HEADSHIP (2)
[p. 243] HEADSHIP (2)
Ephesians 5:22-33; Genesis 2:10-14; Genesis 2:21-25; Genesis 24:61-67
JT As indicated by what was said this morning and by the scriptures just read, the phase of our subject for this afternoon is Christ as Head of the assembly, involving who He is, and what marks Him in headship in the way of affection. We shall have to pursue this phase a little in Colossians at another time to bring out how the assembly functions through what flows out from the Head as the Source of supply. At this time we should seek to confine our remarks to what He is to her in the manifestation of affection. The passage in Ephesians helps particularly in this sense because of the recurrence of the word ‘love’. Several times we have love mentioned; it is worked out in what is very well known in human affairs, in relation to man and wife.
I thought it well to revert to Genesis 2 because of the prominence of the idea of headship in that chapter, not only in Adam and Eve, as in chapter 1, but in the river. It is said to have flowed out of the garden and to have taken the form of four heads (see Genesis 2: 10, note): two of them indicate the influence of what surrounds, and two of them point to what goes forward. Eve is brought into this state of things, surrounded in the garden with the idea of headship in an influential sense, which would enhance the intelligence that Adam and she had. The rivers would promote wealth in the true sense of gold, bdellium and the onyx stone. That is to say, the man and his wife are now in the realm of qualities. If we bear in mind the names taken on by them, Ish and Ishshah, as pointing to family relations, marital and otherwise, I think we shall more readily see that here we enter into the world of superlatives.
CHH [p. 244] Would the whole area through which these rivers flow speak of the sphere of influence? Would the whole area, not Adam and Eve only, be glorified through them?
JT Yes; the first two pointing to a circle, what surrounds, the second two pointing to progress forward. The former suggest love working, the “way of more surpassing excellence”, 1 Corinthians 12: 31. The going forward is intelligence of the divine mind, progress in the purpose and counsels of God.
ANW Would the surroundings be seen in the earlier chapters of the Acts, and the going forward in the apostle Paul?
JT Yes, that is a good way to put it. ‘Surrounding’ would come out at Pentecost in the description of the saints as given at the end of Acts 2. Love predominated, no one regarded what he had as his own; the circle of love was there. They broke bread in the house instead of the temple, meaning that they had intelligence as to the position: the breaking of bread did not belong to the religious circle of the day. They went to the temple provisionally to preach the gospel, which testimony was to begin at Jerusalem, but “the upper chamber” was where the disciples, the inner circle, met, and it was to this circle the Lord added. A principle laid down in early christianity was that if there is to be addition there must be what is worthy of it. This involves the circle of affection, the circle of wealth worth coming into. It was a “daily” matter, like the work in Genesis 1.
AEH Do these two thoughts of surrounding and going forward give us the force of the verses in Ephesians 5 — what is carried through to eternity?
JT I think so. Love goes through. Christ and the assembly are in mind in verse 22. The reflection of this is to mark husbands and wives, that is what is stated in verse 23; “as also the Christ is head of the assembly”. “But even as the assembly is subjected to [p. 245] the Christ, so also wives to their own husbands in everything” (verse 24). Then, “Husbands, love your own wives, even as the Christ also loved the assembly, and has delivered himself up for it” (verse 25). A circle of love is implied to the end that there should be results, “the gold of that land is good”, Genesis 2: 12. Note the wealth that is accruing! the first idea of encirclement is gold. Added to that are the other two elements, “bdellium and the onyx stone”. That is the test as to professing to be Christ’s — whether the divine product is there: “By this shall all know that ye are disciples of mine, if ye have love amongst yourselves”, John 13: 35.
WGT The mining operations would be the digging of gold.
JT That is another matter. The point here is not that you dig for the gold, but the thing is there, it is what is to be found in a certain area. Gold is found in certain areas. You have to dig for it sometimes; in South Africa they go down 6,000 feet for gold, and they dig for the precious stones too. But the point here is not mining, Job speaks of that; this is typically the fruit of the Spirit of God working in a circle of affection. If you get into that circle you will find this product. And it is in relation to the principle of headship, because these streams are called “heads”. Adam would understand the word, I suppose. A body of water flows out of Eden to water the garden, and from thence it was parted. What caused the parting? Why was each subdivision of this flow of water viewed as a whole idea in itself? It clearly implies that each division carried with it the idea of headship, the idea of influence for good in the sphere in which it moved. It is as entering Exodus that we get the great value of precious stones. The house is formed from materials, a list of which is found in chapter 25; what is used represents the persons to whom it belongs, but in the antitype the material is the persons themselves, the [p. 246] wealth being in them. Here the point is the influence of the rivers. There are gold, bdellium and the onyx stone in relation to the action of a river characterised as “head”. We must allow in our minds the environment into which Eve came. Though she and Adam were evidently formed on the same day, yet Adam is seen in the garden to till and guard it before Eve was made; that is his position. The river flowing out of Eden into the garden is a great feature. We do not know the extent of Eden but clearly it was a fairly large area having peculiar advantages, particularly the river flowing out of it, pointing to the Spirit of God coming out of heaven, for the word ‘Eden’ means pleasure.
AB It says the river “went out”; it was not sent out.
JT That would correspond with the incoming of the Holy Spirit. Of course He was sent too, but He “goes forth from with the Father”, John 15: 26. The Spirit is here definitely, as Christ was here, having prerogatives as a divine Person. I believe the word “head” would convey this. The divine authority of the Spirit is seen in the Acts.
WGT We find in Matthew’s gospel that the heavenly Father plants; does the planting of the garden correspond?
JT Yes. The planting would be evidenced in the 120 names in Acts 1; they were the Father’s planting. They were definitely planted and there is the principle of tilling and guarding what was there.
HB Does the enrichment in 1 Corinthians 1: 4, 5 have any bearing, “the grace of God given to you in Christ Jesus; that in everything ye have been enriched in him”?
JT It would fit in. That is, however, more abstract because the actual state of things at Corinth did not agree with it. It is from the divine side. In this sense the assembly at Corinth was furnished fully.
SWP [p. 247] The river Pison surrounded the land of Havilah; was it for the protection of what was there, or for development?
JT Primarily it is to be regarded in the sense of influence. These are the first rivers mentioned in Scripture, and it is well known that a river has fructifying power. Areas drained by them are in this sense influenced. There is not only the draining but the freshening influence of a river. So I believe that this one flowing out of Eden points to the Holy Spirit, as also the one in the last chapter of Revelation: “He shewed me a river of water of life, bright as crystal, going out of the throne of God and of the Lamb”. “From thence it was parted”, Genesis 2: 10; the word ‘parted’ may be linked with the ‘tongues’ at Pentecost. “From thence it was parted and became four main streams (heads)”. The New Translation has “main streams” and what we are remarking is not out of accord with this for it implies that the full thought of a river attaches to each of the four mentioned.
SWP It would come within the range of Adam’s understanding, would it not?
JT Yes; we have to bear in mind what intelligence he had. There is nothing said about his love, for the time had not come for that. Speaking of the mystery of Ephesians 3, Paul stressed his understanding of it. Understanding of a truth comes first and then the working out of it by love. We have the barest facts here. Adam and Eve lived in the garden — how long we cannot say. Did they talk about these rivers? What was implied in them? They would find in them the power of refreshment. There would also be results in the way of production through Adam’s tilling of the garden; toil is not mentioned until sin had come in; after that he is told that “in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread”, Genesis [p. 248] 3: 19.
AEH Would you think that we have in Colossians the idea of fruit-bearing as seen here, “the love which ye have towards all the saints”, Colossians 1: 4?
JT Yes. The Spirit is mentioned only once in the epistle, to tell us that there was amongst them love in Himself; the right kind of love was at Colosse. You might say of the Colossians, “the gold of that land is good”. If you were to go there you would find they had right doctrine, but that was not all, the gold was there, the product of the Spirit was there — love in the Spirit for all the saints (chapter 1: 8).
AEH The apostle also says, “Having heard of your faith in Christ Jesus, and the love which ye have towards all the saints, on account of the hope which is laid up for you in the heavens; of which ye heard before in the word of the truth of the glad tidings, which are come to you, as they are in all the world, and are bearing fruit and growing, even as also among you, from the day ye heard them and knew indeed the grace of God, in truth”, Colossians 1: 4 - 6.
JT That is a very comforting scripture, especially as adding the thought of hope, which is more the going forward as suggested by the two latter rivers; a long outlook into the purpose of God.
GAT What is the thought of the river surrounding the place where the gold was?
JT The thought is that the gold is there because of the river. That is what we have been saying. If you have a circle of love in a place it is because of the work of God in certain persons there, the Spirit having scope in them. The second two rivers are going forward. The circle of affection was in Jerusalem, but the saints were scattered at the time of Stephen’s martyrdom. Then Paul comes in and the saints are seen going forward in the things of God. Paul opened up the mystery, and in the light of it the saints go forward; Christ was in them ‘the hope of glory’.
JV Do rivers carry with them the idea of supply?
JT Quite so; what would this country be without rivers?
LES The river of God carries with it the idea of joy. In Psalm 46: 4, 5 we have, “There is a river the streams whereof make glad the city of God, the sanctuary of the habitations of the Most High. God is in the midst of her; she shall not be moved: God shall help her at the dawn of the morning”.
JT The Scriptures speak much of the idea of the river. It is a leading thought in the general position in Genesis 2. Adam and Eve having been set there. Eve came into this environment; the river is mentioned before her formation when only Adam was there. She comes into all this. Now she is in the hearing of Adam who says, “This time” (verse 23), showing his remarkable intelligence. Eve would never forget this. She would later call it to mind and say, ‘The first word I heard from you, Adam, was about myself’. And comparing her husband with all other creatures she would come to understand that he was not an ordinary creature but one made to live by the breath of God. Intelligence would become intensified in their conversations with one another, Ish and Ishshah bringing in a world of relationships, a world of affection; and that is what Ephesians 5 contemplates, a system of affection.
CCT Which comes first, subjection or affection?
JT Love comes first, that is, love in Christ. “Christ also loved” (Ephesians 5: 25), not “loves” but “loved”. And Paul also says, “The Son of God, who has loved me” (Galatians 2: 20), a historical matter. “Christ also loved the assembly, and has delivered himself up for it” (verse 25). So that love is the source of all, but it is operative in relation to subjection and intelligence in us. From the side of the saints too, love is really first, for the Lord says, “He that has my commandments and keeps them, he it is that loves me”, John 14: 21.
AB [p. 250] You made a remark in regard to superlatives, would you say a little more about that?
JT Gold, fragrant drugs and onyx stones represent quality. I would go to Philippians for that, “things that are more excellent”, Philippians 1: 10. Taken normally among men, wealth makes room for love; it may be corrupted in men, but true spiritual wealth is incorruptible. Poverty is the outcome of sin; divine quality is wealth. Philippians points to things that are more excellent. So in treating of faith, hope, love, Paul says, “The greater of these is love”.
AEH Paul says, “But my God shall abundantly supply all your need according to his riches in glory” (Philippians 4: 19); would you connect that with the wealth in Genesis 2?
JT Just so. When we come to Genesis 24 we shall see how much Abraham’s servant made of riches. All these ultimately belonged to Isaac. But we are treating now of the river of Eden and what Eve came into. We have not yet the actual word ‘love’, it is a matter rather of intelligence. No wife loves her husband unless she respects him. When God brought the woman to Adam He was reckoning on His creature saying something, and he said it; and it was in Eve’s hearing. What can be more interesting than this, connecting it now anticipatively with the assembly? What do the saints think of Christ? Eve was espoused to one man; and so the apostle says to the Corinthians, “I have espoused you unto one man, to present you a chaste virgin to Christ”, 2 Corinthians 11: 2. The Corinthians needed that word for some of them did not respect Paul, and hence they did not respect Christ, for He was represented in Paul.
CHH Would that feature of the warning of Paul be seen in the fourth river, Euphrates, which would indicate boundaries?
JT Yes. That is another thought that comes out: the Euphrates represented boundaries. While the second [p. 251] two rivers flowing out of the garden suggest progress forward, the Euphrates also carries the idea of boundaries. This has a place in assembly principles.
WGT Is this not a greater thought than we had this morning? The animals and the plantings were there, but now it is the woman.
JT That is right; and who would be in her mind first of all but this great being that she hears talking? This would be the first human language she heard. God did not say anything; it is a question of what Adam says. She is to be occupied with him, and she will come to own his headship.
LES Would this fit in with the words of the Supper, “This is my body which is given for you”, Luke 22: 19?
JT Just so; and the Lord showing the disciples His side, (John 20: 20), also alludes to it.
ANW Would you differentiate between these scriptures: “Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands” (Ephesians 5: 22), and, “Woman’s head is the man”, 1 Corinthians 11: 3?
JT In the latter passage the man is head of the woman, but it does not say the man is her husband. But in Ephesians 5 it is her “own” husband.
AEH Genesis 2 speaks of man and wife, and not husband and wife; is that on the line of respect?
JT It would be in verse 25; but the original word for ‘man’ used in verse 24 is translated “husband” in chapter 3: 6, and 16. Indeed it is generally the word so translated in the Old Testament.
PG Would the woman of Samaria show respect in saying, “Come, see a man who told me all things I had ever done”, John 4: 29?
JT She now had the greatest respect for Christ. If I do not respect the servants of Christ I shall not respect Him. Some of the Corinthians had acquired disrespect [p. 252] for Paul.
WGT Do we see this thought of respect coming out in Genesis 2?
JT Details are not given. But if you put yourself in Eve’s position you would decide that Adam was worthy of respect. Evidently his was the first voice she heard; she hears that voice as standing by him; God did not say anything. Adam 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”, Genesis 2: 23. Adam gives a reason for the name he gives, “... because this was taken out of a man”. Paul brings out that man was not made for the woman, but the woman for the man. This is to bring out the subordinate place of the assembly. The wife is placed in subjection, that is God’s doing. Thus there is a law governing the wife’s position. If she does not respect that law, love for her husband is negatived.
GAT Is this the point in which christendom has signally failed?
JT Yes. The book of Revelation says of a certain body assuming to be the bride of Christ, “I sit a queen, and I am not a widow; and I shall in no wise see grief”, Revelation 18: 7. She has no real respect for Christ, nor for His word or commandment; she professes to be related to Him but it is absolutely false. Whereas the true assembly is subjected to Christ, this is the mind of God for her. Refusing to respect that, any one professing to be of the assembly is rebellious.
WGT Is God jealous that the position be maintained?
JT Yes: Paul says, “I am jealous as to you with a jealousy which is of God”, 2 Corinthians 11: 2. Subjection to Christ in the knowledge of His love is worked out in Ephesians; the Lord speaks to the assembly at Ephesus of her “first love”.
CHH Does the fact that the word ‘Man’ with a capital is emphasised so much in Genesis enter into this?
JT Yes, it is “The Adam”; see the note to Genesis 1: 27. That dignified being is made to live by the breath of God. It is another and infinitely greater thought than being formed from the dust of the ground; the breath of God is divine. God brings the woman to Adam and says nothing. Why is not God saying anything? It is as if He intimated, ‘I have a great being here and I want to see him act’. God delights in His handiwork; He delights in us as His handiwork, as formed after Christ.
WGT As to what you have been saying of subjection, the book of Esther greatly stresses the absence of it in Vashti.
JT That book is most helpful in our times.
Now we may go on to Genesis 24 to bring out how admiration comes into view, not only respect but admiration. The Canticles sets this out in a wonderful way; it sets out reciprocated affection as between Christ and His people. The theme in the longest chapter in Genesis is Isaac and Rebecca. “Wilt thou go with this man?” is the question put to her in verse 58; her answer is, “I will go”. Then “Rebecca arose, and her maids”, not only her nurse but her maids; the feminine side is accentuated as she proceeds. “They rode upon the camels, and followed the man”. Her suitable qualities are stressed throughout. What a person she is, and how definite in her decisions and committals!
ANW Why in Ephesians and here is the onus of love on the man?
JT We can all see that it flows out from Christ. In John’s epistle we get, “Hereby we have known love, because he has laid down his life for us; and we ought for the brethren to lay down our lives”, 1 John 3:16. Love expressed in Christ is the basic thought and response to that by the assembly is what is in mind at this time. It is effected by the Holy Spirit. These verses in Genesis 24 show that Rebecca is a person of decision. There is opposition, her brother and mother [p. 254] would detain her, but she is definite. Many are detained from following the Lord by natural influences, but Rebecca is not affected by these; she says, “I will go”, and she goes. Her nurse and her maids would accentuate the feminine side, as remarked.
CHH “Thou art our sister” (verse 60). Does not that thought enter into this as in Canticles, “My sister, my spouse”?
JT The book of Genesis brings out sisterhood. Sarah is a daughter in the family of Terah, and with Rebecca the thought of sister again comes in. Sisterhood is required for marriage “in the Lord”. Spiritually we are by the work of God of the same family as Christ. Rebecca is conscious of the family link with Isaac, as verse 24 indicates.
GAT She “followed the man”. Is this by influence or by attraction?
JT Attraction, because of what she has heard. The narration of Abraham’s servant would, of course, influence her. The testimony of the Holy Spirit as to Christ involves Paul’s doctrine, what Christ is in heaven.
SWP Is not her intelligence in regard to her position of a high order?
JT That is what the chapter is intended to show; it brings out typically what the assembly is characteristically. You do not get the servant’s name here, but he was the head servant of Abraham’s house; he knows all about Abraham and Abraham trusts him. The matter being left in his hands, he takes ten camels and goes to Aram-naharaim. He is so true and loyal to Abraham’s son that when Rebecca makes enquiry as Isaac comes into view he says, “That is my master!” It is no longer Abraham only, Isaac also is his master. There is an allusion here to the son’s equality with the father.
AEH In this matter of accentuating the feminine side, do you think that may work out in our localities? Does not a brother moving on the line of affection for Christ rally the saints to [p. 255] Him?
JT That enters into this position. “They rode upon the camels” (verse 61), a matter of feminine initiative; whereas, “the servant took Rebecca, and went away”, is masculine. The latter statement would refer to the influence of the Spirit over us as directing us to Christ. Then we are told, “And Isaac had just returned from Beer-lahai-roi; for he was dwelling in the south country” (verse 62). This is the crucial point before us this afternoon: it is a question of admiration. It is respect first (Genesis 2); normally you are bound to have respect for a man like Adam as to what he is in these circumstances. But that is not the point in Isaac, it is what Rebecca heard about him from one who knew him well. She had his gifts on her hands and face, the testimony of Isaac’s wealth on her person. She says, “I will go”. There is no hesitating at all, but it is because of testimony brought by the servant of Isaac. As to the assembly it is the testimony rendered to her by the Spirit of the glorious Man in heaven. Paul was the first one to preach “Jesus that he is the Son of God”, Acts 9: 20. It was the Christ above that he was presenting. He had heard His voice calling him by name, and the Lord sees to it that every hindrance is taken out of the way that this servant might go into action. That is Paul. Isaac is seen as coming from Beer-lahai-roi; Rebecca sees him walking in the fields and springs off the camel. It is not only testimony now, but Isaac himself is before her and she is supremely attracted.
Ques Would you say a word as to Isaac returning from the well?
JT If the assembly is to be brought to Christ, the Holy Spirit must have a great place; but the time comes when Christ is all and she is for Him only. Hence Isaac is now seen by Rebecca. “Isaac had gone out to meditate in the fields” (verse 63). He is not here a man of great affairs like Joseph, but, we may say, a man of leisure. It is a question of Christ and the assembly. Paul says, “I speak as to Christ, and as to the assembly”, Ephesians 5: 32. The time of evening arrives: “And he lifted up his eyes and saw, and behold, camels were coming” (verse 63) — typically the power that carries us to Christ. Isaac sees camels coming, but Rebecca sees him. There are thousands of christians in this town, but most of them are not carried by what the camels here represent but largely by religious organisations. They are not carried by the Holy Spirit but by human arrangements. The Lord, as it were, looks for the camels. “And Rebecca lifted up her eyes and saw Isaac” (verse 64). It is important to note how she is coming, what is carrying her. The assembly is not carried by denominational paraphernalia, she is carried in a royal way, by the power of the Holy Spirit. The camels speak of the Spirit of God who takes us in power to Christ.
CHH Would there be a significance in the name of the well, a testimony of an earlier time? The name Beer-lahai-roi means, ‘Well of the living who reveals himself’.
JT The allusion is to the well that stands in relation to Hagar, typically the Jews as in the early chapters of Acts. The Spirit did not permanently affect them. But the assembly normally is appropriating the Holy Spirit, “the power which works in us”, Ephesians 3: 20.
ANW In her own energy Rebecca sprang off the camel; she shows her power as affected in the presence of Isaac.
JT Yes. It is remarkable how free, how clear she is of all trammels. Persons in human organisations are not so marked. It is most difficult today to get people away from the trammels of the religious world.
WGT Following the man is a good suggestion; she had in mind that in following Abraham’s servant she would reach Isaac.
CCT Is she brought into the knowledge of headship when the servant says, “That is my master”?
JT Well, that is how she should be affected. “Rebecca lifted up her eyes and saw Isaac, and she sprang off the camel. And she had said to the servant, Who is the man that is walking in the fields to meet us? And the servant said, That is my master!” (verses 64, 65). The Spirit does not present Himself as an Object for our affection, although there is “the love of the Spirit”, but He keeps Christ before us as the Object for our hearts. “That is my master!” would enhance Isaac’s greatness in Rebecca’s mind. So verse 65 says, “Then she took the veil, and covered herself”. That is the feminine way, the assembly not showing herself to the rude gaze of the world; her attractiveness is primarily for Christ.
CD Would you say that Peter is speaking with a note of admiration when he says, “Let the whole house of Israel therefore know assuredly that God has made him, this Jesus whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ”, Acts 2: 36?
JT Yes. He would rivet our hearts on Christ. Philip preached “the Christ”, and that is how He became attractive to the converts.
WGT Do you see the full thought in Paul’s first preaching?
JT Yes. Paul preached “Jesus that he is the Son of God”, Acts 9: 20. That is a very attractive title; not simply the anointed Man, but the Son of God — what He is personally. In regard to the enquiry as to how we come into all this, one thing of importance is to be definite in regard to light obtained. Many are indefinite, uncertain, unable to give an answer. Secondly, to take on the “maids”, the feminine accessories, in such circumstances; for we are now dealing with a feminine matter, how the assembly appears in the eyes of Christ. Then am I on an Episcopalian waggon, a Baptist waggon, or, contrariwise, am I on the camels, the typical means the servant took to carry Rebecca? What believers have to come to is that they must take on [p. 258] what God has provided if they are to get to Christ. It is not a question of going to heaven now, but a question of how I am to reach Christ as in assembly relationship. It is by the Spirit.
CCT The thing for me to do is to ‘arise’ and move toward Christ in the right power.
JT Yes; and not use any other power. It is the Spirit.
AB Is it seen in Acts 16? “And a certain woman, by name Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, who worshipped God, heard; whose heart the Lord opened to attend to the things spoken by Paul”, Acts 16: 14. The carrying power, the Holy Spirit, did not suffer Paul to go elsewhere (verse 7).
JT All that fits into what we are saying. He must go to Philippi. There were certain ones by the river praying, models, a remarkable group. Today you hear of groups having left the churches and meeting together, but ungoverned by assembly principles. If you seek to get them to own the truth, you have the greatest difficulty. But in Philippi conditions were different. There was prayer outside the gate by the river and the Lord opened Lydia’s heart “to attend to the things spoken by Paul”. Thus we get the truth opened up.
WGT Would you say something as to the report that the man gave to Isaac?
JT That is the next thing. The Spirit is seen typically throughout. What a fine spiritual review that must have been! Anti-typically it is seen in the Acts: what transpired at Jerusalem under the ministry of the twelve, and especially under Paul, was all reported, as it were, to Christ. Paul’s epistles mainly furnish the truth relative to Christ and the assembly; Paul says, “I speak as to Christ, and as to the assembly”, Ephesians 5: 32.
Ques You used the words, “mutual admiration”. Does that come in at this point?
JT Yes. “Then she took the veil, and covered herself” (verse 65), which implies that she is admiring Isaac, committing herself fully, concealing herself from others to be for him. It is a private matter, and then his affection is expressed in the tent; it is Sarah’s tent. Thus the assembly is loved by Christ in the place o f testimony, that is, where Israel had been.
GAT Do we get the Godhead in this chapter. Abraham, Isaac and the servant?
JT Yes, in a typical sense.
CCT Is this expression, “He loved her”, the same thought as Ephesians 5?
JT Yes, it is a question of the love of Christ for the assembly: “even as the Christ also loved the assembly, and has delivered himself up for it” (verse 25).
PG What is meant by Isaac being comforted?
JT That is Christ being comforted now in the assembly: it is compensation for the loss of Israel typified in Sarah.
ANW As to the suggestion of mutuality, was there ever a time when the saints were more at home in the Canticles than in the present day?
JT It is remarkable how that book has come into service. This surely is because love has been stimulated in the saints for Christ.