line of waiting for a city?
JT What am I going to choose? It is a question of refusing, and choosing, Moses being the great leader.
FGB Does that come out in Abraham sitting at his tent door in the heat of the day, perhaps the most testing time of the day? Was he absorbing in the right sense, looking for a city?
JT He was not taking a siesta; he does not go and lie down and have a sleep, not that that is wrong for an old person, but Abraham as denying himself gets the benefit. What happens? Three persons came to him. One being Jehovah: and they waited for him to absorb what was there, you might say; they sat and waited under a tree, while he prepared for them. What history was being made by Abraham at that time!
FGB I was wondering whether fasting comes in with regard to what is natural in the way of sleep.
JT It is brought in to show he might have been doing that, and he was denying himself; it is the principle of fasting.
ALV We are told just previous to that, that Abraham circumcised his household the selfsame day.
JT That is right! he was making history. No chapters present the history of Abraham more than those chapters, the matter of circumcision, and then his being wide awake at his tent door.
AH In Isaiah 56, what emphasis there is on the word ‘My’!
JT What is for God [p. 156] is honoured.
HEF In the Supper, we see how divine Persons have committed Themselves to the matter, and the holding fast to “my covenant” would be that we thoroughly commit ourselves to them.
JT That is the idea. You are at the Lord’s supper as the expression of love to Christ. We might regard what we get here as suggesting the principle of covenant. There is the thought of the principle of covenant in the Scriptures, apart from the new covenant which has its own force. But the principle of covenant runs right through Scripture, and enters into christianity. You get the principle of covenant in Romans, because you commit yourself in baptism; and in Corinthians, you commit yourself in the Lord’s supper.
HEF As putting forth my hand to the loaf, and as putting forth my hand to the cup, I commit myself.
Rem Like the lame man holding Peter and John?
JT That is the principle.
HEF What you say as to the difference between the principle of covenant and the new covenant literally is very helpful.
JT The principle of covenant really begins in Eden. Adam transgressed it, but it was there. Israel transgressed it, like Adam (Hosea 6: 7). Adam’s blessing depended on his remaining in it, holding fast to it, but he did not remain. In fact, the principle of covenant goes back to the physical creation.
WCP It is what God provides?
JT And it is that in which He looks for our affections to be active. What are we if we are not moral beings with affections in activity?
HEF Would you say the terms of the covenant are varied, that they are not always the same?
JT On God’s side there is no change. It is the very best God can be to you, and propose to you, and commit Himself to with regard to you. But then [p. 157] He wants you to come into it. What value can it be if you do not? That is the point here — those who hold fast: what you get if you are brought to this holy mountain!
JHB Is it a question here of persons who are at great disadvantage compared with others? If we take up the position at all, of being those who desire to do the will of God, we are relatively at a great disadvantage; but as we go in for those things that please God, we find He will give us what is far better than what we might have naturally, or positionally.
JT Very good, “The things that please me” — reconciliation underlies that. Your instincts move in that direction. You are steady in what pleases God. You ask, Does this please God?
JHB So we do not get discouraged because we are at some disadvantage compared with others, but we follow the example of these eunuchs, or aliens, and find we can get something better than the best we could have on natural lines.
JT I believe from the outset and at every stage of the believer’s life, the thought of being under limitations attaches to him. He thinks he is under limitations as not being spiritual; he is at a disadvantage if he goes to school, or to business; right along to the end of his life everything is against him, at least in measure from the natural point of view; but if he goes through with God (one can speak of it with the utmost confidence from one’s own experience) he is better off in every way as choosing what pleases God. If you are a salesman, He will help you to make a sale; if you are a student, He will help you to study. If you are married, He will support you in your married life. There is not a thing that He cannot come down to in relation to our natural lives to make us prosper.
FWW Is it on the line of forsaking father and mother, and so on? Compensation comes [p. 158] in.
JT That is more material compensation; but in all things godliness is profitable for everything. No one really loses who brings God into his affairs; whether it be school, or business, or married life, God is with him, so that he cannot suffer. But here it is a spiritual result, a name better than of sons and daughters, for “the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths”. “Also the sons of the alien, that join themselves to Jehovah ... even them will I bring to my holy mountain”, and so on. “My holy mountain” refers to what is stable and abiding; He brings them to his house too, which is a provisional state of things while we are down here, but in it we get joy; we are made glad in it. We are burdened in regard to our prayer meetings, of course, but God makes us glad in them. That is the only meeting, as far as I know, of which God speaks in that way, the Monday night meeting. Many stay away because it is Monday; they say, We come out all the rest of the week. But if they, especially sisters, leave out the meeting for prayer, they miss this gladness which God provides.
EHF All this, I suppose, would be God-ward. Does God bring in the thought of fellowship in verse 8, in contrast to strangership? “Yet will I gather others to him, with those of his that are gathered”.
JT There again we meet it; we are limited; we do not get many converts, but here is a further promise, “The Lord Jehovah, who gathereth the outcasts of Israel, saith: Yet will I gather others to him, with those of his that are gathered”.
HFS Is the thought continued in the son of the stranger? You were mentioning earlier that the names Moses gave to his sons denoted the exercises and spiritual decision he had come to; would the name given by the Lord to those who chose the things that please Him indicate the thoughts of love and purposes of love which are in the heart of the [p. 159] Lord?
JT He receives an eternal portion. God brings out to us what His thoughts are, continued in a scene where there is nothing seen outwardly: “An everlasting name”, which is better than any name of great men, filling the world with their glory just for a few days or years. This is an everlasting name; one’s distinction goes into eternity.
BW Would the burnt-offerings and sacrifices suggest spiritual wealth? In all these circumstances you would be gaining spiritual wealth.
JT You could not offer them if you did not have them. It suggests that though under great limitations, you can carry on the service of God, and He will accept it. God is helping us greatly on these lines. Think of these great cathedrals and churches which require such paraphernalia for the service of God! Is God accepting them? What good are they even? God would say to some of them, The cattle upon a thousand hills are mine, and, “I do not know you”. But here are people who are accepted; “Their burnt-offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar”, meaning, you are thoroughly in accord with God’s system of things; you are following right principles — “Mine altar”, and “my house”.
WM What is suggested in, “A place and a name better than of sons and daughters”?
JT It is over against the thought of families here, that is for the eunuchs. That is not fruitfulness as man would regard fruitfulness. God is giving them something better than that.
WFM You mean, “sons and daughters” refer to unfruitfulness on natural lines.
JT Joseph had fruitfulness otherwise, because he would forget his father’s house.
JHB Is it something like the overcomer in Philadelphia being made “a pillar in the temple of my God”?
JT That is the thought, “the temple of my God”.
WM He refers to “my new name” being written on him.
JT The name is like the name here.
WM Like the everlasting name.