(1) CHRIST AS APOSTLE AND HIGH PRIEST
([p. 185] 1) CHRIST AS APOSTLE AND HIGH PRIEST
FER I suppose all the epistles go to make up the testimony. I think it follows upon that that every epistle must have its roots in the Old Testament and its bearing on the future. It is important to bear that in mind. The Scriptures are one complete whole, and the testimony of God is just as clear in the Old Testament as in the New. The one great point is the testimony — “Be not ... ashamed of the testimony of our Lord”.
Ques What is the aspect in the Hebrews?
FER Christ is the Apostle and High Priest — the true Moses and Aaron. Yet you get the Apostle, and at the same time He is the great Priest over the house of God. Then the thought of the house of God carries you on to the future, and at the same time it carries you back to the past.
JSO What did you mean by the ‘roots’?
FER Things are taken up in a new way in the New Testament, but the things are really found in the Old Testament. For the moment however, they are secured in that which is not seen in the Old.
PRM Would you say that is true of Colossians?
FER Yes, undoubtedly.
PRM You get the circumcision brought in.
FER And a great deal more; you get the head and the reconciliation of all things. It carries you back to the past.
Ques In what way to the past — the day of atonement?
FER I mean you must find some thought of the head in the Old Testament — the high priest is the head. You may divide the epistles into two classes — those which contemplate Christ coming [p. 186] out and those which contemplate Christ going in. Romans, Corinthians and Galatians, His coming out. Ephesians and Colossians contemplate Christ going in.
Ques What about Philippians?
FER I could not quite say at the moment. I quote the others because it is pretty plain there.
Dr. M. Would you get both in Hebrews — the coming in and going out?
FER Yes, quite so. Take Romans — there you have the mercy seat — that is coming out. Then in 1 Corinthians He is the wisdom and power of God — that is coming out. In Galatians, Christ is the true Isaac, the vessel of blessing to the gentiles — that is coming out. Now when you come to Colossians and Ephesians, it is really ‘going in’. So you “set your affection on things above ... God”, Colossians 3: 2.
SLJ In ‘coming out’ you mean coming out the first time?
FER I mean coming out in the revelation of God — as apostle.
SLJ Not as coming out in the future?
FER No. Because I think then He comes out as king and priest. He came down as apostle, but has gone up as priest.
C-IB What is the difference between the testimony at the present moment and the testimony in the Old Testament?
FER Not a bit of difference in the world.
C-IB What is the difference in the display of it?
FER It is not display, else it would not be testimony. Testimony is in contrast to display.
C-IB Was there a living testimony in the Old Testament?
FER There was a testimony, though it was not set forth in a living vessel, it was there. Now it is set forth in a living vessel. You get Christ dwelling in our hearts by faith. You could not get [p. 187] that in the Old Testament — that has to be a testimony living. In chapter 3 of this very epistle, you get Moses spoken of as being faithful for a testimony of the things which should afterwards be seen. He was a servant in God’s house for a testimony.
C-IB Then does the difference between Moses and the Son bring out the character of the testimony?
FER Now that the Son has come in, and you get Christ in the saints by the Spirit, you have, I think, the living vessel, that is, the church properly speaking.
If you take this chapter, it is as evident as possible that the epistle to the Hebrews has its roots in the Psalms. Almost every quotation through the epistle is from the Psalms, and almost entirely from Psalm 2 and Psalm 110. But there is another point connected with it — it all has its bearing on the future. I refer to the throne and Christ seated at the right hand of God until His enemies be made His footstool. It is perfectly astonishing what a comprehensive view of Christ you get in the Psalms. The first book of Psalms is full of Christ. You get Him brought into the world — “Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee”. Then, to mention nothing else, in Psalm 8, you get Him as the Son of Man. In Psalm 40, He is the Ark of the Covenant. In the second book of Psalms, He is ascended up on high, and led captivity captive, and you get the ascended Man who has given gifts to men preparing the way for God to dwell. Then you get the sure mercies of David in connection with Zion. Then in the fourth book He comes into David’s house, recognised as Jehovah. In the fifth book, He is exalted as Priest and is welcomed when He comes again. It is all perfectly orderly too. You get both ideas in the Psalms — the coming out and the going in. In Hebrews Christ comes out as apostle and goes [p. 188] in as priest.
JSO The difference in this dispensation is that the relationships are different.
FER Exactly; but then it is so very interesting to see that in this time of the rejection of Christ you get every divine thought taken up in the church. I think it is in the way of education, so that the saints may become conversant with every way of God — it is all to fit the saints for the heavenly city.
JSO They are learning now in Christ everything which is to come.
FER Everything which is to come out publicly, yes.
SLJ But the mass of us do not seem to learn it.
FER Then it is a poor look-out if we do not.
JSO So that everything which broke down in the past history of the Old Testament, in man, will come out in the future?
FER Yes; but then now it is that through the church might be known the manifold wisdom of God (Ephesians 3: 10).
C-IB In Revelation 11 you get “there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament”.
FER It is really Christ seen in heaven — the ark of the covenant secures everything. The testimony has left the earth but it is seen in heaven — everything is secured in the ark of the covenant in spite of all that prevails here. We have come to a day when there is a tremendous effort abroad to assail the Old Testament, and we have to be on the alert in regard to that. I think the great preservative is to apprehend in the Old Testament the testimony of the Christ which is just as plain there as in the New.
B So that in this chapter although the voice is different the testimony is exactly the same?
FER Yes; that is what made me say that every epistle has its roots in the Old Testament, in the light in which Christ is presented. For instance, if [p. 189] you take up one simple thing, the tabernacle of the testimony — it was there in figurative representation, but now you have the thing livingly — but you have the same thing.
JSO You could not possibly have the testimony of God inconsistent with itself.
FER Of course not.
Rem And when Christ came He testified of Himself.
FER Yes, quite so — “Ye search the scriptures ... witness of me”.
ED Would it be too much to say it was more latent in the Old Testament?
FER I would almost say it is all patent, now that we have the light of the New. Every book in the New Testament has its roots in the Old. I think you get the roots of Luke in Jeremiah and John in Ezekiel, Matthew and Mark in Isaiah. Matthew is connected with the first part, and Mark with the second part of Isaiah. I only suggest this, and am not dogmatising one single bit.
Ques You cannot therefore separate the Old Testament from the New?
FER No. It stirs my spirit indeed to see people who prefer to accept Christ in the New Testament and reject the Old.
C-IB “Son of man” is an expression which you get very frequently in Ezekiel. How does this apply in John?
FER The Son of Man is very prominent in John — “As Moses lifted up ... Son of man be lifted up” and “Who is this Son of man?” — “Hereafter ye shall see heaven open and ... Son of man”. I do not however want anybody to think I am laying it down as a fact, I only suggest it. You could not understand the Old Testament, if you had not got the New. In the time of the Old Testament, nobody ever questioned its authenticity. Now, its [p. 190] authenticity is questioned and you have got the New — but really the New is the key to unlock the Old. I think the preparation to meet the infidelity around is the intelligent understanding of the word of God — to see that one thought prevails throughout entirely, and that is the testimony of God. He expounded unto them in Moses and the Psalms and all the Prophets the things concerning Himself (Luke 24). Do not look for anything else in Scripture but Christ. In Revelation 19 you get “The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy”.
SLJ The question is not to meet the critics by working on their line, but to show what underlies the Old Testament.
FER They are as dark and ignorant as can be in regard to what underlies the Scriptures. The critics set forth that you can give up Scripture because you have got Christ. But then the point is this — you would have no authority for anything without the law and the testimony. They have no apprehension whatever of Christ as divine, and have got Him as a matter of history. How can you possibly know where Christ is now? You must have a living witness to it. The Spirit has come down to report the glory of Christ and everything hangs upon that. It was so on the day of Pentecost. The fact of the Spirit’s presence is witness to Christ — “He shall testify of me”.
MS Does not the Lord say, “The scriptures ... testify of me”?
FER Yes, but He meant the Old Testament Scriptures.
MS It has testified to me very often when nobody living was present.
FER But it was the Spirit who testified Christ to you.
ASL Does Scripture make this distinction between the Old Testament [p. 191] and the New?
FER The Lord said “he shall testify of me” and then “He will guide you into all truth”.
ASL But the Scriptures are one whole.
FER Yes, and every scripture is divinely inspired. It is a conventional distinction between the Old and the New Testament. I do not think we must allow anything whatever to prevent us from apprehending the peculiarity of the present time in contrast to the past — that which is dependent on the fact of redemption being accomplished, Christ being at the right hand of God, and the Spirit being here. What we call the New Testament is the new covenant and what we call the Old Testament is the old covenant, yet all is apprehended in the term “Scriptures”. God is now speaking through the Son (verse 2) and you could not have any speaker after the Son.
Ques What does the Spirit say?
FER “He shall testify of Me”. “He shall take of mine” and the record of that is the New Testament.
Ques If there is only one testimony what did the Lord mean by the “New Testament”?
FER He has made the first old. There is only one testimony — that is Christ.
Ques What is the testimony at the present time?
FER It is the ark of the covenant, but the curious thing is that in the ark of the covenant is the old covenant, and the tables of stone.
ASL There is no difference between “covenant” and “testament” is there?
FER No; but the tables were put into the ark of the covenant. “I come ... to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart”. You have the old secured in the new covenant. Christ came as the righteous One, but in virtue of redemption He is the new covenant; yet the old covenant is all secured there. The spirit and principle [p. 192] of the law is all perfectly secured there. The spirit and principle of the law is all perfectly secured in the ark of the covenant but now it is, of course, Christ as the new covenant.
DLL Then what was set aside and what became old was the bearing of it upon man in the flesh?
FER It was the formal system which became old.
ED Is that summed up in, “Christ is the end of the law”?
FER Yes; all the law is summed up in Him — “Thy law is within my heart”. The law was the expression of rights which properly belonged to God and which it was absolutely impossible for God to give up and even in regard to us, who have come into the new covenant, we really fulfil the requirements of the law.
JSO “Love is the fulfilling of the law”.
FER Exactly.
ASL So in the Psalms it comes out in regard to Christ “Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated wickedness”.
FER Yes. We have not to do with the law as a system, but we have to do with it in the sense that the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us in the power of the Spirit.
Ques Is there any testimony apart from the person of Christ?
FER No; but rather, I would say, from Christ — it is Christ officially. He is the divinely appointed Head of the moral universe. He is the Ark of the covenant, the Priest — the Head.
SLJ Do you make the ark as well as the tabernacle, Christ officially?
FER I think the ark is according to Psalm 40 “I come ... to do thy will, O my God ... thy law is within my heart”.
SLJ That is personally.
FER I think it is officially — He comes out accomplishing the will of God. He will give place [p. 193] to the will of God in the universe in the fact that everything is centred in Him.
PRM The tabernacle came under the anointing.
FER Yes. And you can look at the tabernacle in another point of view — as a figurative representation of the universe.
SLJ But will not Christ fill the universe?
FER Yes, but I think as the ark of the covenant.
B Do you take the anointing of the tabernacle to indicate that all will come under the influence of the Spirit?
FER Yes, the Spirit of God morally will influence everything.
B It shows the immense power of the Spirit.
JK Is that pouring out His Spirit on all flesh?
FER Yes, I think it is to subdue — all will come under the influence of God.
Ques Is there some answer to that now in the church — God working in you to the willing and doing of His good pleasure?
FER Yes, quite so.
Ques How do you understand “the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus”?
FER He is the Apostle — the One employed to inaugurate the profession. He comes out on the line of revelation.
Ques Where you say ‘coming out’ you do not mean Christ actually present on earth?
FER That is not so much the point, but Christ coming out to reveal God. He “was come from God, and went to God”. He came from God to reveal God’s mind and He went to God as Priest.
DLH Is it true that we always either get the revelation line or the going in line?
FER Yes, Scripture ranges itself on one of those two lines — revelation or approach.
Ques Would you say that Moses and Joshua were [p. 194] both apostles?
FER Oh no. Joshua had nothing to do with the setting up of the profession — it was all inaugurated by Moses.
JSO Joshua was more on the line of ‘going in’.
FER Yes. He took the people into the land.
JSO The great point in this chapter is God having spoken, is it not?
FER I think so — you get the Apostle.
JK Is there any difference between that and the Mediator?
FER I think the thought of the Mediator is not quite like Apostle. The Mediator brings God and man together.
ASL You speak of the Apostle as the one who inaugurated the profession and the Priest as the one who sustains it?
FER Yes, and the Priest is as great as the Apostle.
ASL Would you say that as the Apostle He is alone, and as the Priest He has companions?
FER As the High Priest He has a house — as Apostle He is alone.
ASL The One who is the Apostle is the object of worship.
FER He is entitled to worship. I think it would be a very poor thing if we were not entitled to worship Christ.
Ques Is it not important that the approach should be equal to the revelation?
FER I think it is extremely important. It is a wonderful thing that Christ has gone in. As Son He stands simply in relation to God. In another sense you can view Him as having been born in time and in that sense He has companions.
JSO In verse 8 He is saluted as Son, and in verse 9 it says “Thou hast loved ... companions”.
FER I think that has come in as what you may call the moral foundation of the [p. 195] throne. It is a throne established in righteousness and hatred of lawlessness.
ASL Do you look upon the companions (verse 9) as priests?
FER I could not tell exactly but I think it well to keep the thought of priests out of chapter 1. In chapter 1 Christ touches God; in chapter 2 Christ touches man, and then you get the thought of Priest brought in. The throne is established in a Man. It is not yet set forth but it is established in a Man and the basis of it is, “Thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity”.
ASL Is the approach on our part the approach of those who are priests?
FER No, the approach of those who are sons. We are priests because we are sons. All the revelation — the apostolic work — was done before even Christ became Priest. He could not be a Priest until He went to God when all the apostolic work was done. You must have the throne of God (verse 8). God must be the centre of influence holding everything in its place. You could not have any idea of a moral universe without that. Mr. Darby writes of it: ‘Our God the centre is’. It is the centre of a moral universe the influence of which holds everything in its proper orbit.
JK Is that the idea of the throne?
FER Yes.
SLJ That is eternal, is it not?
FER I think it is contemplated here in the world to come. It is eternal, but the world to come is the point of the epistle.