DIVINE WRITING
DIVINE WRITING
JT There are two divine ways of communication; speaking and writing. God spoke before He wrote. Speaking necessarily comes before writing. In creation God’s voice is heard; Psalm 19 shows this. “There is no speech and there are no words, yet their voice is heard”, Psalm 19:3. God had a voice in the creation for man. Writing necessitates material, and I think this epistle to the Corinthians shows that God has now found the suitable material on which to write.
Ques Do you mean that the speaking produced the material?
JT The speaking is an objective thought. Speech, we may say, is for the moment; but a writing is permanent. Therefore I think that God wrote on the tables so as to leave the declaration of His will among men permanently. The voice in the creation reminded man of His eternal power and divinity; all it does is to suggest certain things. The creation is a sort of index to the spiritual world, so that men are set in motion by its suggestions, exercise is produced, and nothing is perhaps more interesting in the physical world than the variety it suggests — infinite variety.
Rem If the creation of the world suggests variety, then we may expect variety in the new world?
JT Yes; man has had nothing to do with the creation of the heavens and the earth; God has done it to suggest, so to speak, what is in His mind for His pleasure.
In regard to resurrection, what comes to light is that God gives to it a body as He pleases, 1 Corinthians 15:38. There will be a world out of death, and this [p. 275] will be marked by variety; it will be for God’s pleasure.
Rem In what is coming in there will be the heavenly and the earthly.
JT Yes; there are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies. “There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon”, 1 Corinthians 15:41. There is variety in flesh, too: “one flesh is of men, and another flesh of beasts”; all indicating the variety of things that is in God’s mind in regard to His world. I think creation is an indication of that.
Ques How do you connect the writing with that?
JT I was speaking of the voice that God has in creation. In order to write you must have material, and I think that the first writing of God on the tables of stone showed the character of man’s heart; it was hard and unimpressionable. There was no suitable material for Him to write on. It was touching that Moses came down from the mount with the writing, and the tables were written on both sides, “written with the finger of God” (Exodus 31:18); as if God were saying that He would write all He could for man.
Ques Do you mean that the stone on which God wrote was an indication of the state of man’s heart?
JT Yes, it was unimpressionable and unsympathetic with what was written upon it, whereas the renewed heart is sympathetic and impressionable. It is most touching to think of Moses coming down with the tables in his hands. He knew well what he had was God’s mind for the people, but they were unprepared for the divine writing, and hence he broke the tables of stone; but still you have there the thought of God to place amongst men permanently, the transcript of His mind, but He intimates in the using of the stone that the right material was not there. Israel were no ordinary stones; Israel had been taken up and cultured by [p. 276] God; and the stone had been formed by God Himself.
Ques They were the tables of stone?
JT Yes; but God formed them Himself; that is to say, He had wrought upon Israel: they were in God’s culture, they had had great advantages, but the tables of stone intimated the character of the heart of man even under divine culture and care.
Ques What is the thought of their being put into the ark?
JT The tables represent the divine law, but I was thinking of the material of the tables; the writing was precious. The ark was typical of Christ. He took up the law and put it into His heart; His heart was not stone. The ark was typical of Christ in that respect, that He had the law of God in His heart.
Rem It was the ministration of death and condemnation.
JT I was speaking of the material on which God wrote; if Israel had had renewed hearts, God would not have written on the stones. He wrote on the stones, because there was nothing better, and the stones intimated the character of man’s heart.
Rem It was as unimpressionable to grace as to law. When the Lord was here He wrote on the ground, and His whole ministry of grace made no difference on man.
JT Quite so. I think the Lord’s first writing on the ground in John 8, put man out. He stooped down and wrote, and then He stoops again, and when He rises they had all gone out; the first writing put man out; and the second writing, in principle, retains man. The woman is retained in the Lord’s presence, and the Lord says to her, “Neither do I condemn thee”, John 8:11. The second writing, I think, refers to His death. In His death He established a ground [p. 277] on which man might remain before God — man without sin.
Rem On the principle of law man must go, but if he is to be retained it is on the principle of grace.
JT Quite so, and the Lord’s second writing on the ground refers to His death. How could He retain man otherwise?
Rem His death put the first man out.
JT But they went out. His word, which referred to the law, convicted them. I think their going out is not the thought of man being removed from God’s eye judicially; they were convicted and went out. But after writing the second time He asks, “Has no one condemned thee?”, John 8:10. No one is left, but Himself, but He is going into death. He is the only One who had title to condemn, but instead of condemning He writes, and that indicated His death.
Ques God has spoken in the last days in Son. What is the connection?
JT That is objective, but He left something here on earth in writing.
Ques Is it the speaking that produces that?
JT It is by the Spirit of the living God. But we must have the heart of flesh, otherwise grace would have effected nothing, any more than law, because grace was there in Christ, and it only produced hatred, hence there must be a heart of flesh. God speaking is objective, but what I see is that God has written, and He has left the writing here as it were. It works out in christian affection.
Rem Ye are the epistle of Christ.
JT Yes. Now you get what is responsive. Paul shows what the thing means; he says, “Ye are our letter, ... known and read of all men”.
Ques They were written in his heart. How does that work out [p. 278] now?
JT He indicates what the writing meant; that is, they were in his heart, and he says, “Ye are our letter, ... known and read of all men”. Then he goes on to say what they were; they were Christ’s letter.
Ques There are then two thoughts in it?
JT I think the first is that the Corinthians were Paul’s letter written in his heart, not in their hearts, but in his heart. Wherever he went he spoke well of them.
Rem The Lord would have the principle hold good for us in affection for the saints, carrying them about in our hearts.
JT I think that is what is meant by “Ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ”. Paul had the saints in his heart; that is the thing to get hold of. You will never understand the second epistle unless you see that Paul is formed after Christ; he had affections similar to Christ. Christ had the saints in His heart, so that He died for them.
Rem Then he wants to bring them into line with himself.
JT Yes. The second epistle of Corinthians is the restorative epistle, and therefore the importance of the writing. The feature in the first epistle was that the apostle could not come to them, because if he came, it would have meant judgment. He loved them so much that he did not come. Now Moses did come into the camp. It was impossible for Moses to have remained away, because idolatry was actually set up. With the Corinthians it was not quite so bad as that, but they were getting into that condition, so Paul did not come into their midst. He stayed away in order to give them the opportunity to repent. With Israel the condition in the camp was so bad that the only thing for Moses was to come into their midst in judgment, but in Corinth [p. 279] things were not quite so bad, and instead of judgment there was restoration. The two epistles correspond with the two givings of the law in the book of Exodus.
Rem It was out of affection that Paul did not go.
JT That is the point. Paul was there formed after Christ. He says, so to speak, ‘It is out of affection for you that I have not come’. The first epistle corresponds with Moses coming down the first time. He had set the people up under law, under the first covenant; he had left the divine injunctions with them, and he went up into the mount. In that way they were tested. The question was whether they could obey during the absence of the mediator. The first epistle to the Corinthians is on that ground. The apostle had left the Corinthians, but had left with them the divine commandments, and the question was whether they had kept the commandments. He could not come to them. Paul was prepared to come in with the divine thoughts. Moses came down from the mount with wonderful thoughts; he had all the divine light in regard to Christ set forth in the tabernacle, but he could not come into the camp with it because they were not prepared for it. Think of all the wonderful things as to Christ that God had in His mind to set forth, all that was to be communicated to the people, but their state was too bad. So it is today; if there is not loyalty of heart to Christ, you will not get the light of God’s counsel; you will not come into the good of headship.
Rem If we are to know anything of the privileges to which we are called, the foundations must be right.
JT I think so. If we cannot obey we are not prepared for headship. Headship involves the opening up of divine wisdom and counsel, and Moses had that in his possession when he came down from [p. 280] the mount, but Israel was deprived of it all on account of their state. It is a serious thing to be wanting in affection to Christ, for if we are wanting in it we disregard His commandments, and then we get no light, and consequently we do not get the good of His headship.
Ques What does headship imply?
JT It means the opening up of God’s mind. You see it in figure in David communicating to Solomon all the details of the temple. Solomon had only to carry out the directions left by David. Israel never got the good of headship until David was recognised as king. It is when he is recognised as king, not only at Hebron, but by all the tribes, that he brings up the ark, and then he opens up the divine thoughts in regard to the house of God.
Rem The close of his life had reference to the building of the house of God?
JT Yes, he gives all the instructions to Solomon. Solomon has only to carry them out.
Ques Does that come out in the second epistle to the Corinthians?
JT The second epistle shows that the people were restored. Instead of going into the camp, like Moses, Paul had stayed away in affection for them. The result was their recovery. The first point of recovery is in the Son; the Son is the point of recovery. Paul shows them that God’s faithfulness is in the Son. He shows that the Son of God is not yea and nay. It is a question of faithfulness being in a Person in the relation of the Son, so that the affections of the saints are so touched that recovery comes in. Departure takes place in the heart; “thou hast left thy first love”, Revelation 2:4.
Ques Why does he begin with glory?
JT The second epistle answers to the second giving of the law. The first epistle had reference to the first giving of the law. Moses was actuated by [p. 281] the Spirit of Christ, and he had to come in in judgment. Paul, too, was actuated by the Spirit of Christ. Moses stood in the breach, and he asked to be blotted out of God’s book instead of the people. That is the Spirit of Christ. Paul was actuated by the same spirit, so he remained away, for he knew if he came into their midst it would be judgment. The second giving of the law is what we have here; so we have the shining of Moses’ face. Moses pleads for the people and God reveals His name, and then He acts in sovereign mercy; so when Moses comes down the second time his face is shining. Moses was Christ in figure and prevails with Jehovah; God comes out in mercy, so Moses’ face shines.
Ques “Hew thee two tables of stone”, Exodus 34:1. Is that what you mean?
JT Yes; the second tables are formed by Moses. There would be a new covenant, and the second giving of the law pointed to the new covenant. The second giving of the law was not the same as the first. The second tables were made by Moses and his face was shining. There was the mixture of grace in the second giving of the law.
Rem They were then in a condition to receive divine communications.
JT Yes; after Christ has obtained His place in our hearts we are in condition to be led on. The second epistle prepares us for headship. “We all, looking on the glory of the Lord, with unveiled face, are transformed according to the same image”. That involves that you are won by Christ; your heart is captured.
Rem That is very beautiful; there is no such thing as getting an apprehension of things unless we know what individual contact with Christ is in the affections of our hearts.
JT I think so. This epistle is a question of recovery; everything is on that principle now, so [p. 282] this epistle is exceedingly interesting, and the point of recovery is affection. If God wins your heart He will do something with it. What God wants is men’s hearts. He wants the suitable material on which to write. He wants to write on them by the Spirit.
Ques Is there a connection between the first and second part of chapter 3, in this, that it is by occupation with Christ in glory that the transformation takes place?
JT But you get more than the writing; you get the writing in the first part of the chapter and you get the order of man in the second. We are all looking at the same thing, and we are changed into the same image. That is not His image, though that is involved, but we all become alike and we are of the same order, as He is, and that is more than writing.
Rem I had not seen that before; we are changed into the same image.
JT God has brought to pass here a race that are all alike, and that is brought to pass by beholding the glory of the Lord.
Ques “Not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God”. Is that the Spirit writing Christ on the heart?
JT I think so.
Rem Stephen “looked up stedfastly”, Acts 7:55.
JT Yes. The word “same” is very important; it lays the basis for unity: similarity renders unity possible; we are all changed into the same image.
Rem It is the writing on the heart that produces it.
JT First of all God gets your heart. If God gets your heart He will write upon it. You will be marked by interest in His people, you are concerned about the saints, you love the saints; that is the writing of Christ.
Ques What is “beholding the glory?”
JT You are now engaged with Him. He is an object to your heart, and therefore you are changed from glory to glory. Marvellous thought! A race of men upon earth formed in that way all after Christ, and yet there must be variety in them, but they are all formed after Christ.
Ques Is it moral glory; the traits of Christ coming out?
JT Yes; and it is from glory to glory, there is no end to it; it is from one glory to another.
Ques. Is that headship?
JT I think it makes way for it. You are now looking at the Lord, and hence you are prepared to be led on into divine thoughts. The glory of the Lord here is that He effected the covenant. He made good God’s love. That is the glory that shines in the face of the Lord. “The same image” refers to the saints being formed in divine love. I believe it underlies unity; you cannot have unity apart from sameness. We are united, not because we agree together, but because we are the same, we have drunk into the same Spirit. Here we are beholding the same Lord. There is no other family like christians.
Ques How would it affect us, supposing the assembly today were like the Corinthians? How would it affect you today if you were one of that company? We have not the apostle here now. How would you order things?
JT Love never fails; and as a matter of fact what marked Paul was that he acted in love. His was a most remarkable situation; his apostleship was disputed, but he did not resort to authority, and his stand-by was love. His apostleship would not have met the case at all, so that it is very encouraging that here we have what never fails. Paul had the authority and the power to go in person, but instead of that he falls back on [p. 284] love.
Rem And love never fails.
JT It never does, and never will; however serious the crisis may be, love succeeds; that is what God is. He has devised means by which man will be recovered. He met man’s rebellion in love.
Rem That was where the Corinthians failed — in love.
JT That is why Paul brings love in abstractly in chapter 13. He could not say that it was there; he puts it forward as a test. I believe the point of departure is want of love for Christ.
Ques Is that the way the material was secured for writing?
JT I think so; you yield yourself to Christ. “Son, give me thine heart”, Proverbs 23:26. The terms “son” and “daughter” indicate God’s way of appealing to the affections. God wants man’s heart. It is a wonderful thing that the Lord has material here on which to write, and that material is our hearts.
Rem There could be no assent at all without affection for Christ, because by nature we do not love God or Christ.
Ques Does the writing go on continuously, that the result may come out by-and-by; Christ expressed in His people?
JT Just so; but the result is to be seen now.
Ques How does “liberty” come in in verse 17? “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty”.
JT It is the atmosphere, so to speak, of Christ. It does not refer to the Holy Spirit exactly. You come into touch with Christ. We all throw out an atmosphere about us. The Spirit of the Lord is liberty. It is what you come into in coming near to Christ. It is the Spirit that pervades the assembly. It is the Spirit of the Mediator of the new covenant. It says, “Now the Lord is that Spirit”.
The point of recovery is in the Son, who is in the affections of God.