The ministry of John Nelson Darby is, by the Lord's mercy, so well known as to render comment unnecessary; it only remains to explain the circumstances under which the present writings are published.
His executors have found, amongst his papers, a number of note books, in his own handwriting, containing many comments, notes and meditations on various subjects of divine teaching, explanatory and otherwise edifying, and have decided to set them forth for the benefit of the Church of God at large, and in the interests of the truth.
It was Mr. Darby's habit to jot down, in such books, thoughts on Scripture and scriptural subjects as they occurred to him, not in any regular order, nor in view of publication; thus, the germ of thoughts, amplified elsewhere by him, will sometimes be found in the following pages, together with fresh and deeply interesting matter, such as might be expected to issue from the private study of one so richly taught in the Word.
These writings were not revised by the author with a view to publication, they were made solely for his own use; and are now put forth with the earnest hope that the Lord's people may derive much blessing and instruction from their diligent perusal.
"I know thy works: behold I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name", Revelation 3:8.
Such is the Lord's approval of those who, in the midst of perilous times, seek to keep themselves pure, and to continue in the things which they have learned and been assured of.
It has been the gracious wisdom of God to bring great principles -- such as love, righteousness, and others -- into evidence, by facts. This makes it simple to the poor, and keeps intellectual power in its place, and this is all right, and divinely right. -- Milwaukee, April, 1865.
I have been very profoundly moved in seeing, on reading over old tracts (some quite forgotten), for the desired publication, all the principles, on which the fate of the world and the church now turns, brought out thirty to thirty-nine years ago. God was in it in a way I did not know, though I felt it personally to be God's truth. But, what a solemn thing! but then it has made me feel the responsibility of bringing it all out, systematically, before the professing church; before it only came out occasionally as particular truths pressed. But the main point is the truth itself then coming out; what progress in disruption has been made since! -- October 18th, 1865.
What a sorrowful thing it would be (must we say "would be"?) to our hearts, to say "I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course", -- and that end in "the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine", etc. -- and "they shall turn away their ears from the truth!" Was that the end, here below, of fighting the good fight of faith? What a world we live in! With this Paul identifies finishing his course; in another world it is different, but this is sorrow. So Christ however, Isaiah 49:4, "I have laboured in vain". -- 1867.
It is surely a wonderfully blessed thing to be like the blessed Lord, but I think latterly I have felt the blessing of it to be more in the full capacity to dwell on Himself, unhindered, which it will give, than in the fact of being like Himself. -- 1868.
There is nothing so petty as the human heart, but nothing on which God, by His grace, can compose such lovely, and transcendent music, because man is the subject of redemption through Christ.
The more I go on the more I see how we are in a wholly new position; but, oh! how poorly we are in it.
I follow with sympathy, with an associated heart, all the path of Jesus by the Holy Ghost, in meek, holy, devotedness to God. I ought to follow actually, even to laying down my life for the brethren. Having Him as my life I can feel with Him, however infinitely more perfect He may be. I may present my body a living sacrifice; my heart goes with Him, however poorly I follow; even in Gethsemane I ought to watch with Him. But when dealt with by God, and I speak only of the burnt offering, when the fire of the altar tested all fully (which is not merely offering Himself, but what met Him, to test the perfectness of the offering), then I only look on and adore. I bow my head and adore.
Christianity depends in its work on what it brings, not on what it finds; our side, and relationship to God by it, wholly on what we find, not on what we bring. In a word, it is grace, not man, though he be formed and led by it. Thank God it is.
Ah! it is not all the truth that we are far from God, but when God is come into the world we hated Him. Thank God it is a new creation, and we love Him, and He loved us.
Self likes to be served, and thinks itself great. Love serves, and is great.
No public prayer will do without private, but God always answers private.
There is no familiarity like familiarity with perfect goodness, and that is our position, by grace, with God.
See how, in the Cross, the whole question of good and evil was brought to an issue in every way.
First, it was the complete display of man's enmity against God, -- the contemptuous rejection, alas! of God come in love, for His love He had "hatred"; and in every detail, disciples, priests, Pilate, all bring out the evil that is in man. Then Satan's power is fully manifested, and that over men in their passions, and, in one sense, in death, at least in the sorrow of Christ's soul.
Next, I get the perfect man as nowhere else; perfect love to the Father, perfect, absolute, obedience, and that in the very place of sin, and the cup it had filled. And this in human weakness, Satan's power (though above both, by looking to God), and the forsaking of God.
And then God Himself, in perfect righteousness against sin, and sovereign, perfect, infinite love to the sinner -- His majesty and truth, both made good.
Such is the Cross! In the history of Eternity it stands alone. Man in God's glory is its blessed result.
I see nothing in the elaborate statement at the opening of the Belfast meeting (see footnote) which affects the evolution system, or divinely-formed species at all. Creation it does not touch, as none of them do. But more, that embryos were gradually formed in the womb was always known. That microscopic investigation has discovered segmental division, and the separation into an upper and lower set, with the lines between, may be very interesting to anatomists, adds nothing but details. So, that there are general principles of formation from lower to higher genera in the foetus growth is curious, and shows God's acting analogously, and with system, but no more, unless the contrary to the development theory, because after all men and women have human children, and cocks and hens chickens, and it shows that these analogies of formation do not make intermingled species now. Phillips in his Geology, though afraid to say so, shows there was no cross-intermingling of species. And it is one of the remarkable things that from the same materials and analogous processes, both in plants and animals, specific results are produced. The oak and the bramble grow from the same soil, but the oak does not become a bramble, nor the bramble an oak. Forms of inception, and food, and digestion are the same, and we have eggs, and upper and lower segmentary division, but a man grows into a man, and a pig into a pig.
I do not see that evolution or development, once creation is fully recognised, is anything that concerns us. We all admit it. A corn of wheat, if it has lain 4,000 years without germination, if it meets "the scent of water" will sprout. Supposing the microscope discover there protoplasm itself, or appropriating power leading to organic growth, that is what in English we call "life" in its broadest sense, tree, animal, or man; in every case protoplasm in a cell. What was there 4,000 years is evolved, appropriates extrinsic stuff, and is a plant of wheat, and will, by "seed in itself after its kind", produce more evolved wheat. Now if God pleased (and who can say He did not) -- chose -- when chaos reigned, to-hu (wasteness), bo-hu (emptiness), to form such plants all at once from protoplasm to wheat, or an oak, and cause them to produce "after their
kind", by an instantaneous act of will, what should or could prevent it? This the evolutionists do not pretend to explain, nor can they -- that is, how protoplasm came there.
They -- for science is always, and necessarily atheistical, when it does not honestly confess ignorance (and honest in this sense its pride seldom is), because it can only follow experimentally the series of what does exist, and can only trace it as existing, but how or why it exists can know nothing, for that is no matter of science -- they, to get rid of God, will say matter is eternal, but not only cannot prove it, but a finite mind cannot have the thought "eternity" in it, so that all that is wilful falsehood. Notwithstanding, in spite of us, we know there is a cause, but that is not science. It is clearly seen change of species is another thing; God no doubt could have made it so physically, but it is not proved, and Darwin admits the proofs fail in geology, and if we are to believe the best searchers into the question it is disproved (as Phillips on "Geology of the Thames"). God may allow commixture, and mules, if He pleases in nearly related species, but this rather proves there is no such change, for no such race producing "after its kind" has been found; but it is another question.
If evolution, as daily seen, takes place in four weeks where necessary conditions exist, or waits four years till they do, it is evident divine power could at once produce, I mean produce, so as to set the principle at work, in a moment. The foetus they tell us on its train goes through all classes of life from beginning to end in nine months; be it so. Why not in nine seconds -- be formed so as to do so? But men producing fishes, or fishes producing men, have not been found. It is a mere hypothetical conclusion of what may have been, but this is not science. Science may arrive at a general principle of what is, and so find what will be on the principle which is known in existing facts. But permanent change of species has not been found; varieties from circumstances are common, union of kindred species forming none may be found, but "after its kind" in nature remains "after its kind".
Now Genesis 1 takes up the facts as apparent and no more -- does not touch the "how". There are species -- horses are not oxen, nor cats dogs, nor men apes -- they may tell us they were or may have been, but, as I said, that is not science; but Genesis 1 takes up the positive and unquestionable facts, and does only one thing -- reveals the creative authorship of God,
and that is all -- the "after its kind" is the statement of what is which we all know; more real science than the modern pretended science, and adds what confessedly is not and cannot be the subject of science -- creation -- and which Scripture says is of faith. A more precise account is given of man, because there was a moral relation between him and God; his body was distinct from his soul, and when made, God breathed into his so-formed body and he was in relationship with God, as nothing else was. This was, though creation, more than mere animal creation. "Let the earth bring forth" was for mammalia. God formed man out of the dust. Os homini sublime dedit (He gave to man a face that looks on high), and then connected him livingly with Himself. But what I had on my mind here was, that Moses took up the ostensible facts, and does not touch the "how" (save with man who is in relationship with God), but merely that God, the Creator and Orderer of all that was apparent, ba-ra created, a-sah formed, ya-tzar made (as a potter); He creates all, and then the earth being to-hu bo-hu, He brings it into order with everything, from plants to man. Hence when what orders times and seasons is set in order, he adds, "He made the stars also", but that is all. The creation of angels is not mentioned, they do not belong to this creation.
The creating is brought out I think as distinct parts of the general statements. First God created the heaven and the earth, then He goes on and orders it as earth with its bringing forth. This is to the end of the fourth day. It was the habitable earth, the waters being separated, and the earth, as ordered of God, standing out of it. Then comes the creation of what peopled the waters, it was what belonged to and was of them, but still was a distinct and new part of creation, the lower, and in a certain sense, unordered part. Then comes the higher class of living creatures, from the earth to which they belong. This was a bringing forth, but of the highest kind; still it was a to-tze (let bring forth).
Then comes a quite distinct act; God takes counsel in Himself to make man in His image, and creates him. So that the earth is looked at as the proper object of what had been created originally, and the account is continued in it; but then the separated waters have their own special notice, of which, though not the dwelling-place of man, the great things were God's creation; and then apart from all, though on the
sixth day, but no to-tze, man "created" is repeated three times. Nor do I think "created to make" is without special intention; all was His creation, but with a view of ordering it before Him.
The men of science forget that they can deal with phenomena only, and the evolution, if they so please to call it, of what exists; with existence they have nothing to do; evolution and fixed laws have nothing to do with it either. Fixed laws are learned from the constant course of things, but the constant course of things supposes the things whose course goes on, and even to have gone on long enough to call it a fixed law; man may see the perfection, and universality of it, and conclude perhaps it is a fixed law, but he cannot by science go beyond the constant order of what is.
Evolution is true to a certain point, the foetus or sperm becomes a man or a beast in due time. I have seen no evidence of change of species by it, not certainly, in historical time, in geological mummies and fossils there is no change of species; it is not science but fancy.
Further, though man ventures pretty far, and no man denies variety in species, big cows and little cows, and horned or unhorned, yet it seems to me that fixed laws and evolution are difficult to reconcile. It is all well to fancy that circumstances so act on an ape that he takes the human form, and say that this operation of fixed laws must have produced that consequence, habit begetting a second nature; but it is not science -- phenomena and deduction from it.
Species are, and the fixed law is that they remain species, and always have; change into other species, arbitrarily, from circumstantial influences, is not a fixed law of nature. At first it is an accident, if it has a natural effect, i.e., the consequence of an antecedent, but this is individual, and goes no farther than will, and need; there is no change of race in it. All apes did not shorten their arms, and turn hands into feet together, and, if one did, we should have as many races as circumstances, i.e., there would be no fixed laws at all; but the truth is, the thing, as far as known phenomena go, is disproved really.
But the main point I would insist on is, that science only begins when the system of uniform succession of consequents from antecedents exists, so that the whole system exists, and exists under an order of fixed laws, and science can go no farther than the discovery of them -- is absolutely and necessarily
confined to them -- means only that -- and if it presumes to go farther, wholly ceases to be science; accounts for nothing, and has no ground to go on in accounting for anything, beyond a course of things already in existence, having such fixed laws; as to existence, and fixed laws, or any knowledge about them, it is out of court -- ceases to be science if it attempts to touch them.
Science could not even say that in another Universe bodies, instead of having what we call weight, gravitation, or ether, or what it may be, which are only names after all, are not in a self-repelling gas which drives them away from one another; science knows what is, and no more. Existence cannot be said to be a consequent from an antecedent, nor even fixed laws -- what goes on according to them may be.
But mere fixed laws, and consequents from antecedents reveal causation -- mean that a certain effect follows because another fact is there. Therefore I must pursue causes, evolutionary ones, if you please; and existence must have had a cause, and the fixed laws or causes must have had a cause, for all facts we have ever ascertained flow from antecedents.
What is the antecedent to existence and fixed laws? You tell me -- you leave me in the dark, for I cannot conceive a cause which is not caused; I agree you are there in the dark, and must be. Own it, that is all, and that your science can only know present phenomena, and not God, and we are agreed. But men of science are afraid of being honest in these things.
The argument, as to infidels, is mere stupid presumption, and is merely this: Science, i.e., man's mind, cannot go further than antecedents and consequents; it comes to a point where it has to stop, for, after all, they cannot deny this, therefore there is nothing beyond.
The creation of angels is not recorded historically, but that of this visible universe; then they, already created as a separate body of beings, show their interest in the works of God -- "the morning stars sing together, and all the sons of God shout for joy".
When Christ is born, first the Jewish aspect is announced to the shepherds, and then a multitude celebrating it -- their public delight in God's ways, and, with unjealous delight in them, declare that God's good pleasure is in man. It is the heavenly aspect of it -- they see God's mind in it -- not the conscience part or man's evil. They chant glory to God, for His love is here, peace on this ruined earth -- the place of their service -- and en anthropois eudokia.
When Christ enters on His ministry, they are His servants in the wilderness, and in Gethsemane. The gospel revelation, which does not have them for its object, they desire to look into. The sufferings of Christ, and the glories that follow, bring a more solemn apprehension to their minds; it is not simple joy like creation, or incarnation and its natural fruits; over every sinner that repents they rejoice, it is joy to them. In the church they learn, as in heavenly places, the manifold wisdom of God; they had seen the glory of God's revelation on earth; they are to us, in love, ministering spirits; they praise in a circle outside the redeemed, in the Apocalypse; yet in our state we are but isaggeloi (Luke 20:36), united to Christ, and all the saints His redeemed.
In Genesis we have what addresses itself to man in his responsibility, the first Adam placed in it, and what it is needed he should know. We may have counsels in types, but no more; it is the sphere of responsible man, and man in it. The existence of God is assumed, the creation of angels not spoken of; but first the creation of the heavens and earth needed to be known by us, then the forming of this scene in which we are as established in it, where I may notice that the expanse is not called good as no actual part of the things formed in connection with man. Then creatures being finished, and the last pronounced good (chapter 1: 25), the solemn creation of a head to represent Him in it, is taken up, and a lord or head over the creation that had been made, but quite a different thing; "saw that it was good" (verse 25) closed the creation.
The "image" is the great point (verse 27), though "likeness" is stated, and image is the word used in the New Testament. We have then, chapter 2: 15 - 17 -- definite responsibility, and verse 18 and following -- Lordship, and counsels as to the church, in this only a helpmeet for Christ found; the Lordship was independent of it, but in all of which He was Lord -- no helpmeet, no companion; though a living soul, so far is man from the animal which petty infidelity would, in its low thoughts, persuade us he is.
-- 1. There is an apparent difficulty in viewing this as a primary creation, and then passing on to present formation, when we compare the fourth commandment in Exodus 20; but I think it rather confirms it, for it takes the creation, as we have it now, as the whole subject of the commandment, as a distinct whole; for the firmament is called "heaven", and then we have "heaven, and earth, and the sea and all that in them is" (Genesis 1:6, et seq): light not being mentioned. Also in Exodus 20:11 it is "made", not "created", and it is evident that angels do not come into this category of creation. Light, I apprehend, is a peculiar thing -- a power, whatever its seat, more than an existence created -- and the causing this to be, and seating it anywhere, is surely from the fiat of God, but not the making some material being to exist.
All was created of the universe as a structure. The heavens
and the earth universal, as a fact the universe. Elohim created this vast system; in respect of man, earth having its recognised place, we have no stars, they merely come in by the bye, that all might be attributed to God; but God was the Creator of the whole scene.
-- 2. He then leaves the heavens, and begins with the earth; God's dealings with it, and what belongs to it, hence its heavens so to speak. But first the earth -- it was utterly a chaos, but a watery chaos -- a desolate waste of unorganised existence, not necessarily without form, all matter must have one, but its condition and state an unformed one -- without order and waste -- in darkness which rested on the watery waste, for such it was. Darkness was its state when God began to deal with it; being in this state, for we begin with it in such a one, knowing nothing of it between its creation, and finding it in this state, we have here "darkness on the face of the deep".
The state of the heavens we have left behind us; we are conversant with the earth in a state of chaos. The spirit of God brooding on the face of the waters is formative power.
-- 3. God commanded the light to shine out of darkness, "Let there be light"; it is not said that He made it now, but that where darkness was, there was now light.
"Let there be light" is not formative or adorning by His will, out of the texture of what exists. But He does not say that more than the deep was in darkness. God created the heaven and the earth. "And the earth"; He did not destroy darkness, but brought in light on the face of the deep, and distinguished them for us; for Him they are both alike as to seeing. Light was there, where it was not before God commanded it to shine out of darkness. So in our hearts, there it is created, but not in se, because save in God who is light and dwells in it, light is not a thing but a state, though God may have created what gives it and so it. I do not speak scientifically and materially. Till we come to light again all is a mere ordering of the earth, and light is ordered for the earth, then indeed we have living souls, not said of man; but, God's image, how he became a living soul is in chapter 2: 7.
-- 4. "And God saw the light, that it was good" -- and divided it from darkness -- separated the two -- first darkness on the earth, then light
-- 5. The first light was day; the evening brought on darkness, then morning, and so one day from first day light to morning. There was evening and there was morning, i.e., light comes in where there had been darkness, and so one day; the continuance of the light is supposed till the next evening darkness, for God called the light "day". Hence though morning came after the darkness day was spoken of, and if we translate it simply it is plain; and there was evening and then morning -- one day. That is alternation, and day till next evening; how, is not said. But we have night; first, darkness everywhere on the deep -- light -- night and day -- evening and morning. The light may have been created there, or merely placed. There was light, and darkness separate, but also interchange and passage from one to the other, the gradual disappearing of light, and its dawning -- day, night -- evening, morning.
As regards the day, evening and morning, the light created out of darkness was called "day"; but there was no morning then, hence evening comes first -- the disappearance of light. But to complete the recommencement of day, evening and morning must come in -- the created light apart from darkness -- day; then there was evening, and there was morning, of course with night between, and that counted a day. Although the Jews count from the evening I cannot think this the meaning here; the light had been brought forth and called day; the evening was the close of that -- the disappearance of light. Then I read "and there was evening" -- evening was -- "and there was morning", one day. The night is not taken account of, but by implication, it was the primeval state -- absence of light -- not a creation. God's works are in the light, only if darkness come on light appeared again -- the dawn -- there was morning. The evening is noted first, because it closed the day just created, or ordered by light brought in.
Everything a man speaks of as created exists as much in dark as in light. The continued exercise of creative power, I apprehend, we are very ignorant about; that it exists we know and upholds, which is the same thing -- save the exercise of divine will.
-- 7, 8. Then the atmospheric heavens, the actual blue sky was formed; waters above -- the treasure house for the rain, and below -- the heaven or firmament. That was the second
day; there was again evening and morning -- the disappearance of the light, and its reappearance.
-- 9. Next the sea is made by withdrawing the waters from the surface of a part of the earth, and causing the dry land to appear. Nothing was made the second day, i.e., any new thing; the separation of waters above and below, leaving the heavens free as a firmament between, was not a new substance created, hence it is not said to be very good.
-- 10. But now we have land and sea; this was good. The air (sky or firmament), water, earth and sea are formed, and day and night.
-- 11 and 20: "bring forth" are different -- in verse 11 it is da-sha (sprouts forth) "let the earth grow with green grass"; and in verse 20 it is sha-ratz (swarms with) "let the waters swarm with swarms of ne-phesh" (soul); in verse 21 it is sha-ratz'.
I think a-sah' (formed) is used for forming, putting them in their order and place according to His will.
He made lights -- the firmament -- man, in counsel as to what he should be.
"Create" is used for heaven, and earth, and man; ya-tzar (formed as a potter) when it proceeds out of a certain sphere or place it belongs to; so even in chapter 2: 7 of man, see also chapter 2: 3.
-- 11 - 13. Plants are now formed; the earth "brings forth" -- this first here, and it was so, and good; a third day. The dry land and the seas were the actual forming the habitable earth, and then plants.
-- 14 - 19. Then luminaries were formed, serving to divide day and night, and form epochs, and regulated, or periodic times.
NOTE. -- "To divide"; day and night were already divided; this was a special ordering of the function of light as to the earth, in and by the lights.
It is a mark of revelation this to me, for no one inventing a plan would have separately formed light, and sun, and moon, at such an interval. This is order, not existence of light, nor forming, creating the bodies that bore the light.
-- 20. We have now the living creatures of the waters, and fowl in the firmament; fowl, though flying in heaven, belonging to earth.
-- 21. I do not see more in its being said "God created great whales" than the importance of the thing; vast as the creatures might be, they were mere creatures.
I think "created" comes in with intentional fitness; it is the beginning of living creatures, it begins with great whales.
NOTE. -- Up to that it had been the creation of materials, the earth, or mere plants; now of living beings.
Tan-ni-nim (sea-monsters) are very large water animals. And then we have it again when we come to man; there is matter and its forms -- life and its forms -- and man. He is made as part of the sixth day, but it is a new creation.
NOTE. -- In chapter 2 the living creatures consequently are wholly dropped; the heavens, earth, and plants are created by Jehovah Elohim, and then the detail of man, and his responsible connection with the paradisaical earth. We have what man really is first, ya-tzar, he is "formed" as a body, and then God breathes into him, etc.
NOTE. -- Also in chapter 1 we have after the making the beasts (verse 25), "And God saw that it was good" -- the closing judgment on each day's proper creation. Man comes afterwards, wholly apart.
-- 24. Next, on the sixth day, the earth brings forth animals. The earth brought forth, on God's fiat, all living creatures on it; they had as in the sea ne-phesh khay-yah (soul of life) -- man is quite distinct.
-- 25. "He saw that it was good", is said after the beasts habitually, at the end, before "there was evening, there was morning" -- day.
-- 26 begins a subject by itself, though on the same day. Man closes the formed creation, but he is not properly of it, and save as he comes in under "every thing God had made", there is no pronouncing that he was good; he is not otherwise part of what God looked on and pronounced good -- that closed with the animals. You have first light -- good; then separation of light and darkness; then the earth formed; firmament; sea; dry land (note, no fire is formed), it is covered with plants, and revolutions of time ordered by celestial luminaries. Then living creatures in water, and fowls, then animals on the earth; these are "good". Thus the form of creation, as such, was complete, and its lord was to be made as a distinct thing; I repeat, the closing "and God saw that it was good", comes before any question of man. On the sixth day the
earthly form of creation was complete; yet man was formed as a living creature, with a ne-phesh khay-yah, but it is not said when.
-- 30 seems to say that the beasts of the earth (as a general expression) ate the green herb. We have not "cattle" and "beast of the field", but whatever was a living thing on the earth (as in the ark I suppose). But the statements are not alike; in chapter 6: 21, it is only cattle; chapter 7: 8, cattle clean and unclean; chapter 7: 21, cattle and beast, without "of the field"; see chapter 2: 19, 20, where they are all first called "beasts of the field" and then "cattle" distinguished.
-- 31. It is not said of man "and God saw that it was good". It is said "He saw all that he had made, and behold it was very good", but man held an exceptional place, and his likeness to God, etc., made it more than a mere good creature; as part of the whole, of course he was so, but he was a distinct being.
Of course all things were perfect and the fruit of perfect wisdom, but there is counsel and plan only as to man.
So we find "it was good"; that is, the ordinary creation of that day closes before He begins with man, who is wholly apart. Counsel is taken when all the rest is already formed -- counsel to have man in God's image, not first "like" Him, but in His "image", one that represents Him and is formed to represent Him; he is characteristically one who presents Him to others. In order to this man is made after God's likeness, no doubt without evil in him, but as representing God, a centre of the whole system, looked up to as such, the centre of all affections; one conscious of being all this, a much more compound and relative being it seems to me, as having body, soul, and spirit, than angels are; and the single centre of a vast scene subject to him, which no angels are.
The outgoings of affection, and claim thus of reference to him, as was found in no angel (see chapter 2: 20); at any rate, man is here carefully contrasted with the living creature which the earth brought forth, is not called such (though he were so too); then the sixth day creation was finished and pronounced good, and then man is formed, according to counsel, according to God's image. Thus according to Genesis 1 man was a distinct being made, when the subject creation of plants and living creatures was complete, in the image of God.
"In our image, after our likeness" (verse 26); this has always
had something vague for me. I am clear it is not righteousness and true holiness; that is the new creation -- renewal in knowledge -- quite another thing. Adam had not the knowledge of good and evil, and therefore could not be righteous wholly. But, indeed, this thought is a total inapprehension of what the new creation is -- its difference; nay, man, though fallen, is said to be created after the likeness of God.
I am not yet clear as to all it may mean, but I do see an amazing position in "likeness to God". The consciousness of unity, of a supremacy above all around him, of being the necessary centre of all in relationship with himself; this bringing out all the affections of authority, and reception of dependence connected with this position.
Now this self-centred place as regards others (under God of course, for it was only a likeness and an image) was a most amazing one -- no angel held it, for -- more glorious as a creature -- he was a glorious servant, and the centre of nothing.
The actual dominion was a consequence; but it was one, "and let him have dominion". Innocent Adam would ascribe all to God; fallen -- ransack and overwhelm the world, to subdue it and be a centre, with the desire of empire, the Babylon of his creation.
Absence of evil made part of this place; as God created him he would have been a happy, beneficent head. Christ, the Image of God, will have this place.
The autarkeia (sufficiency in oneself) could not be in a creature -- it denied his nature; Man did not do to be alone, and he had Eve. Here he is the image of Him to come. As to "image" and "likeness"; "image" is that in which he was created; it was a kind of imitation, or reproduction of something; I believe this is just. "Likeness" is the form in which one is manifested; he was according to the likeness of God (see chapter 5: 1) he is in His likeness, because this was them manifested in man. Christ was made in the likeness of men -- this manifested form; it is not a creation of reality, but the manifested form He took.
"Likeness" seems to me to be what Adam was in that place till he fell. An image represents -- reproduces; likeness is conformed to. Man cannot quite lose the place, he is not another, nor a new creation; the likeness he has. He is still said to be made in the likeness kata theon, as in Genesis 1, gegonotas, the perfect (note James 3:9), it could not be otherwise
as to ginomai; we are renewed after His "image"; this at once shows it is not. We are called upon to be like Him, new creation, moral likeness practically, only we have received the life in which we can; this is a wholly new thing, divine, with the knowledge of good and evil. There was likeness to God in Adam, in that evil was unknown within. Conscience, as necessary from God's nature in him, so by man's constitution, had yet no place internally; but this is different from holiness in this, the absence of moral power, evil being known and kept without by the energy of the divine nature; necessarily by nature in God; and through grace and the participation of the divine nature in us.
An image represents, but a likeness corresponds, but it must be seen how far tze-lem (image) and d'muth (similitude) correspond to the English words in sense.
In Genesis 1 man is created in God's likeness, and man begets a son in his fallen one, this is the main point, but the latter was also after his image. The likeness is the appearance anything affords even if it be itself -- I speak of the word -- likeness is the fact of appearance by which I can represent to myself what a thing is. The image exists to represent him exactly, and as replacing him. When a likeness is very accurate it becomes an image; hence the shadows of the law were not the very image, they did not strictly represent, though there were analogies -- shadows of the highest importance. At Sinai, Israel saw no likeness, such was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord. But when man is created, he is created "in the image" of God; next, "after his likeness"; he was the representation de facto of Him on the earth, and not so "like him". Hence man is the eikon (image), the image and glory of God in 1 Corinthians 11:7, it is the place he holds as representing God; so Christ is pre-eminently "the image of the invisible God".
But James shows the folly of blessing God, and cursing him who was made in His likeness; it is not his place and glory as representing Him, this would be quite unsuitable, but what was created -- like what he blessed; he does not enter, I apprehend, into the question of the likeness being lost (those who cursed did not either), but the original constitution maintained as the archetype of God's mind -- not the result of fallen man; hence it is gegonotas, not genomenous -- the condition of creation continued to the mind, not the established
fact and its actual consequences. But then, I apprehend, when it is growth according and up to a perfect representation of the original of what He is as He expresses Himself -- not qualities, but full growth into the whole personal presentation of what He is -- it is image. Likeness is in distinct qualities; "image", complete presentation of the person. Hence in Colossians 3:10, they were renewed in knowledge according to the image, the complete presentation of what, and of all of what He was -- a wondrous position and calling -- here "likeness" would not do, indeed would have no proper sense -- "according to the likeness" -- it is according to Himself, but as presented, so as to be known in the revelation of Himself. Hence also in 2 Corinthians 3:18, it is according to or into the same "image" -- ("as in a glass" should be left out). "We with unveiled face beholding the glory", "are changed into" the very "image" itself of it; Katoptrizomai (I look into a mirror) is "looking home" or "thoroughly into it", and it is ten auten eikona (the same image).
These, and the passage Ephesians 4:24 are very remarkable in connection, and in a certain sense in contrast with the "image and likeness" of God in Genesis. Ephesians goes first in thought here, then Colossians; then 2 Corinthians 3. I think verse 3 shows it could not be mere likeness; Christ is written on the heart by the Holy Ghost. Analogous qualities would have been likeness, this is more. Still we behold, and are changed into, not Christ of course, but His "image", by life-giving and communicating power of Himself by the Spirit; so Romans 8:29, we are summorphos tes eikonos. It is a glorious calling, not merely like qualities -- through grace we have them as a consequence -- but complete, though not Him (see the transfiguration), but as Him. Compare 1 Corinthians 15:38, 39.
As explanation that "image" has the double sense, formed on the same idea, of anything that represents an unseen being -- as the image of Jupiter -- which need not be like, but of which the final cause is to represent -- and hence perfect conformity, because then it does represent, "he is his very image" we say; and this in moral things, i.e., in moral qualities, goes very far, for we cannot be like, really, without having them. The limit to this sameness in moral things, when there is likeness, is there, subsisting as a source in the Person of God, or of Christ who is God, and derivatively in us, for the Godhead necessarily
carries with it a character which is wholly its own; It is divine -- infinite -- has Its source in Itself -- sovereign goodness -- and the will of a divine nature -- not a duty.
There is another division of Genesis 1 besides creation, and the days, made by the words "and God saw" and "it was good". First He creates -- He then separating the elements, so-called, to make the kosmos or order out of disorder -- makes light to shine out of darkness -- the first needed act dispelling the darkness that brooded on the deep; and that was a day. Then the open expanse of heaven or sky; the second day. Then water and dry land, giving each its name; and the world thus prepared He pronounces "good". That is the first division -- an ordered kosmos.
NOTE. -- The saying "it was good" was not at the end of day.
Then He begins to adorn it, and first produces vegetation on the earth; this is another division, and "it is good"; third day. Then He orders the ephemeris of heaven -- lights to order seasons, etc.; only declaring therewith that He made the stars. This is the third division -- and "it is good" -- the fourth day. Next the waters are peopled, and fowl to fly in heaven, and this "is good" -- the fourth division -- fifth day.
Then beasts and other creatures having life, and this "was good" -- the fifth division -- part of sixth day.
The first mention of "life" and "moving creature" is in the seas, in the fourth division; here, too, blessing is first pronounced.
The fifth division of mere creation, and an ordered kosmos adorned, and peopled with moving life, ends with the earth bringing forth living creatures; God closes it by "God saw that it was good".
Man stands wholly apart, as the ruler, by God's purpose and counsel, of the earth He had created. Separated wholly in his nature and place; of, and from God; but yet connected with the living creature too.
There is no blessing pronounced on the living creatures of the earth, but on the Head of them, subjecting them to him; and all is on the same sixth day; their respective food being provided, but not life given to him for food; he had the fruit of trees -- the beasts, the green herb; and all was "very good".
Man being set distinctly, and separately at the head of all after "behold, it was good" pronounced on that division of the work; yet he comes in the same day with the cattle of the earth, and the general order. "Create" is used as to the universe, great whales, and man.
The difference of Genesis 1 and 2 is evident. I do not understand how the infidels make any difficulty or inventions about it. Evidently in chapter I he takes his place in the creation, the work of God as God amongst the creatures, male and female, like the other animals (only paired especially, and that noticed), whereas in chapter 2 it is in his whole moral constitution and being, and place, and relationship in the counsels and ways of God, as He has had to say to men, that he is noticed. Yet in one sense, as a creature, he is distinguished from all others; God thinks about the way of creating him, and has pleasure in that which is like Himself and His image. To this no creature could aspire. But it is not relationship, but God's delight in Himself and creation after it. Not the new creation (as often remarked) of Ephesians 4, that would never do; it could not fall -- ought not. It is not mere creation of a being, but a nature communicated -- partakers of the divine nature. Nor is it anthropomorphism (i.e., being the form of His body); that were poor and no purpose worthy of God, and pretentious too in man to think of. What is insisted on, however, is the image, not the likeness. So Genesis 9:6 But in James 3:9, "likeness", not "image". But "likeness" must, I think, come first for him to be so, as "image" must in the birth of Seth. As I have said elsewhere, an image "represents", a likeness is "conformed to". Seth did represent Adam on the earth, had his place, though not the first in it, or he could not be an image, but alas! he was in his likeness, too, a fallen sinner.
So when man's blood was to be shed it was not his moral goodness but the place he held and dignity, his representing God as he had been set, but which made it unfit he should be killed. James will not have man cursed, and here "likeness" is the fit word; we bless what God is and curse His likeness -- man, who was made in it, for so he speaks. Hence (as I have said elsewhere) He formed man spotless, sinless, free, with a will to be for ever used in the sphere he was placed in, and the centre of all the affections and reverence of the sphere he was placed in, and he stood alone as the centre of it all, the
image of God. Christ will be, though far more, yet this, perfectly; being One that in the highest sense fully partakes of the divine nature.
We have only then to inquire in what sense it is said in Colossians 3, "renewed into knowledge (epignosin) after the image of Him that created him" -- and this I think when reflected on is profoundly instructive -- Ephesians is, it seems to me, more the likeness. "After God in righteousness and true holiness". It is like Him -- what He delights in Himself. So in the commencement of the Epistle, "chosen in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love -- to himself". Hence too, I add, it is kainon anthropon, a new kind of man, and we are ananeousthai, it is the spirit of our mind, it begins all afresh with a man of a new kind, and there is no question of knowledge. Hence it is God Himself, as such, before whom we stand. In Colossians it is more Christ all, and in all, representative and image, Himself of God; and so in chapter 1, "who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of the whole creation".
Now there is the true full image of God only in the whole creation -- where in Adam was the image of Him that was to come; and even in forgiveness it is in Colossians, "Christ forgave" us; in Ephesians, "God in Christ". In Ephesians Christ offers Himself to God. So again it is here having put on the neon anthropon, the man that had not been there before, not the kainon, new in its kind of nature (though that it surely was too), but it is renewed (anakainousthai) into knowledge it gets during the apprehension of that which is quite new in nature. It estimates the new man -- Christ; for Christ is the perfect manifestation of what this new man is in us -- we see God represented in Him. The moral apprehension of what God is in Him, also represents Him before men. Hence too we are in Christ, and God is far more fully revealed? or rather spoken of directly, in Ephesians than in Colossians. We grow up to the stature of Christ, He is the head of the body and the like. Our life is the life of God, a kaine zoe. We are mimetai Theou.
In Colossians, "worthy of the Lord", we are to walk in Him, and Christ and His fulness are much more spoken of. Christ is our life, Christ is our all in all; the peace of Christ is to rule in our hearts, the word of Christ is to rule in our hearts, the word of Christ is to dwell in us richly. Now this is very
precious, but it is different; we have more of the fulness and life of Christ, our association with Him, in Colossians. His glory is more brought out, the fulness of the Godhead dwells in Him bodily. In Ephesians He is more the Man once dead, now raised and exalted. How precious to have both. But I think it makes the force of "likeness" and "image" plain for us, and makes the character of the two epistles very precious to us, and how divinely exact in things where man's wits, I am persuaded, would have never worked. And, remark "likeness" would not apply to Christ, for He is God. "Image" does, because He does, as Incarnate, represent God. He never imitates God, for He is God. We are called to these things, yet He is the pattern of them, because God is revealed in Him, but then it is original in Him. Walk in love as Christ loved us, and gave Himself, and to God; all this is very perfect. Hence in one sense we find Him more exalted in the Colossians, because He does take a kind of official, or representative place, and that has to be guarded against any misrepresentation. "All the fulness was pleased to dwell in him" (the English translation is horribly false) and all the fulness of the Godhead dwells in Him bodily. All this is as it should be. Compare Genesis 5:1, where it is "in likeness", because it is Adam's state. He was made in God's likeness, not what he was before others, but what he was.
It is not the fact of man's being a living soul that is the distinctive point, but the manner of it. The statement, "Thou shalt surely die" (verse 17), certainly implies that, had he not, he should not have died -- death entered by sin -- the power of the breath of God would have sustained life, but it would have been life here, in relationship with this world. All that follows is government, and consequence as to this -- outside the place into which God had brought man, in probation, in blessing. Afterwards, in this state, the question is raised of obtaining life there by obeying, as he had lost it by disobeying, but this, also, in the sphere in which it all took place -- the earth.
Then, indeed, God gives life (as in fact from the beginning
He had done, in view of redemption) in connection with another world.
Real, moral separation from God, sin, and what it was, is known only spiritually; though conscience, knowledge of good and evil, is in all, though away from Him.
NOTE. -- Hence whenever a man seeks eternal life (even if he has it) he is under law.
God has given it to us in His Son, though we do seek it in a certain sense, as we have it not yet externally in its own sphere; we have it, but not formally, in another world. Hence in Romans 2 (where the great eternal, unchangeable principles of good and evil are maintained, paramount to all dispensational dealings) those who go right, though eternal life be given as the result (apodosei will render), yet they seek glory, honour, and incorruptibility; we are called, as Peter says, by glory and virtue -- nor does he speak of being sinners merely -- that they were, but contentious, and not obeying the truth, and having pleasure in unrighteousness; yet the judgment is universal on every soul of man working evil.
If eternal life be given as John unfolds it, that does not weaken the judgment of right and wrong, which even made it necessary; only there is the atonement of full efficacy when life is given. Eternal life, though really given, and our life, is yet surely looked at in resurrection blessedness; yet while its nature could be fully happy alone there, it is equally true that its nature, which will be happy there, is already in us, and that nature is the principal thing, because it enjoys God, and this even true as to the millennium.
Eternal life will not be satisfied, though blessed then, because the Prince of Life and Peace is there, and the power and contradiction, and temptation of Satan gone; nor do I suppose they will die; still, if life be there, there is the seeking for glory, honour and incorruption; and the sight of Christ -- the perfect display of it -- sustains this.
There is not the kind of desire we have, because the eternal life, nature, is enclosed in this tabernacle, in which we groan in conflict and temptation, and they enjoy, under a present Christ, the full effect of holy and righteous power; but if groaning after it be not there, holy desires I doubt not will, but this will be in communion with Christ. The thing displayed is government, which will be celebrated, but there will be within, what will characterise saints, that they still wait a
better or fuller accomplishment of their relationship with God; only they wait in peace, fully glorifying Christ there.
In this chapter God forms man dust from the "ground", i.e., he had his form first of all without life, and then breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. God Himself was the source of life to him, "for we also are his offspring". He was Ha-adam (Man) from ha-adamah (the ground), and then got life from God; it was thus Adam became a living soul. That man, and man only, had life from God, not simply by will as an angel might, but communicated from God and in a body, is evident, but only as life -- existence. As to animals, they are formed from the ground, but they are brought to Adam to name as the paramount lord; it is their relation to Adam here, not their nature; all refers to Adam's place before God. Alive, through the breath of God in his nostrils; responsible; in the garden he had been placed in to enjoy; lord of the animals by God's authority; and God, interested in his estate, gives him a helpmeet taken out of himself, made for him, not a human being with him.
In the first chapter it was the animal's place with God as Creator, and Adam before Him; the second chapter is not repetition, nor is it another contradictory report as alleged -- one is creation, and every creature's place in it or over it; the other the whole moral place of man when God, the Lord God, set him up as such.
-- 4. The right division is here; the term "God", and then "Lord God" alone shows it.
The first chapter of Genesis should be clearly to the end of chapter 2: 3; this is complete, with Elohim. God created, and God rested, and sanctified the seventh day. The serpent speaks of Elohim, as such, in contrast with His creature; but Jehovah Elohim is in communication with Adam and Eve.
So Eve and Cain refer to "Jehovah", nor is it here "Jehovah Elohim", but simple "Jehovah"; only Eve in giving birth to Seth says "Elohim", so the following history of Seth's family is "Elohim". All this is simply historical, not the mind of one knowing Jehovah and His ways, showing what they were.
"Jehovah" I apprehend is simple relationship; "Jehovah Elohim" relationship, and moral dealing connected with God in His moral character as such. So in chapter 6 "Jehovah" said (verse 3) "My spirit"; that was directly His ways with men. But "Elohim" saw (verse 5) God, such as He is as God --
this was the great historical fact; (verses 6 - 8) his relationship to man -- "Jehovah"; (verse 9) historical again to the end, the Creator deals with creation; chapter 7 "Jehovah" deals with Noah, but I should begin chapter 8 at chapter 7: 17, thence to chapter 8: 19; verses 20, 22 are specific relationship according to the estimate of the writer; chapter 9 history, again "Elohim"; then clearly all is with the Creator, and the earth, so on till we have "Jehovah Elohim" of Shem. Nimrod was a hunter "before Jehovah", it is morally viewed, not merely before God -- "before God" would not have the same thought; exceeding great, but "before the Lord" is another thing; he was morally viewed and judged. Then in Babel we get clearly moral responsibility and relationship, and so on with Abraham, though there in electing grace. I think judgment is associated with "Jehovah", it is, however, mainly relationship.
NOTE. -- Chapter 4 is in connection with chapters 2 and 3, i.e., on the ground of "Jehovah's" dealings -- chapter 5 on the natural ground of "Elohim" again -- man's history on the earth -- "Jehovah's" previous dealings, as such, are referred to at the end -- chapter 6 commences "Jehovah's" dealings again.
It is to be remarked that Sodom, as Nimrod, is before the "Lord". The typical victory of Abraham gives Jehovah a new name, One above all gods, whose heaven and earth are, and that in possession.
NOTE. -- Though "Jehovah Elohim" is used in the history of Eden, both the Serpent and Eve say only "Elohim". Passing over Enos, whatever the force of that may be, we get Noah building an altar to "Jehovah"; I suppose a name religiously known from Enos -- there the blessing is, note, from "Jehovah", God of Shem, while Japhet's being enlarged is only "Elohim". The next is chapter 12, Abraham built an altar to "Jehovah", and called on the name of "Jehovah", chapter 14: 22, we have more; chapter 15: 2 is "Adonai Jehovah", if I recollect. Sarai calls Him "Jehovah" in chapter 16. The revelation of the name of relationship is in chapter 17, but it is not "Jehovah" in chapter 18, but that was appearing as a man -- it was altogether fitting. The angels and Lot say "Jehovah". In chapter 22 "Elohim" all through till Abraham calls "Jehovah" Jireh.
-- 5. V'a-dam a-yin "And man was not"; it was the state of things.
-- 7. N'sha-mah (breath) seems to me the act of respiration souffle; ruakh (spirit) (chapter 7: 22, etc.), the existence of respiration as life, spirit or life in us. God breathed into man's nostrils a nish-math khay-yim (breath of life), it is not there ruakh. Thus we have, in the Flood, all in whom was the nish-math ruakh khay-yim (breath of the spirit of life) -- this spirit of life itself -- ne-phesh khay-yah, a living soul, is all that constitutes individuality -- personality -- what taken together constitutes I -- a person without reference to the body, though in it and living in it, and hence, if used for a dead body as being the apparent person. The ru-akh is the power of life which is exercised in us in breathing, the thing that acts, and in us lives, by breath. Man became a ne-phesh khay-yah (soul of life) by God's breathing the nish-math khay-yim into the formed and organised dust, and so there was a ru-akh which was life, and in the body maintained by breathing. God did not breathe a ru-akh, nor did man become n'sha-mah, or even ru-akh, but a ne-phesh. Ru-akh being the power of life, this word ru-akh is used of Him; it is the active power of God. As to the rest, I have remarked.
As far as I see without a concordance we have only ne-phesh khay-yah (soul of life), then ru-akh khay-yim (breath of life), or nish-math ru-akh khay-yim (breath of the spirit of life) The ru-akh khay-yim (breath of life) made man a ne-phesh khay-yah (a soul of life). The ru-akh khay-yim (breath of life) was in flesh, but no being was ru-akh khay-yim (breath of life), man was (became) ne-phesh khay-yah (a soul of life). Then, moreover, arises the question, is ne-phesh khay-yah (soul of life) said of any but man? It is said, Genesis 1:20, 21, of what the waters brought forth, and verse 24 of what the earth. Whatever I suppose had ru-akh khay-yim (breath of life) was ne-phesh khay-yah (a soul of life). Indeed ne-phesh is itself breath or breathing. And this form of life, animal life (I suppose animal the same derivating) man clearly has. But the difference is immense of his becoming so by Elohim's breathing into his nostrils, so that we tou gar kai genos esmen.
The object of Genesis 1 is not the Beschaffenheit (constitution). God formed the beasts of or from the ground; so Adam, dust from the ground, not a man from the ground, but dust, and then breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and thus from this breathing in of God he became a living personality -- the offspring of God in His existence. Hence
God says (chapter 3: 19) "and to dust shalt thou return", but that in no way affected that which was breathed into the dust, or spring in man from that divine breathing. And, as I have remarked, whatever divine intimation there may be in chapter 2: 17 or chapter 3: 3, in the execution of judgment, there was only reference to this world, not to the soul; all that was behind. Thus, "He drove out the man", was removal from God's presence, and his place before God; but, externally, it was only exclusion from Paradise.
The whole question of the soul's relationship to God and a judgment after death is untouched here, though, as a spiritual person, I may see separation from God to be eternal ruin. Gradually the instinct of man's soul was lit up by the declarations of the Spirit in the Old Testament, particularly the Psalms, but there was no revelation of life and incorruptibility till the Gospel; they were not brought to light. The Pharisees were right -- they had concluded it from the Old Testament, and the Sadducees did not know the Scriptures and the power of God. But the Lord Himself draws it from "I am the God of Abraham", etc., and it is added, "for all live unto him"; death is only death as to this world and man's place there. This revelation has so much the more clearness that the original sentence was limited to that; all still lived to God. So of eternal judgment, it was part of Jewish faith, as in Hebrews 6, but formed no part of the original revelation. Wrath of God from heaven on men was revealed when the Gospel came in, for it met it.
The deep moral effect is justly pressed -- He drove out the man -- that the God of love, the Creator, should do; that cannot be too deeply estimated. It is rightly felt as judgment, when I know what God and a soul and divine favour means, but the doctrine of soul and life, etc., is not entered on in the passage.
So in Ezekiel, though "the soul that sinneth it shall die", it is still dealing with a living man, responsible on the earth; it may be used as a warning and threat, but its application is life on the earth in the land of Israel.
In 1 Corinthians 15 we have exactly the same statement as to the first man. He is ek ges, chotkos, and we see here that it applies to man as here in the body. It is mortal -- sown in corruption -- flesh -- corruptible, i.e., it is the body -- man alive
on earth in a corruptible mortal body. It is the body which is always designated thus.
In speaking of blood it is always the life of the flesh, not of man, but of all flesh, though of man as flesh, i.e., in his animal nature. Indeed, in Genesis 9 it is carefully distinguished.
The life is in the blood, but He requires the life of man from his brother, because in the image of God He made man. See Leviticus 17:10 - 14, and Deuteronomy 12, but I do not exactly know what da-mo v'naph'sho (the blood thereof for the life thereof) means. Query, if the accents be not wrong -- the munakh under da-mo -- and if it should not read, "for the life of all flesh (is) his blood", it is for his soul.
For v'naph'sho -- with, or for the life of it, compare Leviticus 17:14, twice, and Genesis 9:4; from the last it is evident, I think, that the expression means in its state of living existence, flesh; v'naph'sho, is not to be eaten; and that state -- of flesh ruined -- lies in its blood. Thus, Leviticus 17:14, becomes plain, "the life of all flesh", i.e., the subject life in flesh. The fact is simply stated at the end of the verse: ne'phesh kol-ba-sar' da-mo hu -- "the life of all flesh is its blood"; i.e., the abstract principle -- flesh's life -- is the blood. The beginning of the verse merely adds that it is in its state of living existence. Genesis 9:4 comes in to show that the term means with the life in it -- flesh, with the life in it -- or its state of living existence -- which is the blood.
This makes it, I think, quite plain, and it is important too.
-- 7. To go back to this verse; it is evident that it is the nature, the Beschaffenheit (constitution) of man, what he is really, and, at the end of the chapter, the woman's relationship with him in creation; it would have been quite out of place to have introduced her having the breath of life from God; it is not even said she had a living soul. In chapter 1: 24 we have what the beast is, how he was created, the way he existed as a living thing; as this verse does of Adam, how he did. In chapter 1: 26 it is not said even that man was a living soul; his distinct place in creation is pointed out.
As regards Eve not having the breath of God breathed into her nostrils, it is not the subject of this chapter, but her relationship to ha-ish (the man); otherwise she is included in the ha-a-dam, who is made in the likeness of God. They were called ha-a-dam in the day they were created, and she is fully aware of the prohibition to eat the forbidden fruit as alike
applicable to both (verses 16, 17). No doubt this speaks primarily of Adam by reason of verse 18; but it is not the less certain that it is ha-a-dam, the race, that is contemplated -- chapter 3: 3 gives the command to Eve as to Adam, ha-a-dam had it; verse 18 begins a history by itself, so verses 7 and 8 are both distinct elements in the account. Adam is looked at as ha-a-adam -- as the head of the race, but chapter 5 shows Eve was included, "Let us make Adam", but so God created ha-a-dam, male and female. This (chapter 1) is Adam's creature place, from Elohim -- chapter 2: 8, his relative place with Jehovah, including Eve, verse 18 et seq; his relative place to Eve; chapter 3: 20, hers to all that followed. Chapter 5: 1, 2, both in respect of the whole race.
-- 7, 25. All this is the sixth day.
-- 8. This is a constituted place of present blessing and trial. He was not created in Eden, but of dust, and the breath of life breathed into him, that is all; the garden is formed, and he is placed there under such and such conditions. The whole scene is one of relationships, and the footing on which the man stood in every respect.
-- 15 et seq: blessing, responsibility, purpose of union, conferred intelligent dominion; then his partner, but his own position was with God first. And though the woman was first transgression, yet the Lord says "Thou", and speaks to dam of the disobedience; for temptation never justifies departure from God.
-- 19, 20. This implies a kind of knowledge given of God, which man has not now. Nature, as such, was much more, and otherwise the domain of man.
-- 20. The first Adam is ha-a-dam, the second time simple l'a-dam (to man); that is, the first is man as such in his place, before God, put by Him in the place of authority, of which naming in Scripture is the constant sign. All was thus placed under his authority from God; this put him in his place with God as to this. God brought to him every beast, etc. But he, though in this place, with all authority from God (Psalm 8) found, in all that had been brought before him, no associate, no help k'neg-do (as before him), none to answer to what he was, and be before him as such. Adam, let him be ever so much ha-a-dam -- the man -- in this place of authority, found no companion for Adam.
Ma-tza (found), if not referred to ha-a-dam, must be referred to God, as bringing all this before him; the immediate antecedent is ha-a-dam, otherwise it must be referred back to vay-ya-ve (and he brought), verse 19.
-- 21. This is after he is in Eden and dominion over creation, but the purpose (verse 18) expressed, before Adam in lordship is conscious of suited relationship in contrast with creation, and of the quality and source of Eve, when he receives her. In Christ there is necessarily more in His divine purpose of love -- as man it is so also with Him; but He consequently takes her before the exercise of his lordship, but not before His title to it as exalted, see Ephesians 1:22.
-- 22 is Ephesians 5:27.
-- 23. NOTE. -- Adam had the knowledge and consciousness of the manner of the formation of his wife, though it were done in a deep sleep -- zoth (this) seems all through in contrast as well as hap-pa-am (the time), with the beasts. He gives her a name as well as them, but a name which in the most intimate way connects her with himself. If she was k'neg-do (as before him), it was that she was me-ish (from man). Yet it was in some sense the side on which he was connected with the animals. The hap-pa-am shows this clearly, as indeed zoth, though there is contrast, and this is important as being in creation itself, yet now called to walk together in the grace of life and in spirit; in k'neg-do there is neither male nor female, so truly is it a new creation. But here he gives her a name, as to the others, and Elohim brought her to the man; but then, spiritual things apart, he needed the help, it was not good he should be alone. She was not brought merely to know what he would call her; the identity too with himself, or derivation from himself, was his first thought. The cause of her name was in this. Still it was only one flesh. How thoroughly true and expressive is Paul's statement, "The man was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression", and "the woman was made for the man, not the man for the woman". In the creation she is put e'-zer k'neg-do (a help as before him). In the fall all passes with her, and Adam is I-shah, her man. But in Christ all is new, there is neither male nor female.
-- 24, 25. These are, I apprehend, the remarks of the inspired writer.
I have noticed it in a measure, but the passage from chapter 1: 25, 26 is very remarkable and distinct; the day's work ends, so to speak, as to mere creatures of God's hand, with "God saw that it was good". Then comes His mind, God said "let us".
Query, What is man? He is first God's image -- represents Him, and presents Him; that it might be rightly so, He created him in His likeness, but the point, as we see in verse 27, was His image. The beasts were l'min-ah (to its kind), but man kid mu the nu (according to our likeness); Adam begat a son in his own likeness, after his image, conversely.
Man is the image and glory of God -- stands out before God, as one that characteristically represents Him, showing His power and mind, and yet only representing and presenting Him. Hence Christ, in the highest sense, is the Image of the invisible God; he refers to God entirely, yet represents Him as a Viceroy. Besides this, Christ is God manifest, and so only fully presents Him; but we ought to present Christ, but that is another thing.
K' (as) or kath (according to) is not exactly "in", verse 26. We read of the likeness of the appearance of a man; the likeness of four living creatures -- of their faces; the likeness was k' (as) coals of fire (Ezekiel 1:13). Seth was in Adam's likeness, the same thing man is according to the way God is seen and known, he is not the same, but answers to what God is, and is set forth as him in whom God represents Himself. The conscious centre of reflective power, though dependent on God, or not really representing Him, but so void of evil that it might be so, and his consciousness towards God abide, that he might consciously be in the place which was His image. The Viceroy has the King's power, not his own, or he is not one, but has the King's power, i.e., not in efficiency necessarily, but in title, and place towards those below him -- "have dominion and power" is another thing.
But the peculiar place of man is most remarkable, he must be very miserable or very happy. No doubt, now, it is necessarily so, more than in Adam, because the knowledge of good and evil, and of God through the death of Christ is come in. But there was real likeness -- no evil in man -- though no holiness and righteousness and intercourse with God, free. A mind -- I do not mean reasoning -- having capacity for it, in communicated thoughts and feelings, as we know from his
history in the garden -- that which God could appeal to (not mere conscience), as competent to receive, and enter into, and return, as impressed, His thoughts; and so Adam even when guilty can, though wickedly, still about that which God is cognizant of. This is an immense point.
In "Adam, where art thou?" we have natural relationship recognized; "the woman thou gavest me", though thoroughly wretched, and wicked, yet deals with God, as the object of, and cognizant of His doings. And so does man now, though presumptuously, and wickedly. So God with Cain; he is able to understand God's moral reasoning. Now this was rightly so, less conscience before the Fall; he would own God, know goodness, know power, feel His goodness, know his place, know the beast's, know Eve's; have God's mind in respect of Himself, and His ways in creation; was competent, as looking to Him, to act naturally from him in his created place. All this was a great matter; in all this he stood alone. But the "image" was the place, the "likeness", glorious as it was, was needed for it; the "how" is not stated here, it is the fact that is stated.
Yet of course the word means, generally, something, but if I say "That man is very like his father", it is the fact, without saying what all the points of resemblance are, though, of course, there are such, but the fact strikes, when I may not yet see what it is in distinctly. And the fact here, as it is like God, is the important thing. I have no doubt it was in simply answering to the mind of God; a very different thing from reasoning to draw a conclusion, which is the proof of ignorance, and the opposite to what God does.
We can easily understand that, if God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, there must have been in kind, and capacity of being, what answered to God's nature, but in responsibility personally. It was as a creature -- "let us make", so God created, but in making He breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. Hence in his living soul there was necessary association with God, or, as a sinner, exclusion with a natural capacity of enjoying the sense of it hidden for a time. It is not here a question of what the affections towards God were, but of the natural capacity; so Elohim speaks to them, which He did to none else, even when He blessed them, besides much else.
The angels are never said to be created in the image and
likeness of God, as man is; I suppose they have the knowledge of good and evil, and so in creature righteousness and holiness, are so far more what God is. This, man had by the Fall, "the man is become as one of us, knowing good and evil"; this, therefore, was not the image or likeness.
The order of this chapter is interesting. After the temporal judgment of death we have Eve, or life, first brought in; faith recognizes life above and beyond death, and judgment of death. Then Jehovah clothes man through death, and takes away nakedness, and then prevents access back to the tree of life -- to nature's place in blessing -- which, indeed, now would be perpetuated curse. Abel's is another element; he comes -- approaches God by the slain lamb. In Noah we have another -- the deliverance by executed judgment out of the old thing into the new. This is death and resurrection as baptism figures it.
NOTE. -- Before Satan began to introduce, or could introduce, lusts into the heart of man, he produced distrust of God, and when that was brought in man was easily a prey -- all was really gone. As to the way of grace, see then with what infinite goodness, and surpassing grace God attracts, and warrants confidence in the chief of sinners, in Christ.
-- 6. It was dreadful -- so deliberate and bad -- yet how graciously met by Christ's being the woman's seed.
NOTE. -- "Where art thou?" is the first great question. It was the first visit, and, as I believe, the first day. God was walking about in the garden -- visited man -- it was natural for man to be with Him.
Adam is addressed, and speaks alone; he is the responsible man. So the woman here takes her place again, sad as the excuse was, "to be with me".
-- 9. God however called to the man -- Ha-Adam; it is a terrible scene, and a terrible confession, an unnatural thing so to speak -- "I heard thy voice, and I was afraid"; but the fig-leaves and the skins, long noticed by others -- man's and God's covering -- is most instructive and beautiful.
NOTE. -- The Lord does not say in coming into the world, as in the garden, "Where art thou?"
In Isaiah 50 we have indeed, "Wherefore when I came, was there no man? when I called, was there none to answer?" but He came with the full knowledge of the state of man, as he was, in full, ripened sin, and utterly evil and wretched, in the state in which the full development of the fall, in all its effects here, had set him; and then in the very midst of this, and as taking his nature, without sin, but exposed to all the suffering, He says, in perfect grace, "Here I am among you". What a truth this is! No doubt atonement was needed to bring us to God -- impossible without it -- but at least God was with us here, and with us such as we are.
-- 13. Query: the force of hish-shi-a-ni "cause me to be false or wicked"?
Elohim asks nothing of the serpent; with man and the woman he draws out the fact, and the conscience as with interest -- with the serpent, it is only "because thou hast done".
It is to be noted too Elohim gives no reason to the conscience of the woman. He assigns her her lot. With Adam He enters into the cause, he had listened to his wife's voice, and slighted God's -- the first was his excuse. So in verse 12.
-- 14. It is remarkable how every part of this, to the end of the chapter, is external -- government as respects this world; internal or eternal relationship with God is not touched upon, whatever may be implied or involved in it. The exclusion from the tree of life was de facto from living for ever in this world only.
-- 15 is an exception, yet even that is accomplished in the earth.
The question of eternal life or heaven is not raised, separation from God, death in trespasses and sins, left to a divine appreciation of evil; only that man fled from God's presence, and God drove him out from the place of blessing, and there is no way back. Only we have the blessed parenthesis of verses 20, 21, faith in life, and divine clothing.
Why enmity between the woman and the serpent? Was Adam qua Adam held for overcome? and that it was in the hope of the seed that any resistance or hope began?
-- 16, 17; and that Eve understood; how perfect all this is! The coming of Christ from heaven has brought out other light, but all this is earthly and governmental; the prophets and psalms had no doubt lifted up the corner of the veil into another scene of life.
I have noticed that all the judgments are temporal, or rather government on the earth, for the bruising of the head will be final; at any rate the conflict, and bruising of the serpent's head was not in Adam.
It is remarkable how God owns the superiority even in fallen Adam, he had to say to God, though the woman brought the mischief. So indeed Adam, "I heard", though indeed the history says "they heard". He was the image and glory of God -- wonderful place -- yet in the woman, the fall and the enmity; in the woman's seed, the conflict and victory. Eve then gets a name, not from Adam but from her children -- Khav-vah (life), not Ish-shah (woman). It was not her proper title, I think, but still a title of life and blessing, for death was come in.
When the clothing by redemption comes in it is individual, for Adam and for his wife. It is remarkable that here this thought, with others as to man's condition, of Elohim, recurs as in the making -- not in the present temporal judgment -- only here it is Jehovah Elohim, not simply Elohim, "as one of us". It is not properly counsel, not even when He says "let us make", but it is association with others; others are addressed when "the man is become as one of us". It is the statement of a fact -- but a statement in community of thought with others called "us" -- but there is community of act in the other, and consultation, not of doubt, but together, "let us make", or "we will make", and "now lest he put forth", therefore Jehovah Elohim sent him forth, and "He drove out the man". Man becomes a Gershom as to the earthly paradise, his natural seat. This was definitive exclusion, more than the earthly judgments. These are the whole of man's relationship to God as such. Then he is the head of a race.
-- 20, 21. This is wonderful grace of faith in life, and divine clothing; and it was present judgment before the driving out comes, which is a distinct announcement.
-- 22, 23. It seems to me also that herein Adam was kept from the sin of presumption; it was mercy in the midst of judgment. Not that this is the only consideration; it was the arrest of presumption, as defeating God's plans.
I have often remarked that this chapter presents only the earthly, or governmental consequences of sin; but the truth is, whatever were the developments of this relationship, or the
experiences of godly saints, which necessarily savoured of this truth, the full separation from God which sin causes, and is, was only brought out when He Himself was revealed, and indeed, could only then be. Indeed it is what is in Romans 1:18.
NOTE. -- Though I do not say historically, as they are separate statements, yet in the Spirit's mind, as presented by God; Eve's being the mother of all living where death had come in, and Jehovah Elohim clothing them with coats of skins, before they are driven out of Paradise, grace met their need by God's act, before they were driven from forfeited natural blessings (which they could indeed no longer so enjoy) by judgment.
It is carefully to be noted (I have already partially done so) that the sentences pronounced on the serpent, the woman, and Adam do not go beyond present earthly results, for even the bruising the serpent's head is his whole power over man which is on the earth; the whole question of the soul is behind More may be intimated in the distinct statements that come at the end of the chapter.
The first thing I notice in the end of this chapter is, there is no confession. Adam and Eve tell the truth as to fact, and God pronounces judgment accordingly, as He sees fit, but there is no moral action in their hearts apparent. The serpent is not asked, his judgment goes first by itself -- enmity and final destruction by power through Him who had the heel bruised. We then get the present effects in this world on to death (where, note, death is pronounced on the man only as representative of the race, as before the life -- breath of life -- was communicated); but then we find faith on man's part as to life, Adam called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living -- this, after death was pronounced. Then God clothes them both. Life is not from Adam, so to speak, it is the woman's seed; but clothing, and putting away nakedness (the witness of sin, verses 7 - 10) is Jehovah Elohim's act; this is full of instruction -- grace first brought and fully. Man is then driven out from the place of blessing, and all recovery of life naturally. This is the judgment, and blessing of man, as man before God; the history of the race comes in chapter 4.
NOTE. -- Death also is a part of the personal temporary judgment of man here, which in certain aspects is an important point. The relations of a soul with God do not come in here,
unless by mere analogy. Adam's calling his wife's name "Eve" is clearly a new thing, for he had, as united to himself, originally called her Ish-shah (woman) a supplement to Ish merely -- now he (the sinful man) is wholly laid aside. The woman's seed is what God has recognised as that in which the original mischief was to be set aside. Sovereign grace for the remedy comes in the place, and origin of the sin and evil -- man, as man, and Adam has no part in it -- only he gets the good of it as having faith, as Adam, had here -- he is clothed -- here it is individual -- there is neither man nor woman.
God then drives out the man, still the representative man, Ha-Adam -- of course Eve with him -- but in all this Ha-Adam is the representative man before God -- the head of the race.
Even in chapter 4 it is "Ha-Adam knew".
NOTE. -- Adam after that disappears; Eve expresses her thoughts and faith; the mistakes, but thoughts with Jehovah or God, are hers. The race is in its fallen -- Adam -- state; we have no Ish-shah any more, the whole scene is changed.
I have already noticed -- lust was not the first thing with Adam, but distrust of God which opened the door to lust -- and Christ's restoring confidence in God in the vilest of sinners. But there is more than this as regards Christ Himself. In Adam's case Satan got between Adam and God; the creature's place is dependence in confidence, from this Adam turned and got into sin. Satan insinuated that God had kept back, through jealousy, the forbidden fruit, because if man ate of it he would be like Himself; (Note: this is just what grace does with us, in wondrous mercy, in Christ before God.) Thus dependence was lost, and man acted for himself, for his own happiness -- this was will -- so that when dependence on and trust in God goes, necessarily will and lust follow. Now Christ, when tempted of Satan, was just the contrary; Satan tried to get Him to distrust God, and act on His own will for His happiness, to lead Him from dependence. The Lord met it by dependence, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that cometh out of the mouth of God shall man live". This was dependence on God (as for the manna every day). So as to trust, "Thou shall not tempt the Lord thy God" -- not try whether He will be as good as His word, which is distrust. Thus the wicked one could not get between God and Christ so as to interrupt dependence -- could not touch Him, nor introduce it into His soul. When he tried it was in
an open way and profitless, and he was rejected as an openly detected Satan, and that was all.
In the first instance, the most legitimate want, connected with will, would have been departure from God -- taking the world by will without God.
Dependence is a special claim in a world departed from God, more than even Adam in Paradise, though every creature is dependent. Christ trusted God perfectly, so as to wait for His will; then, on the pinnacle of the temple, He trusted God enough to wait till the occasion came for the accomplishment of promise, and would not try it in His own time to see whether he was.
NOTE. -- That God became a God of judgment is the consequence of sin; sin has turned Him into this; and man's knowledge of good and evil -- He is holy, He is righteous -- hence if evil comes in He must judge.
But with innocent man there was no judgment; He was blessed, with unfallen angels. Blessed be His name, He is love revealed in Christ -- that is what He is. A child may know his father to be a judge, but he does not know him as such. In fine sin has made God a Judge.
As to Conscience and the Fall, it is, in one point of view, the result of the Fall. Man is set in an anomalous state, they are "as gods", "as one of us", in one sense; they have the knowledge of good and evil, but with this immense difference -- God knows good and evil, but is as Supreme over it all; man, as a sinner, knows good and evil, but as a creature, in owning it, is subject to evil, he knows good and evil by being subject to it, by having sinned. God, moreover, the source of all good, knows all evil as something without, not of, Himself; man, the receiver of all good, knows it as in himself, subject to it in himself.
The first man was the failure of the creation under evil; the second man was, under God, the supremacy over evil. So the resurrection was the great point of evincement, for as death was the head and full power of evil, resurrection was the full triumph over it in man, even Jesus; hence Jesus became the second Adam after His resurrection; the power of manifested life in man, that is properly and fully, when He was manifested to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness by the resurrection from the dead. He, previously to that, proved His competency in His human state, and became
it, as having overcome evil -- overcome evil with good -- instead of being overcome of evil, when all natural good was made His, He overcame with good when all natural evil was made His. He had all quickening power in Him indeed while living in the flesh, but He was not the head as having been made perfect through all. But Adam sinned in Paradise, or Eve individually, and, as ejected, became the head of the fallen race. Christ acted faithfully in the world of sin, and as risen out of it, became the Head of the saved race -- the Author of eternal salvation to all them that obey Him. He was not subject to, but overcame evil; Adam in good and Paradise became subject to evil -- such was the contrast.
The analogy of the first and last Adam seems carried very far, if we take our portion in Adam as excluded, and in the Lord, the last Adam, as risen, and gone in within the veil; for our position in one and the other is largely in fact and morally fully correspondent. Just as we have seen in the circumstances which made way, laid the ground, for their respective characters elsewhere, in the sin of Adam, and the obedience of Christ unto death, and taking the two together as in the opposition of final results, it is most instructive.
This chapter, as already remarked, as a continuation of chapters 2 and 3, carries on, evidently, the question of sin into men's relationship with one another. It is not absolutely said that Eve gave Cain his name (Seth she did), but the thought is hers. Ha-Adam is merely the course of the race. Eve was Adam's Ish-shah here, but "Eve" is in sense; it was her thought on the Lord's mind of giving a seed; she has gotten a man -- "Ish" -- the name Adam gives himself in chapter 2; she came out of "Ish". She -- Eve -- on this great new event, had from herself, with Jehovah's will, and as from Him, a man, a born man, seed of the woman in the world. I say it was her thought; it is not "the Lord hath appointed", that was deference to His will. This, her feeling, though looking to the Lord; she looked at the gift, though she ascribed it to Jehovah; but it was man -- natural man -- a child of Adam really; evil, yet outwardly in the place God had set Adam in -- a tiller of the ground. Abel's place was a place out
of the natural place in which man was put, whatever brought him there; he kept sheep, a new and invented thing. In this relationship with God, he was clearly in faith, offering a sacrifice of slain beasts; Cain in nature.
Then comes out exasperated hatred; but first the immensely important ground it is all on -- law and gospel. First, we have God still in intercourse with fallen man; He had clothed Adam -- grace had wrought; next, acceptance if he did well -- that is law -- if not a khat-tath (sin offering) was there, ready for him; that was the ground he was on with God; as to his brother, as the elder, Abel would be subject to him. But what man is comes out; hatred is above all fear, and remedy or intervention of God. Sin against one's brother fills up the measure of sin against God, through which they were already cast out. There is, again, a present judgment as to the ground; and, besides hiding from God's face (which his own conscience tells him), he goes out -- here his own act -- from the presence of the Lord, not in sorrow -- no humiliation in His presence -- the despairing complaint of selfishness -- and makes the world as comfortable as he can without Him.
I do not dwell on the evident figure of Israel, I have spoken of it elsewhere; the moral ground is what I look for here.
In Seth's case "God hath given"; it comes from Elohim's, -- God's -- own act, not "I have gotten" from "Jehovah"; here again Eve is in the sense, and all right. Subsequently the worship, or owning of God -- connection of men with Him -- was with Jehovah; a name of relationship. This closes this part.
This was the breaking out of an evil nature, when it was there. There cannot be a more important chapter, whether we consider the fact of Jehovah's intercourse with fallen man, or the ground He puts him on, or Cain's conduct afterwards, showing where his nature was. Yet it was founded on the intention of God with Adam. Cain's worship, after Adam and Eve having been clothed with skins, shows great indifference and hardness I think; he had the signs of sin and judgment always before him. Not so Abel; yet he approached by faith -- it was Jehovah. Intercourse had given occasion to worship; it was duty, only duty in Cain; spiritually intelligent approach, which had taken notice of his state, and God's grace, in Abel.
NOTE. -- Clothing is from God -- sacrifice from man, only the
true Lamb was God's Lamb. It is remarkable that Gin's worship should be connected with nature and the curse, of which he was daily cognisant; Abel's with God's act in grace, however noticed or apprehended, for slain beasts had been the means of clothing Adam's nakedness.
This chapter is a wonderful display of grace, after the fall and exclusion. Cain is nature, and the world after Christ's rejection.
The woman looks for the promise in nature, and connects Jehovah with it -- "I have gotten", etc.
Cain's is the worship of nature, when doing what God had set man to do. But nature under grace is "vanity" (Abel); and if connected with Christ, i.e., coming, owning sin, and by death, is rejected of men, and under death must have, in itself, its sentence. In nature Jehovah owns right and wrong. If Cain did well he would be elevated, and his brother subject to him; if ill, there was sin; then sin is completed by murder, and then "instructed" (Enoch) world comes in; but grace, acting in the midst of nature, fails under the power of evil, i.e., of result here. So Christ has in death fully shown.
Then the world is built up -- then we have God's appointed seed.
-- 1. It is "Ish" -- not "a son", not "Adam", not "Enosh"; there is triumph in what is right, and promised, but according to nature -- he is born after the flesh -- not Seth "appointed".
"I have gotten from Jehovah"; verse 25, "Elohim hath appointed me" -- but that was after Abel.
There is nothing new in it, but it is wonderful to see how complete is Eve's mistake as to the man from Jehovah. The first man -- his blindness and natural insensibility to sin, and where it had placed him, and thinking to worship with what was the sign of the curse -- then man of the wicked one -- murder and falsehood, and driven out from God -- the world and its enjoyments -- the whole history of the first man.
Abel coming with the sacrifice, as the only way of access to God, receives testimony that he was righteous; God testifying to his gifts. Seth is the appointed man instead of both.
-- 2. Cain was in his legitimate place according to nature; chapter 3: 23. Compare Zechariah 13:5, rightly translating the close -- "from" is not amiss -- "with" (His aid and blessing).
-- 4. Abel's is wholly out of, and above nature and duty; it is faith.
NOTE. -- Though there is no way back to life here, there is access to God while here through faith.
-- 7. "Accepted?" ("and ... door"); but the khat-tath (sin-offering) is at our door in Christ.
-- 7. I have long thought that "sin-offering" is the true translation here, but I am confirmed in this thought, by the whole course of the history, in an interesting way.
In chapter 4, the question is of the state of man, and how, being such, he could approach God; the answer is, by expiatory sacrifice, which owned the state of sin, grace, and the remedy it afforded; or, rather, the self-offering up of another to God -- it is "fat", not "blood" as for committed sin. It was not a question of guilt from sins, but of man's state, so here it is a sin-offering "if thou doest not well". The two things are quite distinct, one is the abstract consideration of man's estate before God; the other, getting an individually purged conscience before God.
I cannot but think that lap-pé-thakh khat-that' ro-vet'z' (sin will be the lier at the door) is a sin offering, meaning it is quite ready -- "lying at the door" I suspect to have come from this. We have the doctrine of the eldest, as before of the woman -- dependent -- looking up to -- and desire -- and being ruled over. If it be a "sin offering", it shows how early it was spoken of by God -- a thing known and recognised.
NOTE. -- Not only was there faith, but God had intercourse with Cain, as having to say to man after the announcement of the woman's seed, and the skins -- the person and the work.
It is objected that till the law there was no khet' (sin). In general, I apprehend this is just, and the difference important; as in Abel's sacrifice it was the state of man -- "Where art thou?" -- not what he had done. The burnt offering took this ground; it was not for particular faults which a man had committed, but that man, driven out of Paradise, alienated in sin from God, could not come to God as if nothing had happened; sin, and death for sin, and the glorifying of God as to it, must come in, in order to approach acceptably; and this was the general character of sacrifice till the law made imputable transgressions. It was the ground on which sinful and excluded man stood with God.
The blessed Lord, having come down to reconcile us, took this place -- was made sin -- and His perfected obedience was, when He was made sin, He drank the cup.
When I see sin really, as God sees it, I see it is putting away; I see what it is, only when it is put away. "If one died for all, then were all dead", they were away from God in sin, and He, in its judicial infliction, drinking that cup, was forsaken of God -- just feeling it as it really was, as forsaken of God -- separated from the presence of God -- as to what His soul felt, and judicially. Hence when sin is presented to me fully (not merely my particular sins), Christ and His cross is presented to me -- He, on the cross, a sacrifice.
And I think there is allusion to this in the Lord's word to Cain; I do not say it is to be translated "a sin offering", but sin has been laid at my door by God -- how? -- in Christ. No doubt I have sins to be dealt with; but, when the world is convinced of sin, the whole status of man is exposed -- it is in the cross of Christ. So, even here, it is in that "lying couched at the door", that sin is laid there.
Still, it is to be remarked here that the case of Cain's not doing well is put, i.e., not the status of Adam; it is a positive and imputable fault which is supposed, then sin "lies couched at the door", and the word of course is so applied -- sin-offering.
If the s'eth (accepted or "exaltation") refers to his exaltation above Abel, not to his place before God, though it be supposed withal, then khat-that' (sin) refers more to sin itself. I am still rather disposed to take it as a sin-offering, at least Christ presented as such. It is not "at thy door", and it is a reply to anger and a fallen countenance.
There was no need for it, he well-doing -- exaltation and acceptance of person; and in ill-doing -- the remedy there.
It brings in the state of man before God, and in Abel's offering, that state met, and acceptance -- the burnt offering; and thus, supposing sin, the remedy there. There was no need for irritation or hopeless despondency.
It may not be treated of formally till Leviticus 4; but, when these great elements are discussed, it comes in as a part of the needed punishment, and remedy of God for the sinner's sin.
Man was ruined, there were no offerings for sin; Noah offers, and the Patriarchs their burnt offerings (these last only in Palestine, and the young men at Sinai, Exodus 24), and in these cases sin-offerings were not in place; when the law had raised the question of imputable sins, then they were; but here, as a great principle, they are in their place. After the
general principle in Abel, Abraham's offering (chapter 15) was the founding a covenant, but it was hardly a burnt offering.
As regards khet' (sin) there is another difference. In the o-lah' (burnt-offering) as Abel's, and all others, man approached God by it; he came by it freely to approach and worship God. So here Abel comes; the manner of coming, as recognising all truth, is in question. It was as referred to -- it is willing, though due, heart coming to God -- but how to come, now sin had come in, and man was out of Paradise. But Cain's was positive, active sin, and a sacrifice required for that evil; not only man was a sinner and excluded, but he had committed a sin, and against his brother -- hence, khet' (sin) was there; still I think presented by God in Christ.
I cannot come and tell the Jew who has slain the Christ, nor the world which has not believed on Him, of their actual sin, without presenting the sacrifice lying at their door; that is, in the grand principle of it, God's way of presenting their sin to them.
In this way the sacrifice of Abel, and Jehovah's words to Cain, have great importance amongst the great foundation principles here set forth; we have the burnt-offering, and sin-offering as the great foundation principles of relationship, and clearance with God, replying to "Where art thou?" and "What hast thou done?"
-- 8. The completing of sin in its second part.
-- 10. See Hebrews 12:24.
-- 13. Rather as in the margin, but in the sense of despair.
-- 17. A city here first -- the world.
But in Lamech we also return to the Jews.
Civilisation is not merely post-diluvian.
Is there nothing peculiar in va-y'hi bo'-neh (and he was building) instead of ba-nah (he built)? Is it not characteristic rather than historical?
It is nothing new, but very striking, how much more activity and interest there is in the history of Cain than of Seth. It comes first too -- it is after the flesh -- in fact Abel disappears before it -- but less of the individual than of the world.
In Seth we have individuals only -- they lived so long and died, that is all; but the progress of the world is largely recounted in Cain's family, cursed from the ground -- hidden from God -- but establishing cities, and arts, and luxury, and
a sister whose name was "Pleasantness". But what a character it gives to the world -- "despair" with God, and marked "not to be killed" with man -- city, and luxury without God -- gone from His presence -- is that the world?
We have another element, "not of the Father". Still it is in rejecting Christ what it is.
He went out from the presence of the Lord in despair, not in repentance -- with his life safe. I cannot but think Lamech's a threat -- "Have I done as Cain? I will be seventy-seven times avenged" (only I admit it true of the Jewish remnant at the end, as slayers of Christ).
We have the difference of the name of Seth, after we have learned that all is "vanity" (Abel -- He'-vel). "God has appointed", not "I have got".
NOTE. -- Here it is Elohim not Jehovah, the whole thing began again, so to speak, from Elohim, and so does chapter 5 completely; Cain is not owned at all; Seth is instead of Abel, though he takes the place of rejected Cain.
Then began a distinctive people of God in connection with the name "Jehovah"; not a people called out by it as Israel. Cain had gone out from the presence of Jehovah, and taken care of himself, settling down where Jehovah had made him a vagabond; but in Seth's time the matter began again, and Jehovah was owned on earth.
We have He'-vel's (Abel's) portion, a better one not here revealed.
Is there anything in the names Khanoch' (Enoch) and Enosh?
The condition of the world and man is singularly pictured out in all this.
26 is a distinct part. Enos is in contrast with Ish; nor is it simply Adam -- the race. They took the lowly place failure and death put them in. And then (men) began to be separated to the name of Jehovah, and to be distinctively associated with Him, and worship Him. This was the knowledge of faith; it is not "on Elohim".
Nothing provokes the world like divine favour. But Jehovah reasons with Cain on the ground of responsibility, and present government or order, in a world of sin -- doing well, a sacrifice of sin-offering if needed, and superiority here in the world. But this, though he did not care for God, would not do; his jealousy was of man enjoying this favour in grace --
allowing it to run. Cain was utterly evil -- no relenting -- no profiting by God's patient goodness.
The order is, Abel accepted according to Hebrews 11 -- faith; himself accepted and his gift -- sin -- death -- judgment -- propitiation recognised.
Cain, like the world, untouched by conviction, is not accepted; as the natural man, furious; Jehovah reasons with him, the case put before him, in grace, to do well, or, in grace, a sin offering is there -- no relenting, nor profiting by it -- fills up sin against his neighbour; judgment from the world (as Jews with Christ) -- no hope or relenting -- despair.
God had not said to him to leave His presence. Cain does and goes out from His presence himself, to dwell where judgment had made him a vagabond, and then comes the world -- the world as God sees it in its true place before Him.
NOTE. -- Cain and Abel -- wicked nature and suffering in grace -- both disappear; Seth only is man appointed of God -- Christ, when He comes again.
Otherwise we have man wicked, the rejecter of God -- Adam fully developed -- Christ and suffering saints in grace, both pass away. Seth is the appointed man -- Christ, as the Son of Man, to come.
It is a wonderful chapter -- the whole history of nature and of grace.
This begins quite anew; it is a new division of subject.
We have the moral history of the antediluvian; history, much more of Adam (man) in what proceeds; the rest was nothing, save Enoch. They lived and died; of Cain's family a good deal -- they civilized the world. Here there was one Enoch, and the prophecy of a world to come.
-- 1. As to Adam (man), it is only said the "likeness" of God, not "image", the point here being what he was, not his place.
So it is Adam, not Ha-Adam, the representative man. But we return to the first chapter here, it is "likeness", not "image". Man is still, according to place, the image and glory of God; this will be actually fulfilled in Christ. The answer in God's mind to "what is man?" for all failed in glory, is to
be made good in Him; failed that is in responsible man. In James we have him made in the likeness. Christ is never said to be like God -- nullum simile est idem (there is no "like" that is "the same"); He was the revelation of God, in a word He is and was God. But God created them also as an animal race, and both get the name, of the one created, as being this race; but here individually; there, but as one being characteristically. "Adam begat a son in his own likeness, according to his image"; in chapter 1 it is in His "image, according to his likeness"; but Seth was in likeness, morally, the same thing. Seth, though taking the place of Adam, and so according to his image, could not have Adam as that of which he was to be an image. Adam was created to be God's image, Seth was in a certain sense in this place, compare 1 Corinthians 11:7, but he was not Adam's image, but according to it, but he was in his likeness. These are Adam's generations, not the woman's hopes, or faith, but what man, a child of Adam, was; in chapter 4 Seth is God's gift to Eve, here the "child of Adam" (male and female); Adam begat a son in his own likeness.
Nothing can be more striking than the way in which "God", and "Jehovah", are distinctively used here; "Jehovah" always connected with moral government; the dealings of "God" with those he had to say to.
Enoch walked with "God"; verse 22 -- it is the ground which "Jehovah" had cursed, verse 29 -- it was dealing of the righteous Governor.
God is the Being, the Originator, of all things, and is named in His nature.
Thus, in verse 1, we have "God"; so Enoch walked with "God", "God" took him. Verse 29, which "the Lord" hath cursed; so chapter 6: 3. But in chapter 6: 5, we have "God", because it is what He is, Himself, in His nature; but it repented "Jehovah", here He is in heart occupied with His dealings with man; so chapter 6: 7, but in chapter 6: 12, it returns to "God's" own estimate, as "God", and so to the end. The Sovereign Originator of all is now going to set it aside, and begin a new world. In chapter 7 he begins to deal with man in a relative, so to speak, official way, and it is "Jehovah"; He is carrying out His thoughts and we have "clean" and "unclean". In chapter 6 He was a Creator, here a Governor, and see how they are brought together in
chapter 7: 16. In chapter 8: 1 - 19, it is "God" setting up a new thing; verses 20, 21, special dealings with Noah and men. In chapter 9 "God" establishes the new earth; in the matter of Ham, verse 26, we have "Jehovah" again. The contrast of chapter 4: 1 and 25, noticed precedingly, is very striking; there was, though on divine ground, in a certain sense, assumption in verse 1; all is ascribed to sovereign originating grace in verse 25 -- but this brings out a people, who know the revealed "God" in His name.
NOTE. -- In chapter 1 God gives names Himself to "day" and "night", to "earth", "heaven", "seas" (not to "light", light was light on the face of the deep), to the things formed on the earth, or in the seas He does not -- His word brings them forth, and they are good when He sees them -- nor in this chapter, when they only come in as part of Elohim's creation, though in a special way does He to man. But in verse 2, we learn, when man's history is begun, God, not Jehovah, called their name Adam in the day He created them; that was the name, as a race. Adam gave Eve her name first Ish-shah, then in faith, as I suppose, Eve -- Khav-vah -- and he gave names to all animals.
NOTE. -- Adam, though asleep when it was done, knew whence Eve was -- Ish-shah is her natural relation to Adam -- Eve (Khav-vah) her place after the fall, and revelation of the gift of the seed. The repetition of chapter 2: 19, that "out of the ground Jehovah Elohim formed every beast ... and brought them to Adam" is to be noted. So he gave them names as his, and so to the fowls (fishes are outside this); but there was no helpmeet (k'neg-do). Then the woman is of himself, yet given a name -- subject to him -- his.
She is afterwards Eve, but now Ish-shah; names of large import; first, when death was written on him, he gives her the name of Eve -- God had separated her -- the seed of the woman was to come, and Adam retires as it were, accepts it by faith as promise and gives her the name, not of connection with himself, but of her posterity; death, with God's judgment on the Serpent, did not hinder her being Eve -- she had that place by promise, not by connection with Ish; but in chapter 5 the race is taken up in both, on the ground of creation, and now fallen.
-- 3. Seth is in Adam's likeness and after his image; he was like Adam (fallen), and represented him too on the earth.
With Cain and Hevel (Abel) we have nothing of all this; they had their own history, but are not brought forward as any way representing Adam, or taking place, it was intrinsic moral walk, yith'hal-lekh' eth ha-Elohim (walked with God -- not Jehovah), not merely relationship in government, as in chapter 4: 20.
-- 27. Methuselah died, at the very latest, the year of the Flood -- according to Septuagint 14, Vat. 6 years -- all make him 969.
-- 29. The Patriarchs here were in the Adam condition, calling on the name also of the Lord distinctively; not Cain's condition -- their actual personal state, save Enoch, we do not know. This verse shows the Adam state and the Lord owned.
-- 32. Shem was 98 when the Flood came; and it is likely these three sons were born after Noah was 500 years old, certainly all but Japheth. Probably none are named but those who escaped -- born when apart from the world; he may have had, probably had, many others, unless he lived alone all his life till then. Twenty years before this he received the revelation of the end of all flesh; the direction for the ark was later, chapter 6: 14 - 16.
Up to this chapter I see three characters of sacrifice. God covers our nakedness, that is our first need as sinners; next, coming to God in worship, we are accepted, personally, according to the value, and worth of our gift. Then God smells a sweet savour and says "I will no more curse". But this makes a new heaven, and a new earth; here earth, and note here, in spite of, and as meeting the wickedness of men, compare 6: 5; and it is Ha-Adam here. But then we have something more here; they were clean beasts. It was founded on God's mercy, according to His mind, an odour of rest. Abel's owned death, and needed sacrifice, in himself -- came in faith, and all its value was on him; but Noah's was the sweet savour of Christ according to God's mind, acceptable in itself so as to bring favour and blessing on the world. Abraham's is more worship of God, who revealed Himself; doubtless he offered sacrifices, but it is not what is noticed; so at the second altar he called on the name of Jehovah.
-- 2. Jude and Peter seem to make the B'ney ha-Elohim (sons of God) the angels; but God effaced all this in the deluge, and so may we; but the Titans and mighty men, heroes, find the origin of their tradition here.
I have little doubt this is purposely obscure, but the language here, in itself, tends to the thought that B'ney Elohim (sons of God) were not of the race of Ha-Adam (man).
"Wives" is not right; nashim (women) is not necessarily "wives". They chose those they liked, and compare verse 4; and query there if it be not "and also after the sons of Elohim went in to the daughters of men, and they bore to them; these were the heroes, mighty men which were of old, men of name"; these were Nachsatz.
-- 3. "Jehovah said" -- all is of Jehovah till the historic recital, verse 10. "My Spirit shall not always strive with man", in his wanderings -- he is flesh; "yet his days shall be", etc.
Yadon, from dun (judges, contends with), rightly "strive" or "plead" I cannot doubt; it is the regular sense of din or dun, and even where it is judge, very often the judging is a judicial striving of God with man; see too the noun.
-- 3, 4. Here we return wholly to the race of "Ha-Adam".
It is a question whether akharey-ken asher does not mean "after that", "thereupon that", and no stop, or only a comma between "them" and "these"; Asher (that) is not "when", or "als"; akharey-asher (after that) is clearly so used, and I see not why akharey-ken asher; asher is not "when", that I know.
I can understand two distinct classes here, but they seem to have subsisted together, though the first may have, in the first instance, preceded the second. They may have been Cain's progeny; another offspring of the unholy mixture of the sons of God and daughters of men. Certainly the two are brought out as bringing about the Flood, they both characterised the epoch which brought about the Flood -- "those days".
The principle is the mixture of those who are of God with evil; but I am not aware that B'ney ha-Elohim (sons of God), is ever used for men. Job 38:7, they are surely not men, but angelic; so Job 1:6. B'ney El khay (sons of the Living God) in Hosea 1:10 (in the Hebrew 2:1), is surely different. Judges are called "Elohim", but not B'ney ha-Elohim (sons of God). But there is no question of that here; so that the
usage is certainly for beings angelic, not human, in nature; see Jude. I cannot for a moment doubt the force of this B'ney ha-Elohim (sons of God), and b'noth ha-Adam (daughters of man); and Jude quite confirms it. It seems to me also that akharey ken is not "afterwards" but "after that"; i.e., the consequence of this alliance; they were Titans and such like. All these traditions had a source. It may be questioned if the nephilim (giants) and gib-bo-rim (mighty ones) are identical.
But then, afterwards, only the general state of the race of Ha-Adam (Man) is spoken of. The sons of Anak are called nephilim; elsewhere giants are "Rephaim"; the connection with the traditions of giants, Titans, etc., seems evident.
I cannot help thinking that the war of Titans (mythology), and the details referred to in them, are directly connected, not merely with the fact of the deluge, but -- though mixed up with the original desire and temptation, "ye shall be as gods" -- with the apostasy of angels, and the frightful oppression, war, and corruption, and open rebellion against God. No doubt Scripture -- the Spirit of God -- has clothed all this dreadful evil with a veil of brief words, and the pious mind will see the divine wisdom, and perfectness of this, yet enough, as in so many cases, to explain all the various traditions of the heathen world as to it, and that is all we want. The tartarosas of 2 Peter, and the sinning angels of Jude; the genealogy of Titans, and their end are too closely connected not to give a character to the history of the world before the Flood, which accounts for its being passed over. It is curious that these poor slaves of the enemy while worshipping the gods who, they alleged, destroyed the Titans, yet honoured these as illustrious, and the origin of creation; and how Satan had succeeded in making the righteous Noah and his family, who were spared, into fallen gods, though they owned the judgment on apostasy which had spared them. But such is man, if not kept of God.
They are called giants or nephilim, giants I suppose earthborn; all this history is their being men of renown. Ovid says, besides the violence against men they would have aimed at heavenly rule, but were judged. Yet the giants and Titans are said to have been in contention; the oppression of the heaven-assailing rebels, who would have introduced all this, may be here alluded to.
Hesiod's making only three ages before the Trojan war is remarkable; he very likely meant to compliment his ancestors -- the common bent of poetry.
He says: Titenes upo zopho eeroenti kekruphatai (the Titans have been buried in murky darkness).
And again tois ouk exiton esti (for whom there is no coming out).
And again before this he says: kai tous men Titenas upo chithonos euruodeies pempsian kai desmoisin en argaleoisin edesan (and sent the Titans beneath earth, whose ways are open to all, and bound them in grievous chains).
I have sometimes thought that in this verse (verse 4) two classes of persons are referred to -- the giants, and men of renown. They were men of renown (I apprehend the article in the Hebrew is emphatic), the builders of Babel aimed at it; it is possible that the mythologists mixed up this story with it. I apprehend certainly it is "the" giants were in the earth in those days, and also after that the sons of Elohim came into the daughters of Adam, and they bore to them, the same were mighty men which were of old, men of name -- of the well-known name, an'shey hashshem, the men of name.
I do not in the least pretend to say how the impiety against heaven was shown, nor disentangle all the mythological accounts, but the great facts seem plain; Jude must of course be looked at, his subject is apostasy; Peter's, just judgment -- apostasy (Jude) as leading to judgment.
With Jude, the angels are cast down, and not seen, they are upo zophon (under darkness), Sodom and Gomorrha prokeintai deigma (lie there as an example) in the earth; this is all fitting.
In Peter, we have it therefore with the Flood -- the world's judgment, and a remnant saved -- judgment being his subject, and an elect remnant. The reserved judgment no heathen could know, Satan would not teach them that, for it was responsibility was there; the eternal judgment, or of the secrets of men's hearts, was not his subject of course -- now that full salvation is come in, he may reduce men to this level, quod nota, and so he does. Hence the importance of full grace for deliverance from him.
NOTE. -- Milton -- I do not know what men of taste will say -- was a miserable engrafting of all the heathen mythology
on what was, after all, error so as really to make a fresh heathenism; that is the effect for the imagination, and so merge the power of what approached to truth in it. With most beautiful poetry, no doubt, it is a very mischievous book; indeed I have ever thought it so since I read it. But he was full of various learning of this kind, and turned Scripture scenes, and his views of truth (which was not the truth) into it. Purity mixed with corruption is corrupted purity, and that is not purity at all, but as an effect, and an evil worse than new corruption, save indeed, as the word implies, that it is always that, for corruption always implies something good corrupted, there is no evil created. What God has had to bear with in man! but He is perfect in all, and oh! how great the grace which has brought, and brought us, into the perfect light in grace and truth by Jesus Christ.
The Satanic idolatrous version of divine facts, as to God or man, with which truth is connected, having its origin in what, in itself, truth had to tell -- this truth, as given by God, both gives us the positive blessing of itself, and explains, and guards against all that Satan derives from it.
Apply this to the corruption of Christianity. I do not doubt that this system will come in again in the gods, mauzzim (Daniel 11:38, 39), and that Satan will thus, where he exercises his direct power, so rule the world. How great the deliverance of being in the light.
NOTE. -- That the evil being in the form of a serpent was called aphophis -- the sacred asp -- or the giant in Egypt, he was also called the brother of the sin.
-- 5. But besides this, man's -- Ha-Adam's -- wickedness was great upon the earth; I say, besides this, for it was general, though this may have had a great deal to say to its coming in in this shape. Kol-hay-yom is surely "continually" not "every-day" -- "all the day".
-- 5. "And God saw" -- He sees all things; He cannot forget His faithful ones, and He does nothing, but He makes it known to His servants the prophets.
-- 7. Ma-khah (to blot out), is a very strong word, "wipe" or "blot out", "destroy".
-- 9. His walking with God was not merely the acknowledgment of Jehovah, which he did, but "walking with God" -- his moral character and walk -- fear of God like Enoch.
-- 11. So the earth was corrupt before God. We have
the origin here of diaphtheirai tous diaphtheirontas ten gen (to destroy those that destroy the earth), Revelation 11:18; but it is only in the Apocalypse, and thus Hebraic in language, but in 1 Corinthians 3:17, is the same, save dia.
-- 13. All is simple judgment here, there is no intercession. We are not on the anticipative ground of grace in communion, but simple deliverance in judgment.
NOTE. -- When the end of all flesh came, the spirits are in prison, yet it died.
-- 18. Noah stood alone for the covenant "with thee".
There are two things here: the declaration of not repeating the curse on Adam as to the ground, and the non-repetition of the Flood. This was founded on sacrifice. The new world, as this earth, was founded on sacrifice, the first on judgment; then the curse, here the curse no more repeated; with man's nature fully seen, God acted on the sacrifice, not on it.
As to labour, partial relief, see verse 29.
-- 7 - 12. I cannot but think the raven and dove emblematic, though not a type; yet the ravens brought food to Elijah.
-- 11. Ta-raph, "pluckt off" or "fresh" -- not an old dried one to be found anywhere.
-- 12. Where the dove could rest, Noah could; so blessed be God, with us; yet then, no sure rest, now sure.
-- 21. We have here the propitiatory character of the sweet savour of Christ's sacrifice. It was not a sin-offering, bearing, and putting sin away, but one which met the mind of God, as to His sense of sin, by the perfectness of the sacrifice -- a reyakh hannikhoakh (odour of the rest) to Him; so Jehovah said el-lib-bo (in his heart).
-- 21. The word as to the curse is this -- Noah was to comfort man concerning the work of his hands, because of the ground which the Lord had cursed; it does not say the curse was gone, but there was comfort in labour as to it. But further, there was to be no repetition of the curse, or the Lord might have been always at it, for all the imagination of the thoughts of man's heart was only evil and that continually. But there was this on the ground of sacrifice, "the Lord smelled a sweet savour, and the Lord said in his heart, I will no more again curse", neither would He smite the earth with a flood. He would not again act as He had done. And the effect of this sweet savour is very striking, not in changing God's mind, but in revealing what He is -- the source of peace.
Love was free in righteousness, righteousness glorified in the sacrifice, the sacrifice love had provided. The Lord had seen that the imagination of the thoughts of man's heart was only evil continually, and the Lord said, "I will destroy". But now, the sweet savour of the sacrifice was the ground of action -- what drew out the heart of God -- moved it in grace, and could because righteously; hence, though seeing all the evil, acts on the sweet savour. If I deal according to what man is, I must always curse, for the ground of cursing is always there as spoken of (chapter 6: 5, 6). Hence "I will not again", do it, or act as moved by what is in man (for there is only evil), but on the ground of the sacrifice offered. Here as to the world, for the old world was, as to dealings of God, left to itself, only with a testimony, and was founded (besides Cain) on "He drove out the man". This world was passed away, and sacrifice was the basis of God's dealings in testimony as to this. In the old we had full individual testimony, as Abel -- Enoch -- but they by cross or heaven left the world they belonged to outwardly. This had in view the world itself, and the rainbow was given in pledge, and appears in the throne, in Revelation; when in chapter 11: 19 God is taking up the earth we have the ark of His covenant, and the Lord begins again with the Jews. Revelation 4 has a far wider range; He is Creator and all created for Him, and redeems out of nations, peoples, tongues, languages. And this opens a good deal the book of Revelation. In chapter 4 the throne is set in heaven; it is the heavenly throne making good in power the universal title. In chapter 11: 19, the temple of God is opened in heaven, and the ark of His covenant is seen, and then the Jewish people immediately come on the scene, and the wars and judgments. In chapter 5 angels and all even ept tes ges praise and glorify Him that sits on the throne; the elders and living creatures fall down before the Lamb who has redeemed.
-- 22. It was yet a remaining earth.
This chapter gives Noah's family and personal fall, and the judgment on Canaan, son of Ham. It is Noah's personal history and prophecy; but it was the fall of the head of the
new world, with all its consequent history. Babylon was another thing -- association to make a centre to themselves without God. Then God constitutes nations out of a family, or three families, at most. It is the actual basis of the state of the existing world -- the world such as it is.
-- 2. What a different dominion from Adam's! (chapter 2: 19, 20). God there, as Creator, puts all living animals under Adam's power; he names them. Here, God is a preserver, soter, but the animals are merely placed in Noah's power, and fear, the character of relationship; Noah is their destroyer, whom they fear. Blood is put into his hand in the way of government, for blood shedding, life taking, was in the earth. It is clearly a setting of the whole thing upon a new system, and footing (compare chapter 1: 28, 29).
-- 6. This puts evidently the image of God on a different footing from moral qualities.
-- 20. The history of Noah, and his patriarchal prophecy.
-- 26, 27. Is it intended, the difference of Shem and Japheth? Jehovah, the name of relationship with Shem -- Jehovah, the God of Shem; and Elohim, simply the fact of divine power and providence -- "God shall enlarge him"; he gets the world, as such, when direct relationship is not established in the world; this is the basis of the world's history.
The whole chapter gives the relationship of God with the new world and its order; this is the world's history in general, in prophetic plan according to God.
This chapter begins that historically. It is a general history of the local planting of the nations of the earth; not a date of an event -- the geographical arrangement of the world. It looks back, and sees the earth partitioned out, and traces the families from their sources.
The world is here ethnologically arranged, as to races and families; morally, in chapter 11: 1 - 9, and at the same time nationally, as distinct countries. We have here the central family before God; but there is another fact, the earth was divided (verse 25).
-- 5. Parad (separated) -- not palag (divided). They separated from one another, and so settled; this verse is evidently
after the confusion of tongues, so verse 32. Verse 19 shows it to be of Moses's time, only Nimrod and Peleg are as special facts noticed on the way.
It is remarkable how Noah entirely disappears after his fall and prophecy. Headship over the world there was none; but first association, and then individual energy.
-- 6 - 8. We have Ham, Cush, Nimrod.
-- 8. I do not think Nimrod was the immediate son of Cush, it may be, he was of his family. The chapter takes up the different families, as Mizraim, Philistine, etc.; then Nimrod is singled out from his beginning an empire. But Babel was there before he began, as beknown there to this day.
-- 10. I suppose Nimrod was after the dispersion; Babel was the beginning of his kingdom. It does not appear if the division of the earth was before or after. The dispersion was judgment -- the division, arrangement, and man's life shortened by half. Conquest may have been after this, or the arrangement consequent on Nimrod's violence; in Scripture they are independent facts. The first fact is Nimrod -- imperial energy; the second, general ethnological location as a fact. The judgment on the family of men, is what brought the ethnological division about, verse 5.
-- 22 - 25. Shem, Arphaxad, Salah, Eber, Peleg. If Ham's family had the same length of life, Nimrod was long contemporary with Peleg. Peleg was born some sixty years or more after him; but up to Peleg the ages were, say 430 years. Peleg lived only 239 years, he died, according to Hebrew chronology, 340 years after the Flood, he was born 149 years before the death of Noah. Nimrod with similar ages died 87 years after Peleg and was contemporary with him all his days. The whole period of the lives of the members of Shem's family is not noted, so that the Spirit would draw our attention to it there, chapter 11; here the change is the important thing.
-- 25. I suppose, with many others, the division of Peleg to be a distinct thing. According to Hebrew chronology, Noah died 10 years after Peleg. The Septuagint Chronology of course alters their relative dates; according to this, Peleg was born 401 after the Flood; I think Nimrod lived say from 267 to 576, Peleg to 510. If we accept the Hebrew chronology, this division was in Noah's lifetime, indeed long before his death; if that of the Septuagint, not so; at any rate, I apprehend, after the
dispersion. It seems a kind of orderly settlement -- a distribution. Remark how Noah has disappeared; his authority was lost. Where was he when the tower was set about? The dividing, besides their record, is the great subject of this chapter.
NOTE. -- All the present mighty ones are Japheth. Of the four empires, Persia (Elam) alone was Shem, and favoured the Jews; and, as the Rationalists say, Shem was monotheistic, which is true -- "Jehovah, God of Shem". They did not know the true God without revelation surely, but providentially were not Jovists -- mere mythological heathen, i.e., of the four, for the Assyrians were idolators, and were of Shem.
After Nimrod and Mizraim, for Ham began, the great powers of later days have been Japheth; Asshur was Shem, but he never pulled down Jerusalem, nor built it up as others did; perhaps Nebuchadnezzar was Ham, the first Chaldean empire was. I suppose "went forth Asshur" (verse 11) is right, for certainly they had Asshur for their first great god in Assyria. They had really the longest, and, on the whole, greatest empire; but though a rod for Israel, they never came into collision with God's throne in Jerusalem, nor supplanted it; Sennacherib would have done so. As far as Assyria is concerned, the alleged monotheism of Shem is a fable; they were idolators as the rest.
This was their first descent into the plain, where they would have centralized themselves, and were dispersed. They would have humanity one -- a kind of republic; God made nations and tongues of them. Then Nimrod began an empire, and afterwards there was some kind of partition among them of the known earth in Peleg's time.
-- 2. Mikkedem, eastward; the word seems to me thus formed -- it is used as in the mouth of a person speaking in relation to himself -- a person to the east of me is, of course, coming, speaking, or looking from the east, thence mikkedem, eastward.
2 Chronicles 4:10, "the right side of the east end", i.e., the right side in relation to one looking towards it, for it faced the south, and was not to the east of the person, therefore not
mikkedem, but ked'mah (eastward); so mikketheph, on the right side; so I take mimmul (on) to be opposite the south; so 2 Chronicles 5:12.
Chapter 10 is practically a parenthesis; this chapter continues from chapter 9, or begins afresh as the next noticed fact, and settles providentially the state of the world after Noah; here, the "Lord" is dealing -- "God" began the world afresh with Noah in chapter 9.
The history of the old world after the flood is ended, and the new form of men's relationship -- the world, not Noah's family, but nations, tongues, etc. -- is established.
To the end of this chapter we have the genealogy of Abram, but not the Lord's dealings, though in fact the call had come, but the action is Terah's.
-- 1 - 9, comes before chapter 10, and goes by itself, showing how, by the judgment of God, historically the dispersion of mankind, came about. This closes the tol'doth (generation) Noah; and now the origin of the whole state of the earth.
-- 10 - 32. These verses go with what follows -- Shem's family, they are the distinctive tol'doth (generation) Shem.
-- 2. Bik'ah (a plain), a low river plain.
-- 5. B'ney Ha-Adam (sons of man) again.
-- 10 begins the generations of the family God owned -- the history of Abraham's race -- the people of Jehovah -- He was the Lord God of Shem.
-- 19. Diminution of half the duration of life, connected with the regular settling of the earth; not the spreading of the various stocks and branching off of families.
-- 24 et seq. According to Jewish chronology, i.e., as given in the text, the last born of Terah's three sons was born only four years after Noah's death.
Chapters 12, 13. These two chapters give the whole position consequent on the calling, and its realization in the heavenly place of faith, with the contrasts of weakness and worldliness.
We have the general promise on which the faith was built, and Abraham distinguished and separated.
This chapter evidently begins a wholly new matter, and relationship with God.
God had formed the world, and called Abraham out of it to
be in it to Himself, and deposits all blessings and promises in him as a head of race; it is the beginning of promise to men -- save outwardly, no more flood -- and it is not to men, but to a chosen person, and then to his posterity, as taken up for God by Himself in grace.
The interesting points of detail I have noticed elsewhere, but this is the place they hold in the history; it begins a new one, and promises, and blessings to descendants.
God elects, reveals Himself, calls out to Himself, and deposits promises. Here the path of faith is entered on, as a stranger in the world which God had formed by judgment -- the world around us.
Now, separation from Terah -- natural ties -- comes first; going down into the world, from natural motives, at the end of the chapter. In the first case, he does not reach Canaan at all; in the second, he leaves it, and denies his wife -- Jehovah was forgotten -- but he is well off through it. The true relationship of Christ and the Church must be lost when we get into the world.
Abram is a stranger with an altar, but none while with Terah, none in Egypt; they belong to the place of faith, not exactly to the revelation by which God calls, but by the revelation of Himself, by which He associates with Himself in the place of promise, and this brings in necessarily the seed.
We have seen sacrifice for Adam, in Abel, and in Noah, here an altar -- worship on the revelation of God Himself (in promise), or that carried on as a known relationship with God. But then in verses 7 and 8 it is immediately connected with Israel and the land; he was in the place of promise. The general testimony brought him out as the Lord commanded him, but worship is only in Canaan. Here note too, as regards the promise and its going, Abram's seed; the descendible quality, though actually enjoyed in the path and place of obedience has nothing to do with a nature, or relative place with God in virtue of the sin, or goodness of that nature.
Abram is shown, called by God's revelation of Himself, and receives the promises; not as Adam, a father of a race in his image, and exclusion from God's presence; there is the path of faith, but God calls and gives, and that to the seed too.
It is not descendible nature and place, but grace and promise -- he is a stranger too by faith, out of the world -- not out of Paradise, and God's presence, by sin. "I am a stranger with
thee", so we as to this world, but besides we sit in heavenly places -- we are let in by righteousness (through one Man's obedience), and belong to Christ (as his children to Adam); we are not strangers in our Canaan, but in the world we are; but in our walk we are, for spiritual wickedness is still in heavenly places. We see how union with Christ has given us an entirely new additional element to Abraham; Abraham had not so much as to set his foot on, nor have we, actually, as men in the body, but we are sitting there in Christ.
NOTE. -- We pass here definitely from great general principles, in which God is revealed, to special dealings with one specifically called out into relationship with Him.
It is all Jehovah, not that that is the particular name of revelation -- that is El Shaddai; but it is not Elohim, but Jehovah's dealings, only he is shown to be Elohim as One who condescends to man -- is the Source of blessing, and who executes judgment, looked at as an historical fact; chapters 17: 3 - 14, and 19: 29. See also chapters 21 and 22, in the last God Himself looking for absolute obedience and confidence -- a contrast with Eve and Adam. But the dealings are Jehovah's; hence, note, we have the question of man's ways in the relationship into which grace has called, and by which conduct is judged -- not mere right and wrong in detail.
-- 1. God appears to Abraham, causing him to seek the country; he does so in the land (verse 7), and he builds an altar, it is the ground of worship. This he renews as his habitual portion (verse 8); having none in Egypt, he only returns to the one he had, at the first, on coming back.
This personal designation, instead of dealing with Ha-Adam, is most remarkable; and setting the blessing distinctively in one called out from the system which God had settled as the world. Abraham is called out of his country; his heavenly place is brought out only, when he has not so much as to set his foot on, in the country God had shown him.
"Had" is right here, see Acts 7:2. What has misled many is supposing Abram to be Terah's eldest son; verse 31 clearly depends on this.
-- 2. How is heyeh thou shalt be? It? If it be the name, it is, I suppose, "in thee shall they bless".
-- 3. "I will curse" -- pronounce a judicial curse, pronounce a curse arar (he cursed), him that curseth, speaketh
injuriously, wishing evil -- kalal (to curse). Here clearly it must be Jehovah not Elohim and the creature Ha-Adam.
This verse then goes back to chapter 10: 32, in grace.
-- 4. Terah was 130 when Abram was born, or a trifle more, i.e., the time between his death and Abram's departure, 205 - 75 = 130. Terah begat Nahor at 70; there were thus some 60 years between Nahor and Abraham, but most, or a great part, of this was passed in Ur of the Chaldees. Lot was born there, and I suppose Milcah married to Nahor.
-- 5. They had been some time in Haran.
-- 6. This is the root of perseverance of faith; and being a stranger, he could not have what he was called to.
-- 7. But the Lord's revelation of Himself, in the place Abraham was called to, reveals to him the way he would have it, and is the ground of worship; this continues as his condition -- a tent and an altar. Still promises are on earth here.
-- 10. Nothing wrong apparently, but, when tested by the difficulties of the place of faith, he does not walk by faith, nor consult divine wisdom and will for guidance. He acts on the wisdom of sense, but that is Egypt; and this goes further, he must conceal the full truth there.
The world takes up what belongs exclusively to the man of God, but is judged for it; the man of God had denied its being exclusively his, because he had lost his own place of calling with God. This is the forgetting the Church and distinctiveness of blessing where we are called.
The call and blessing of Abram is most deeply important. The world's history had been gone through -- the Adam fallen -- the world formed by man's sin -- Babel -- his multiplying and forming settlements -- and the earth divided -- countries were formed -- and then a kingdom or empire by man as a mighty hunter still connected with Babylon. Now we get, not merely individuals called by grace, or walking in godliness, of and in the midst of the race -- one of the families and countries of the world -- but one called out of the scene which God Himself had settled. Countries were that order; Abram is to get out of his, and blessing established and settled in him as a stock apart. It is not dealing with Ha-Adam in his responsibility, but positive purpose and grace calling out and conferring a blessing. It is on another principle from man's responsibility.
Then countries are left behind as the things called out of; in the millennium they will be taken up -- all the families of
the earth (ground) will be blessed; but here blessing is deposited in a called out one -- further, "I will make thee a blessing", nothing more full or complete than this. Did man, or angel, or any, wish to know what a blessing was, look at Abram. "In thee", it is said, "shall Israel bless, saying Jehovah make thee as Ephraim and Manasseh"; he was blessed of God so as to be a model and pattern of blessing; so we, through infinite grace, in a much higher way, that in the ages to come, He might show the exceeding riches of His grace, in His kindness towards us by Christ Jesus. Hence Paul, in the personal consciousness which we have of it through the Holy Ghost, says, "Would God that not only thou, but all who hear me this day were both almost and altogether such as I am, save these bonds". He was a conscious model of blessing, and that is the true Christian state, nor does any aright, else, truly honour God, when we think of the grace given to us in Christ -- in His own Son; things that angels desire to look into are for us -- a place in Him above creature name -- and not merely glory, but blessed in Him, one with Him and loved as He is loved, and in the same blessed relationship as He is in with the Father.
NOTE. -- In chapters 12, 13 and 14, we have the relationship of the called in the earth with the world; failure is seen, but in general it is "called out" and "leaving it" -- perseverance in heavenly separatedness from it -- leaving, because of the promise, the world to the world, and, in the end, full victory over it, and blessing in it from the Possessor of heaven and earth under Melchizedek. In chapter 15 we have the principles on which, by faith, the called is sustained in going through it, while not enjoying the effect of the promise; while chapter 16 is the failure, and here the earthly people are under oppression of the free but must submit. In chapter 17, the inheritance of the world is brought out by the covenant of circumcision, and Sarah -- the free woman, under the new covenant, is mother of the heir, for He was rejected under the old. Here, mark, however, it was historically a covenant to keep a covenant in the flesh; Israel had to keep it, and execute it, and one who did not would be cut off; it was imposed, the bought servant was to undergo it -- it was his duty. This was connected with faith, i.e., the position of the believer -- he was father of many nations before Him whom he believed, for this hangs on chapter 15 (compare Romans 4); still the word is, "Thou shalt
keep", chapter 17: 9. Now in Christianity, the seal of faith is a gift -- it is the Holy Spirit, and it is power, "after ye believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise -- earnest of the inheritance, till the redemption of the purchased possession", and baptism, which has the form of outward recognition, is conferred -- granted, "who can forbid water?" "what doth hinder me to be baptized?" it was more in association with Jewish ground and ways of relationship with God.
The commission in Matthew supposes the residue of Israel all right, and sends out to gather in the Gentiles, all baptizing them according to the new light. Paul, though he owned and submitted to it, for all was to be linked together, was not sent to baptize, but to preach the gospel in power.
Even this, however, did not impose a law on flesh, nor seal a promise by man's act, but implied remission of sins, and deliverance, complete by death and resurrection in Christ -- that immense saving, and divine life-giving boon, which is given through Him.
Hence, though they came under it by the call of God, it was, in form even, a conferred benefit; they were baptized -- the Church baptized them to confer the benefit, and admit them by death and resurrection into its blessings, and standing before God; thus, in ordinance, the character is opposed -- the seal of God is the Holy Spirit. Circumcision is before the birth of the son of the free woman; hence we find it also as to time in connection with the effort to have the promise by law -- the unbelievingness of the vessel of promise -- Sarai.
Now there is giving up because he had his portion; thereon the Lord leads him to the full knowledge of his own portion, this leads to his building a new altar. Now he is finally victorious over the world; this produces no altar, but blessing and praise through the royal priest. Hitherto we had altars -- relationships of faith turning to worship.
-- 3. Bat-t'khil-lah (at the beginning).
-- 4. Barisho-nah (at the first).
There is the true point of return, but no progress; but he returned to the altar there, and there he called on the name
of Jehovah -- cared for meanwhile, but no calling on the name. The Lord's prayers are as little possible in a strange land as the Lord's songs are unfit.
-- 8, 9. It is a difficult place, where grace must separate; but it always yields as regards self and the world. It gets what its desire would rest in, though only by gracious conduct, the heavenly place and promise. This is not the cross, but the spirit of grace. Self goes necessarily towards judgment, because it does not know itself; all this is very instructive.
When the world and self are given up, the place of promise is more measured and known. Abram was fearful -- it was want of faith. Lot's heart was in the world -- selfish -- it was a sad course with Lot.
-- 10 - 17. The whole picture is striking of Lot and Abraham, but I have considered it elsewhere. Only remark this, that Abraham failed in faith, got into sorrow, and returned; Lot chose the well-watered plain, and got into Sodom, and out of it into sorrow, as through fire.
-- 13. I think "sinners", laY'hovah (before Jehovah) is special; it is not merely "How shall I do this great wickedness, and sin against God?" (chapter 39: 9) i.e., a true conscience and the fear of God. It was Jehovah, the Governor, offended and, speaking reverently, disgusted, with the evil, infamous as it was.
-- 14. How beautiful it is from this verse!
-- 18. There are three altars here; God's appearing to him in the land, the regular, natural so to say, habit of communion, sign of the bond of the soul with God. To this he must return on leaving Egypt; he builds no new one -- and consequent upon his survey, and realization of the place and gift of promise. In Egypt, of course, none.
NOTE. -- I do not find any intercourse like that of Abraham with God; Noah's is the most like it after the flood -- there too we find an altar; then there is a present salvation ordered of God -- the altar is to Jehovah. But when the blessing comes, it was Elohim renewing the earth -- the ordering of the condition of the world only -- Jehovah comes in with Shem. Here it is special calling and promise, and revelation of Himself, and intercourse on the ground of it.
The whole history closes in the end of this chapter, with Melchizedek, and the revelation of God in His final character in time, or dispensation -- Possessor of heaven and earth -- victory after failure -- and full final blessing, and praise, and that in the King of righteousness and King of peace.
-- 2. "That these", better left out.
-- 12. "And he, a dweller in Sodom", is rather emphatic in Hebrew.
-- 14. Grace does not cease to care for the worldly believer, who has got into weakness, though strength be with faith.
-- 19. This is power and its full results, as it will be indeed accomplished. It receives all from the Most High God, Possessor of heaven and earth; so Abram knows God. There is not an altar here, we are on other ground; Abraham was only prophetically and typically on this ground, but worship is not prophetic. It is the people of God's (Israel's) full victorious blessing in the millennial earth.
From the world's possessor of the earth the believer will take nothing.
-- 22. NOTE. -- Abram, in speaking to the King of Sodom, takes the place of Melchizedek's revelation -- acts on the full results of all, in his ways as to this world. "I have lifted up my hand to the most high God, Possessor of heaven and earth, that I will not take" -- will not give the world an opportunity of saying -- "I have made Abram rich". He who possesses heaven and earth will do, what seems good to Him, with us in this respect. Abram here, with his brother, with the enemy, with the world as such, is above the world -- its master and superior -- morally and really -- Lot under its power; if we enjoy it we are. On Church ground, with Sarah and Pharaoh, he had failed; but he had gone down through trial, not inquiring God's will; it was not taking the world, but his own counsel when tried.
NOTE. -- Abraham gives up the world in liberty -- conquers it in power -- refuses it that he may have everything from God. He is blessed of the most High God, Possessor of heaven and earth.
NOTE. -- While Abram is called by the revelation of the God of glory, and then by God's again appearing to him in the land,
he gets the ground of worship; with us it is more inward and intimate, though on the same principle; Christ, that bread of God, is revealed in our souls, as the object revealed by the inward working of the Father's drawing, and then our worship is not merely by an outward revelation which calls forth praise and adoration, but we feed on Him slain for our sakes. All the divine love and grace, the perfect obedience which has been shown in Him, dying in love for us, draws out our praise and adoration to the Father who gave Him, and to Him who gave Himself; and the soul is fed by this grace, the heart delighting in it inwardly, and entering into it by the power and working of the Spirit of God. This is evidently a nearer and more intimate thing, hence we see how the Lord's supper allies itself to worship, witnessing too redemption. The glorified Christ is another thing, there we are drawn out after, and see the absolute completeness of the work, and the new place into which we are called.
There was no promise, before Abraham, to any person as an object and depositary of it; there was an object of faith in the judgment of the serpent, as to the promised seed, but there was no person an object of promise. What Christ was to God is to us of infinite interest in this way; for the drawing out of one of deep and admirable affections, and large mental powers, an adequate object is necessary, that all He is may be displayed and in exercise. Now Christ, looked at as an object, was divinely and infinitely so to God and His Father; such was He, that all that was in the Godhead of infinite perfection was necessarily and perfectly drawn out -- what a blessed thought!
NOTE. -- It is into this we are brought, as put in Christ; as love, "that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them", this is only a given case of it -- "that thou hast loved them as thou hast laved me". He is gone to His Father and our Father, His God and our God. When we think how all that God is, must shine out on Christ in glory in the Father's house, and remember that we are there with Him ever, and like Him, we see what the infinite enjoyment of our heavenly place wilt be. What a sweet, blessed, and peaceful portion!
This is a new order of chapters; the place of faith and triumph has been given as a whole in chapters 12 to 14; here we have God's ways -- promise -- law -- covenant, etc. Historically, the title of God seems founded on the facts of the preceding chapter, and Abraham's conduct; this makes the difference between this chapter and chapter 17 still plainer; here it is Jehovah.
Abraham having conquered the power of the enemy, and refused anything from the world, God is his shield and exceeding great reward; being his he asks for himself and is answered, receiving the promise of the heir, and the limits of the earthly inheritance -- what man down here wanted. God did not appear to Abraham here; the word of the Lord came to him, and he believed it, and he is justified, it is for righteousness to him. It is not worship. Faith is sealed by a covenant for the earth.
The beginning of the chapter seems a reply to the renouncement of chapter 14; this gives a character also to what follows. The intervention of God was from Himself, not a reply, so that the other questions were awakened.
God reveals what He is in Himself to Abraham -- his defence and portion for ever -- but His grace leading out the desires, and meeting the condition of man also, assured all that in grace.
There is His word for the positive, conferred blessing; destitute man finds His righteousness in faith in it; being God's word he believes it, notwithstanding all in himself which would make it impossible through weakness -- impossibility of submitting to the sentence of condemnation, and the greatness of sin causing doubt as to grace. Further, the Lord volunteers to recall his attention to Himself being concerned in it in grace (verse 7), "I am Jehovah that brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees, to give thee this land to inherit it" -- I came to you, when a poor idolater, with the purpose and intention, and your lot depends on grace and purpose, not on your strength or condition -- it did not then -- it does not now -- I had the purpose when I visited you in your misery, when you had not even the desire for it.
Next, Jehovah encourages him by binding Himself now by the solemnity of His own act, in which it was impossible for Him to deny Himself, or lie as a man would by a similar
solemn covenant; He passes between the pieces of the victim.
But more, the value of the Sacrifice, its moral claim, its title, to set aside which God must deny Himself -- not be Himself, which is established by Himself, and which is between Him and Christ, so that Christ would not have what has infinite claim for what it is -- divine righteousness, which He should have (see John 17 and John 12); the whole power of that which is founded on what God is, is now engaged in securing the blessing. This is wonderful truth!
God has graciously entered into this -- given us this assurance -- but the same necessity of His nature which rejects sin -- the same truth which cannot fail -- the same righteousness which cannot fail -- the moral obligation which flows from His nature in the highest possible way -- is engaged in the blessing. It, relatively and repulsively, in its negative effect, rejected firstly, necessarily, sin -- a sinner; but in its positive, and powerful reality of nature, will, and righteousness, and debt to Christ, now secures the blessing. It has so voluntarily acted to secure me, and make me happy, but it has acted in manifesting itself in the work of Christ, and cannot afterwards deny itself; it is between Christ and God, though to my security, profit and joy.
He has passed between the pieces, the sacrifice of Christ, the offering of Himself up to death; it is the sacrifice He despises, that is, morally, Himself, whose character has been perfectly glorified in it, if there is not perfect security of blessing. What a wonderful grace, and condescension is this! Yet God is glorified in it, and in Himself in it.
Then there is another thing, man's nature, such as we are, can have no part in it; hence it involves death as to this, He brings us out into another scene and state where we enjoy the profit. Abraham passes under the horror of great darkness, and sleep, to come under the promise of blessing, and receive it, in this way of severity. Christ therefore has, in accomplishing this, died, and risen again to enjoy and enter into it.
Death must pass upon nature, when God gives blessings, secured according to His, in righteousness; this also becomes real deliverance from sin. God becomes (is in this and becomes) the light (of life), and the furnace of His people, to consume all that connects with the life of sin.
It is a wonderful display of God's ways and dealings, basing blessing on Himself, in connection with sinners, through the
work and sacrifice of Christ Himself; the Holy Ghost realizes all this in our souls. Romans and Galatians, in a more elementary way, are just the development of this, and the doctrine in them as found elsewhere in Paul; other consequences are attached to it in connection with the Person and title of Him who wrought it.
The driving away the birds (verse 11) seems the guarding the perfectness of the Victim of sacrifice from all contamination or imperfection; the living, working Christ as man does this, for Abraham is the living dying man.
We have here an entirely new thought or principle; hayah d'var Y'hovah el Av'ram, "the word of Jehovah was to Abram". The God of glory had appeared to him, and spoken (chapter 12), but now there was an express word or revelation, a communication of God's intention and mind.
It is all prophetic announcement; d'var (word of) Jehovah, not personal relationship.
-- 4. Here again d'var [Y'hovah] elav lemor, "the word was to him, saying", in this faith is manifested, Abram he-emin ba-hovah (believed Jehovah).
NOTE. -- It is not when Jehovah appeared, but when the word of the Lord came to Abram, that he believed, and it was counted to him for righteousness.
-- 6. Better, I think, as Paul interprets, to translate here "believed the Lord"; there is b' (in) in Hebrew, but the verb with it has scarcely this force.
-- 7. "And He said, I am Jehovah"; the davar (word) was Jehovah who had too made him go out from Ur of the Chaldees.
Now too Jehovah makes a covenant with him.
We have not the davar (word of) Jehovah again till 1 Samuel 3:1, 7, 21, which makes it more remarkable; in verse 21, it is formally distinguished, Jehovah spoke to him (Samuel) bid'var (by the word of) Jehovah. After Genesis 15, and Samuel, and to Nathan, 2 Samuel 7:4, we find it with Solomon when at Gibeon, 1 Kings 6:11 -- 1 Kings 12:22, Shemaiah; and with the prophets regularly, particularly Jeremiah and Ezekiel; in Daniel not, save in reference to Jeremiah. Psalm 33:6, is remarkable, even if it cannot necessarily be made personal, because we have davar (word) and ruakh (spirit), Isaiah 30:33, is nish'math (breath).
-- 13. It is clear that either in the 400 years, all are from that time to the exodus, or that 100 years is the equivalent of a generation. In the fourth generation they shall return, Ya-shu-vu (they shall come again), verse 16 seems from Egypt where they had gone down. Abram's portion is parenthetically in verse 18; but verse 13 applies to his seed, and the "serving" to the Egyptians, for the nation that subjected them to it God would judge, verse 14.
Then the 400 years comes in question, that is, whether it is directly found in-nu (they shall afflict) or not; it is not by the accents; Athnakh comes before it, then it would be "up to 400 years hence"; however, this I still leave in doubt. There is no reason to confine ger (a stranger) in a nation not theirs to Egypt, and if so, the 400 years becomes simple, only it is what we call round numbers. The two events occupy 400 years; the fourth generation would then be the stay in Egypt; "returning hither" clearly does not refer to a sojourn in the land. The only question would be on b'eretz lo la-hem (in a land not theirs).
The Mal'a'k (Angel of) Jehovah, (is not this the first time we have had it?) is distinctly called "Jehovah".
We are here, not in the large principles of moral good and evil, and God's ordering of the world, but of man's ways as within the calling of God; man's, or woman's, workings and plannings, and the result in God's hand. The only person who was any way right, save despising her mistress, for which she suffered, was Hagar, and to her an Angel -- messenger from Jehovah, speaks; not to any one else in the chapter. Abram accepts it, and gives the name pointed out.
But Mal'a'k Jehovah seems an inferior manifestation to Jehovah's own visitation; the ye-ra Jehovah (Jehovah appeared) as chapter 12: 7, and as we learn from Acts 7, already in Ur of the Chaldees, and again in chapter 17: 1; in chapter 15 we have another form of revelation -- the word of the Lord d'var (word of) Jehovah was to Abram in a vision, ma-khazeh. The Lord's appearing seems more present relationship; it produces worship, or familiar intercourse, communion in confidence and intercession according to its nature. At first such a revelation as led Abram to God, chapter 12; it is not said "appeared", indeed it is passed over as already done, for Terah had taken Abram before; it is only in chapter 12: 4, that he moves "as the Lord had said". The word of the Lord being in a vision, produces faith in what is said.
This chapter is evidently law, but the delay of promise to want of faith gives to flesh the occasion of putting itself on this ground. God uses it to raise the question of righteousness -- to judge flesh; it must return back to promise in submission of will. Israel under law, Abraham's seed according to flesh, God does not give up; not only promise was before law, but, for flesh, law must come after promise, because flesh takes up law, in self confidence, to obtain the hope of promise.
Here chapter 15 is the promise; the manner of its accomplishment, in divine grace and power, is not yet revealed, nor is it until God reveals Himself in chapter 17, after law. Christ may be known after the flesh; but as Sarai was the state, no fruit of promise by divine power; yet Abram acts on flesh's impatience to have it, according to flesh's desire, in its own way.
In a certain sense Ishmael answered to chapter 15: 4, but it was all flesh's doing. Under promise, Israel according to flesh will have inheritance, but it is not in the place of Sarah and Abraham, the heavenly glory over the Gentiles; in itself, in chapter 21, it is cast out, and cannot be heir, it will come in no doubt under grace. Even in chapter 15, it was promise according to desire; in chapter 17 according to Elohim's own full purpose, and direct revelation of Himself; chapter 15, we have seen, however, met faith, only Abram did not, in reply, rise above want.
NOTE. -- Up to the end of chapter 15, we have promises fully, and a covenant for earthly promises as to Israel, and government, the smoking lamp, and the furnace. But the development of the seed is after the entering into relationship by express revelation, and the consecration of Abraham to Himself by God by circumcision -- the judgment, though here only partial, of the flesh; before this we have the earthly seed, which is according to law -- Hagar, which God takes care of providentially, but which is not the true personal son of promise in grace.
Note further, this is not the leading to faith by grace; it was the seal of faith, as we have the Holy Ghost as a seal -- the special relationship in which Abraham had to walk with God.
It is not until chapter 17: 19 that we have the personal seed; the promises to the seed, and to the land are confirmed, and will surely be accomplished, but the personal seed is nominally
revealed to the exclusion of the legal seed, though the former must be born for it to be carried out.
Historically we are on earth, and it goes on so, but in principle we are getting out of flesh -- promise and circumcision, or rather circumcision and promise, with known relationship, and communion, by the revelation of God Himself, are brought in. What God is, is made the ground of relationship -- hence, note, communion.
Remark further, Lot was never circumcised; circumcision is not simply believing, though it be the true place of every believer now. Israel was circumcised when they had crossed the Jordan, as remarked elsewhere, not in the wilderness. Lot, though he left Ur, was, as to his own faith, not separate from the world, on the contrary, connected himself with it -- was a believer in the world. Circumcision, in its full import, takes out of the flesh; we have died with Christ, and cannot be consequently alive in the world.
The reproach of Egypt was rolled away at Gilgal; hence, circumcision comes after chapter 15, which connected Abram with this world, in promise; then we have the heir, as an immediate promise, and the judgment of the world, but God in communion with Abraham about it. This gives the character of chapters 17 and 18; millennial promise may come in, but founded on death and resurrection.
In this chapter we have again God, and here it is not only historical, but there is special ground for so taking it; for instead of a Mosaic, i.e., a divinely given apprehension of it according to the then knowledge of Jehovah, it is what then passed as it passed, and was the communication by God Himself of another kind of knowledge -- that of God Almighty -- Elohim revealing Himself as El Shaddai, as in Exodus 6:3. But though Jehovah did this, and Jehovah did that, as Moses and Israel, here the one true God, and it was important that Israel should understand that their Jehovah was not a particular god, but the one true Elohim. Yet it was not with them of old Jehovah, known as such to Israel, "Jehovah" did and said so and so; God had that name, what its import is is another question, but it was their knowledge of Him as to themselves;
it is a revelation of what Elohim was -- the Absolute, ever-existing One; not merely "I am" (abstract existence), but perpetual existence. Hence One who went on, as to men and lives, with His purpose, could be counted on for promise. In actual governmental dealings with men He could not be simply Elohim, that is God in His nature, whereas as Jehovah, He governs -- is something in connection with men -- has descended into relationship and dealing; and hence it was important to see that He, Elohim, who said "I am El Shaddai", which was being something, and putting Himself into relationship, was Jehovah; and here the New Testament speaks as clearly, in that it was in the Person of the Son. Thus this chapter is "Elohim", and chapters 18 and 19, "Jehovah".
-- 1. God appears to Abraham and reveals Himself, and that by the name by which He declares to Moses He was made known to him, and to the patriarchs, Isaac and Jacob. This has a new character, it is not worship, nor an altar, but communion, a still higher, as it seems to me, and more blessed thing; Abraham falls on his face, and Elohim talks with him, having declared His special name of relationship. He then unfolds all His purposes, and the death of the flesh is brought in. But hereon Abraham (chapter 18) receives the visit of the Lord with two angels; the Lord abides with him as a guest, Abraham knowing Him, but saying nothing to Him, as the Lord, when all the rest were there, the Angels and Sarah. The son is promised as soon to come, and then God reveals His purpose as to the world, treating Abraham as His friend; hereupon Abraham acts on this ground, he is alone with Him, and he pleads with Him -- intercedes for others. There is the confidence produced by this revelation of Himself by God, and the communications which followed, and, while owning Him as Judge of all the earth, yet a counting on mercy and goodness -- no asking for self -- not merely worship, but intimacy, communion, and intercession; and Elohim went up, when He had done communing with Abraham. This is surely of another character from the building of an altar, and more blessed, though worship will have its place in heaven. But surely this will not cease, though a display of friendship, in condescension like this, may have no place.
NOTE. -- That after stating that it was Jehovah which appeared, it is always "Elohim" -- God in Himself, as such; it is wholly on the ground of His sovereign purpose and action.
It is ett'nah (I will make, lit. give), not ka-rath (he made, lit. cut); grace more simply and obligingly. It is not merely here the Lord appeared, and said something, and then Abram builds an altar, but He appears to reveal Himself, saying, "I am", so and so, "walk before me", so that Abram fell on his face as a present thing; and then God not simply yo-mer (said), but talked with him y'dab-ber itto (talked with him). The covenant is given, is, and is established liv'rith olam (for an everlasting covenant).
-- 3. Abraham does not ask in answer to "thy", which characterized chapter 15, but is on his face, and Elohim talks with him. God cannot reveal Himself, and be only to a nation; this we see in Christ even down here, though He may be to a nation in His own wise, sovereign will.
-- 7, 8. I think we get here a covenant with the seed -- and Abraham -- to be a God to them, i.e., to Abraham, and his seed.
-- 8. To be their God in the land; this last consequently is, "I will be to them for God", i.e., as coming into possession of the land, though it was given to Abraham; so, before, it was "to be a God to thee, and to thy seed after thee", here only lahem (their).
-- 9. Remark how it here begins afresh with Elohim, as a fresh starting point with man in Abraham, which is to be noted, not as in relationship.
-- 10. This seal of righteousness and the covenant is founded on chapter 15 -- the righteousness of God.
-- 12. Surely the eighth day signifies that circumcision is in resurrection, not in nature, hence after Jordan was passed.
-- 16. "Also" -- but in verse 19, "indeed".
-- 17 - 19. God seems to accept the faith of Abraham, and Abraham's laughter in his heart gives a name to his son -- Isaac, laughter; it was the simplicity of heart in the unexpected glad tidings; Sarah's -- for God can discern -- was incredulous, mocking satisfaction.
-- 20, 21. Ishmael does not belong to this chapter, but he is blessed in it as a son of Abraham, and so loved, but he is no co-heir; that cannot be, all that flows from a higher source. Circumcision was not instituted when he was born -- it was life in flesh; but he is circumcised now, for the sure mercies of David can only be through resurrection. Abraham and all take this place now that it is God's revelation of Himself; but
it is connected with the revelation of Himself before the heir comes.
-- 22. God went up from him; He was talking with Abraham, and went only when He had finished, and Abraham could present the desires of his heart to Elohim, and had a full answer, but God had His own purpose.
-- 23. Abraham's obedience was blessedly prompt. It is, though in the flesh, yet a bright scene; all that belonged to him, all his house, are subjected to God's covenant.
The position of Abraham (and so of every believer) seems to me a very blessed one. He is the one in whom God centres and deposits blessing, and that from which blessings flow out to others without. Now this is the very character of God, only that in Him it is essential and original -- it is Himself; while in us, of course, it is Him. God is the centre of all blessing, and in Him, and in His nature, blessing is, but it is by grace deposited in the believer, and flows out from him; he dwelling in love, dwells in God, and God in him; he loves therefore because divine love is shed abroad in his heart -- what a place to be in! Christ the fulness of it in man, but we entering into it in Him.
In the circumstances in which this has place in Abraham, God had, on the manifestation of pride in man, settled them in divers countries by languages; they were not merely dispersed, but, in Peleg's days, the earth was divided -- the earth was arranged and ordered under God. Now Abraham is called out of what God had settled, to be to Himself, and so the depositary of blessing. It was not the Adam race (ha-Adam) in its responsibility, but the active, self-originated, and originating grace of God, which called out one to be the head of a new race in grace, to Himself; and as the place and family of blessing -- Abraham's seed (now a spiritual seed, another connection with Christ no doubt) on the failure of the natural because it was flesh, and according to purpose, but still as Abraham's seed, the family of blessing. This is an immense and most important principle.
There are three principles or characters of revelation; first, the personal dealings and relationship, as in chapter 12, Jehovah calling -- revealing Himself in the land -- appearing to Abraham, so as to draw him out in various ways, in relationship to Himself. Next the word of the Lord; and this was the foundation of faith, on which righteousness was counted. Then
God, as such, for now Abraham could be righteously before Him, puts Abraham in a known position of covenant standing, as a system of blessing in grace to him and to his seed, and he has the seal of the righteousness which is by faith. God here talks with Abraham and he gets his dispensational place.
Remark well the character of the different revelations to Abraham in chapters 15 and 17. The first is what God is for Abraham, and Abraham asks what he is to have; the Lord in grace tells him this. But in chapter 17 God says what He is, the name by which He makes Himself known, and thereon it will be found that, though God gives the present hope of the heir, Abraham's place is not to ask for himself, but that of communion with God -- God talks with him -- eats with him, and, though reverently, Abraham is familiarly in intercourse with Him, and then, according to this position, intercedes for others. This is a sweet and important difference.
This chapter gives a new and very wide ground. No doubt it is still Jehovah, but it is not appearing in covenant and personal relationships in gracious dealings. It is Elohim Himself all through; the relationship name -- as with us, Father -- is a sweet thing, and we come in our personal relationship, under it we have access to the Father. But God is God, and does what He pleases in the armies of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth; here He reveals Himself as El Shaddai -- Elohim talked with Abram. He does not take the name Jehovah with him, though it was Jehovah, but of God Almighty, so Abram falls on his face, yet He talks with him -- so Sarah is not my princess -- that was with man -- but princess.
Here only Abraham is fully put in his place, not his personal place of blessing -- that is in chapter 12 -- but full relation place towards others -- nations -- seed -- land -- and God Himself, as of God. He is the Adam of blessing towards those below him, as he was of responsibility -- the father of us all before God; that, Adam never was -- he was the father of us all driven out from God -- only now of course it is spiritually and in Christ. That is Galatian doctrine and Romans 4, yet Paul there treats the covenant of this chapter as founded, as regards Abraham, on the faith of chapter 15 -- quod nota. But this refers to the righteousness -- God takes this place with a personally accepted one, and that was by the word of Jehovah -- it was faith.
This chapter is a different relative place in the communications of God, consequent on the place of faith.
Note, in all this chapter, Abraham never calls the Lord "Jehovah", here it was not the name of relationship. In chapters 12 and 13 his altars are to Jehovah, and again at Beersheba he calls on the name of Jehovah; so in chapter 15: 2. But here in this closer communion and intercourse with God, founded on his walking in covenant relationship, in his own place as set of God in the earth, it is Adonai.
The mystery is evidently intentional here, and the perception of faith, and the already exercised spiritual mind in Abraham, instructive and divine. He knew he had to do with One who visited him thus, but, till the Lord reveals Himself, he acts towards Him in the way He comes; this was true deference, and heavenly propriety, and he receives the fruit in the Lord's gracious familiarity with him on this ground -- a significant anticipation of Christ's presence. From verse 9 onwards the Lord blesses him, in revealing Himself, according to and as a reward of -- as meeting -- this instinctive perception of who it was. Under the Spirit's power, we always do what is fitting.
From verse 22, Abraham deals openly with the Lord, then alone with him, on the full known ground of what He is. All this is exceedingly beautiful. What a thought -- to receive the Lord thus! -- it was Martha's privilege, without the cumbering, and hence the communion besides.
It is evident also that true intimacy is exercised when alone, and so it is here, and what a place this gives!
When judgment is announced as to the world, the immediate giving of the Son is made known to faith.
In this chapter we have no doubt Abraham's place, and contrasted with Lot's, but the patient goodness of God, in government, is brought out, more than Abraham, at the end.
-- 2. It would seem that the three men stood suddenly by him, nitztzavim alav (stood by him).
-- 3. Abraham only speaks to One -- "in thy sight"; there was discernment, but no intrusion into their secret.
-- 4,5. This is all in the plural. The Angels would have known the discernment of the saint. Then all enters into the apparent form, and this continues to verse 9.
-- 9. It is not that all spoke, but it was not Jehovah testimony.
-- 10. Here it is again the revelation of Jehovah given by the inspired writer. The name of Isaac (laughter) is from Abraham's laughter; however Sarah may have disbelieved, Abraham fell adoringly on his face, owning the communications of the Lord, not so Sarah. How very different is what seems like in the things of God! But in spite of Israel's unbelief, God's purpose will be accomplished. (See Psalm 126.)
There is wonderful depth in this passage. It seems clear the Word takes up the declaration here, being a word of promise; also it is Jehovah in verse 1, and I suppose in verse 3 it is Jehovah, or else it is a common titular name of Christ as the Supreme God, and particularly connected with the Jewish people. In verse 5 it is "they" said -- Abraham compelled doubtless in his mind by the Spirit, addresses (them) as Jehovah or Adonai, and says "favour in thine eyes"; all personal acts are placed plural -- "your feet" -- "ye have come" -- "your servant"; that which recognised Jehovah, singular -- "Thy sight" -- so in their acts -- "they did eat" -- "they said" -- and "He said returning, I will return" -- we shall see more concerning it afterwards.
-- 13. Here we have Jehovah Himself, directly.
-- 14. For Abraham, Sarah's unbelief is only an occasion of confirming his faith; this also is blessed. Sarah did not fail to see that the Lord spake, but there was the unbelief of heart which thinks of flesh.
Our poor unbelief is very often a reason for the Lord confirming His word in mercy, yet were we happier in Him in simple faith -- "speak the word". The passage is singularly beautiful.
-- 17. The portion of the believing Church of God.
When the Lord has promised the Son -- the seed of blessing and laughter -- in the old age of the Church, He looks or turns towards Sodom, nor does the unbelief of the Church alter His purpose concerning it. Shall the Church also not be afraid to laugh? But the Lord shall make it laugh. Indeed Abraham is constantly used I think for the men (people) who compose the Church, and Sarah for the Church subjectively, or in the abstract -- Abraham, the men as acted in by the Spirit (failing or not).
-- 20. The Lord declares the cry of Sodom, and He going down to see -- Abraham enquires -- recognising the righteousness
of judgment, pleads righteousness in sparing for any's sake -- then the Lord instructs us in the measure of His (accurate) judgment in reply.
-- 25. Abraham clearly treats Him here distinctly as God -- the Judge of all the earth would do right.
The place of Abraham is communion with the Lord about the judgment -- Lot is only saved, by his interference, out of it -- but Abraham was where he stood before the Lord -- it was the top of the mountain whence he saw the smoke of the plain going up; and mystically this place is Heaven, for God says to Abraham there, "I will go down and see" -- and that is the place of intercession -- of the Church in spirit.
What a wondrous passage this is! It appears, certainly to me, that Jehovah appeared and talked, but that it was He only who alone reveals Jehovah, who was the man of those three thus associated with Him as the messengers of His service -- for He is Lord of angels. Yet we know that He has had Angels strengthening Him, and He sends them here -- the executors of His judicial power, compare Matthew 13:41, for it is the Son revealed who is the executor, the Father judging no man, but committing all judgment to the Son -- and He, as Man, will here exercise this judgment; I certainly do think also more particularly that Abraham represents here the saints, and Lot the Jews, though what else, I say not here. There was some good in Lot, though he was in Sodom; there was the sense of evil, and hence he did not lose the good -- he liked to have it with him -- I do not say it was the only motive, the apostle commends it in Hebrews.
But what that in Benjamin should be formed the sin of Sodom!
We are admitted to the Lord's thoughts by revelation; only leaving that, He treats Abraham as His friend, and I think that, though verses 20, 21 are an abstract revelation, yet the place they are introduced shows that, as to the nature of the communications, the Lord, though with Abraham who was on earth, was on His own heavenly ground, not gone down to earth in judgment, and to judge; this is important as the place of intercession. Only the Lord knew of course what He would do, and the two men -- angels -- had gone on their way, but faith's heavenly intercourse with the Lord, however imperfect, is within all that.
Note well, this is all connected with chapter 17; it is not as
in chapter 15, God for us in our wants, which ends, in all cases, in what we are on earth. It is God with us -- hence revealing Himself -- hence grace in us does not ask for self, but intercedes for others; it has already all from God, according to His delight, only chapter 17 is sovereign purpose, as Elohim is minded to have it; this chapter (18) is gracious communication -- the Lord dealing with Abraham as with a friend. In one, Jehovah is Elohim Shaddai -- blessed that He is so! -- in the other, He is, though Jehovah, still as a Man as near in intercourse, and revealing all, as He is solemn in judgment. And note, in treating Abraham as a friend, He does not tell him what concerns himself, but what is in His own mind concerning others. This is the Church's place -- the Christian's -- this is what we do with a friend -- how singularly blessed! surely more than "What wilt thou give me?" though that has its place.
The Lord's own most patient grace in judgment is also shown both in verse 21, and in the intercession. Abraham never says "Jehovah", but "Adonai"; Abraham was not in his place, as at home on earth, when he pleaded with the Lord; he was with Jehovah in the way of faith -- we may say a heavenly way. He returned to his place -- the home of nature; there he had received the Lord, but in his communing and intercession, he was before the Lord, where the Lord had taken him.
One can scarce believe the extent of intercession, or patience of God's grace and gracious ear; but there is however "once more" -- yet the Lord more righteous than that -- note however the language of verses 30 and 32 -- most wondrous!
Then -- what a scene! -- but how great the patience.
It is something like 2 Corinthians 12, where we begin with the third heaven, verse 2, and end with vile conversation, verses 20, 21, yet in Christians; here mainly, the world.
We have here the wretched picture, not only of the grossest wickedness, but of the moral consequence to the saint of getting into such a place; think of Lot saying "my brethren", and offering his daughters. Where sin is not a horror, there is companionship and friendliness.
There is nothing here at all of the ease and familiarity of
Jehovah's intercourse with Abraham; this is all the ways of Jehovah.
On the whole this is a sad scene. The believer, if in the world, would have importance in it -- do good; he sits in the gate -- the gate of Sodom! But Lot is not easy at being found there, he acts as at ease, but he would hinder the strangers from knowing what a place they had found him in; it is no use, he takes it on himself, uses atrocious means, for what could he do against them? Power delivers him, that is all. These are Jehovah's ways in relationship with men; it is not Elohim here; note from verse 17, it is practically referred directly to the Lord, "He said", so verse 21 -- and verse 29, we find Elohim; they are God's ways, and judgment. We have noticed the general case elsewhere.
-- 1. See the place Lot found himself in -- the place of society and the worldly place, but it was not Jehovah he met. I suppose there was right feeling, and discernment however; his soul was righteous, but fleshly interest had brought him where he heard it (2 Peter 2:7), and to no purpose.
-- 6, 7. What a picture of the falseness of his place. How strange he could have rested there; and akhay (my brethren)!
-- 8. I think there was the desire to avoid, with respectable strangers, the perception of the company he was in. It is dreadful, and such an offer.
-- 11. I suppose this shows very persevering wickedness; no sense of God's hand upon them.
-- 14. Content -- every point must be dwelt upon in this chapter -- sorrowful, yet merciful (verse 19), so most instructive.
-- 20. Lot's seeking to save Zoar seems a terrible proof of moral low estate. Grace indeed is wonderfully shown, but that this wonderful intervention of grace should not have led him to joyful obedience to the Angel's word!
-- 21. Though accepted and borne with, how he clings to the city, and the plain. He believed the testimony as a fact, but in no way enters into the spirit of it, or he would not have sought one of the cities; he escapes, that is all. The true place of Abraham -- faith -- he is afraid of.
-- 27. Note; one sees the judgment in the place where one has been in communion -- for us heaven.
-- 29. Note that it is Elohim here; the historical fact as to God's dealings; otherwise intercourse and dealings with Jehovah.
-- 30. Judgment is so near what mercy has spared that Lot flees from it. The judgment of the world he recognizes, but he never himself judges the spirit of it.
-- 31. There were plenty of men in the earth, but so unbelief calculates.
What lessons his daughters had learnt in Sodom!
Even before this, it was for Abraham's sake Lot was delivered.
God in judgment and government could not think of Lot with satisfaction; he was righteous, He did deliver him, He knows how -- yea, the evil enhances His grace in doing it, but "God remembered Abraham" (verse 29).
It is a sad and terrible picture; his pleading for Zoar is an expression of utter prostration as to faith.
There cannot be a more terrible picture of the fruit of connection with a godless world than this history, and see how the world is infected by it -- a stain upon the moral feeling. What details of the case there are!
-- 37, 38. "Unto this day" -- this gives a dismal sense of what the world is. Sin perpetuates itself till judgment comes in, and gives the sense of a world infected by it, and which has its history from it; and we know this -- not that the mind dwells on it as occupying it, for our own place is with Abraham on the mountain -- with our Father in heaven.
But if I think of this world, I must in truth know it thus. And note, this was after deliverance; faith and confidence in God had been destroyed -- sunk in dissoluteness of moral feeling.
I think this refers to Jewish position before the manifestation of Messiah. It is not the place of faith, but the contrary, but then, while Israel is in the power of the world, God preserves the nation for Himself and for the time when "to us a Son is born". It is elsewhere remarked that the woman is the state, and the man the conduct in general in types of this kind. The Gentile power is not looked at as hostile here, but as in a false position in respect of the people of God.
Though the typical and spiritual import of this chapter may have its place here -- and I believe historically it has been
doubted of old time -- not only was Sarah very old, but chapters 17: 24 and 21: 5, show that it was within the year she bore Isaac (if the chapter be according to date), but it may be early in it; if not, chapter 12, between verses 8 and 9, may be the place.
It is all so very sad; besides the judgment of the world, and saving God's people out of it, which is simple enough, I do not quite understand. Historically, as to those Israel was in connection with, it is very clear, i.e., as to its object. I see the care of God over His people, even when they are in evil, and failure, as of Lot, and Abraham in Philistia; this is most gracious, "He suffered no man to do them wrong", but, I apprehend there must be more figurative, and dispensational truth in it.
-- 3. With Abimelech it is "Elohim".
-- 18. It is Jehovah again. The divine government in relationship with Abraham.
I think I see the position of Abimelech clearer, which was something obscure and undefined. Chapter 14 closes the history of Abram proper with victory and Melchizedek; chapter 15 supplements it by the promise of an heir of his own bowels, but in connection with Israel, the numerous seed, and the covenant of the land -- still a seed is spoken of; chapter 16 is the effort to have it according to the flesh before the time -- the Hagar, and legal principle; chapter 17 begins a fresh revelation -- God is revealed to Abraham as Shaddai, and he the father of many nations -- still we are on the ground of the seed here; chapter 18, the Lord visits Abraham and the personal seed, Isaac, is promised as an immediate expectation -- the Church's place in communion with God on the mountain, and the judgment of the world revealed -- God treating him as His friend -- the spirit of intercession. Then comes the deliverance of Israel, but through the fire, just escaped -- in principle, the believer mixed up with the world. In Abimelech we have the power of the world; Abraham and Sarah deny the true place of Sarai -- the Church loses its place and the expectation of the promised seed; it is taken under the protection, into the home, of the king of this world. All goes on as if no promised seed was in present expectation; only God takes care of it all. Though unjustifiable in a sense, yet the world did it in integrity; but God takes care where man's faith does not, and all is kept
for the promised seed, but Abraham and Sarah are both reproved. There is more faithfulness in the world's power than in them. The Church (Christians) has lost here then its present true place and relationship, and expectation of the promised seed. In what follows, the seed is born; the seed according to the flesh -- Israel under the law -- the system, and all born after the flesh, done with. That part of what had to say apparently and fleshlily to the root of promise, goes to Egypt. But now Abraham has the upper hand of Abimelech, and reproves him, and Abimelech, and the world's power, seek him because God is with him, and he plants a grove, takes possession of the land with his altar, and this is the everlasting God -- "His mercy has endured for ever". But it is a grove instead of a tent, for, besides the deeply instructive principles, Israel is always in view; hence also Beersheba. But now other truths as to the seed must come in, and to the one seed, which is Christ, always in view, but here distinctively.
-- 1. We have in the ways and faithfulness of Jehovah in promise, His name brought out.
Then all the dealings historically are Elohim; Elohim had spoken, not man; Elohim, in mercy, heard the voice of the lad; Elohim could not allow the bondwoman's seed to inherit.
Note here how we have the origines gentium, no doubt in the family of Shem. The Ishmaelites, as is known, characterise whole countries to this day, but they were allied with Ham, and Egypt; here his mother and wife were Egyptians. Now that Isaac has his true place as sure and only heir, Abraham recognises Jehovah, the God of the full future of purpose, the El o-lam (God everlasting). This helps to the khay-yey o-lam (life everlasting); Daniel 12:2. Only the now incarnate and glorified Christ gives other elements of it.
This chapter brings in the heir and that is clear enough; the fleshly heir is cast out, the seed of Hagar, only as Abraham's seed there is earthly blessing. The world recognises Abraham as the one blessed of God, and here we come to earthly and so Jewish title, yet by the manifested seed.
-- 33. This was a kind of pledge of the possession of the land, as also the tide he gives Jehovah. He was Jehovah olam
for a future day yet hidden, save in promise; Beersheba was literally the bounds of the land.
-- 33, 34, is a sort of taking into possession of the land or earth, and the name of God refers to that; He is Jehovah, the El olam, the God of Might for ever, for the yet hidden future.
Note this; the conduct of the believer -- as under the blessing in the land wherein he is a stranger, not having so much as to set his foot on -- and Isaac, not in the same strength of blessing, yields -- in principle right and alike, but not exercising the same spiritual energy -- not in the same power of blessing. Is it connected with what goes before?
First we have, up to this, the path of faith and promise in various forms, and degrees, and failure; and I think the person of the seed as of promise, all that connected itself with Christ's Person, and in the divine power of life. Now the ground, sacrifice and resurrection; promises given up, looked at as connected with flesh, and promise to one in it.
NOTE. -- It begins with Elohim dealing with man, and then brings in Jehovah dealing with the faithful one, founded on the perfect work done to glorify Him, and the blessing attached to the risen seed.
-- 8, 9. The calmness of Abraham is lovely.
Note here, that Isaac is not slain and laid on the altar but laid on the altar to be slain -- in this, more exactly like Christ No doubt there was the fear of God, but what wonderful intimacy what passed at the offering up of Isaac must have given to Abraham. First, God's calling him to such entire self-devotedness to Himself, to give up everything nearest heart to Him, and thus be to Himself, not for another; then withal to trust Him, for the promises were given up and Jehovah trusted for them.
NOTE. -- God tempts (tries), as such, but the consequent promises are from the Lord. But all promises, as flesh could trust in them, were given up to and for God; this puts him in a very peculiar place -- a place of intimacy -- and into which he was brought by God, by His own will to Himself -- a wonderful place!
The confirmation to the seed is noticed elsewhere.
The whole scene is beautiful, yet solemn; a wonderful act of resigned obedience, and unreserved giving up of self to God, and trust in Him. It was meant as a test, and to bring this out, a fit testimony to Him who did it in far other depths, but a blessed testimony. We have both blessings here united through the seed, and not only promise, but through obedience. It is evident too we are here with wholly a new starting point; Elohim is taking new ground, and as Elohim, in absolute surrender to Himself, accomplished in Christ, and thus takes Himself, "By myself have I sworn", as the sure and immutable ground of blessing, and blessing to Gentiles in the seed. It is in this respect a very important chapter; it is founded on God's nature and righteousness, passed (here in figure) the whole sphere of evil, and in righteousness entered into a new one, which must answer too to the worth of that righteousness, and drawing from God what His own nature could give according to that, yet from Himself as its origin and source, though in righteousness and holiness, fruit of His own nature, counsel, and will, yet saying "because" as Christ too Himself has said both in terms, and laying the ground for it. The scene in itself is of wonderful simplicity.
This chapter seems also the trial of the Church; as possessed by the Spirit, the Church is the man, as in service and affection, and corporately the woman.
Can any doubt the blessed beauty of the covenant-sacrifice of the Son, though there be more in principle in it, i.e., being a principle, it contains more. Thus God's relinquishment, i.e., Christ's of Jewish laughter, to have resurrection joy -- and the Church's also -- bitter as it may seem, all hang on this example of God, shown in the sacrifice and surrender of Christ. So Sarah's laughter of unbelief is God's laughter of joy, for He chooses the weak things.
-- 1. Abraham therefore about 147 years old.
In the noble manners and sentiments of patriarchal simplicity, we have the great truth that Abraham, having the heir and all promises, had nothing here below, but must buy a sepulchre to bury his dead out of his sight, that is all he had a present possession in the earth.
I certainly think that this is the passing away of the spouse of the unrisen Lord (Israel under the old covenant in flesh), to make way for the spouse of the risen One, that has to leave her country like Abraham (we are not here in the type of Sarah and Hagar) but after the offering up of Isaac.
-- 4. How, where there is faithfulness, the consciousness of our true position, given of God, is carried with us in the most ordinary circumstances, and shows itself as a witness of truth for God -- a burying place in righteousness, but that was all.
NOTE. -- We are here after the sacrifice and resurrection of Isaac in figure, and Abraham is a stranger in the land; Sarah (mother of Isaac) is gone, and Abraham knows the God of heaven and earth, as seen below, and a bride sought for Isaac, who is not to go back to the world Abraham was called out of.
The positive prohibition to bring Isaac down to the country Abraham had left, and seeking a spouse for him in the place of promise (heaven), by the mission of Eleazar, spoken of elsewhere already, and Rebekah taking the place of Sarah -- the Church instead of Israel.
-- 3. Here Abraham attributes to God His full title of glory in heaven and earth. There was to be no connection with the rejected race -- with the world in which he dwelt a stranger. It enhances the Melchizedek title (not state) of God, and according to Colossians and Ephesians 1, but there fulfilled in Christ. The whole title as a sphere of glory is here -- Abraham calls God "Jehovah the God of heaven, and the God of the earth", further on, to his servant Eleazar, "the God of heaven" as He who had called him; his faith owned Him the former; in realisation He was only and distinctively the latter, and hence the source and power (through grace) of Abraham's hope. Daniel speaks of the "God of heaven", he could not of the "God of the earth". Some say Christ has all power in heaven and on earth, and we believe it, but He has in no way taken the earth yet, and even in heaven He is on His Father's throne. The Canaanite was a judged race in the place of promise. But Abraham will not have Isaac in the place of nature -- the place out of which he was called; and note here, therefore God (Jehovah) is God of heaven -- he knows the God which took
him out of his country in this character. Isaac was now risen (in figure), Sarah's burial declared him a stranger -- he sought a country -- he was on heavenly ground. Hence we have a type of the Church, and of the Holy Ghost's work, sent to draw her to the Son -- heir of all -- out of the world too. Canaanites are a peculiar character of the world -- the apostate world -- of which Satan is prince -- his instruments and power.
-- 8. Note this point; for though the spouse may be taken out the world, yet we can never return into the elements of it again. The man represents the Church in the energy of the Spirit -- the spouse, its substance and position as acquired subjectively by the Lord.
12 et seq, the laying the ground of faith right, shows the existence of faith, and finds its effect even though in inferior circumstances -- so, "Truth Lord, yet the dogs eat of the crumbs", etc.; so, the centurion, etc.
NOTE. -- Abraham gives no blessing to his son; God gives it directly to him, and confirms it to his seed. He charges Eleazar only not to bring back Isaac to the place he had left, and to fetch his wife thence. No doubt Abraham had the earthly promises, but this separation to the heavenly thing is remarkable in his case. He merges, as on earth, in the risen Isaac. As I have noticed, he calls God, "the God of heaven and earth", and Jehovah, "the God of heaven", when he sends Eleazar, which gives these names a greater force. Daniel had only that as a resource when, as God of the earth, He had left His throne in Israel; but here it is the positive source of blessing. Abraham had had his blessing from the Most High God, possessor of heaven and earth, but that is specific.
This may be after Sarah's death, but is not necessarily so; it is an account of other details of his history to complete it, and show the nations that were of his race.
-- 1. "Then" is hardly a note of time; or rather, there is no "then"; it is "And Abraham added to take a wife". But Abraham lived 35 years after Isaac's marriage, how long Sarah had then been dead is not said -- chapter 24: 67 would say not very long. The "added" is used for "again" or "another".
-- 6. Most probably applies to a previous period -- what, save as to their races, makes no part of his divine history. It looks as if Keturah was after Sarah's death, but "then again" is only English vay'yo-seph (and added); it is merely the additional fact, and Abraham took another wife, not positively saying when -- though very possibly it may have been after the death of Sarah. He lived 75 years after Isaac's birth, being then 100 -- Sarah died at 127, so that he lived towards 40 years after Sarah's death. Only Isaac's bringing Rebekah into his mother's tent, though much more meant to show the substitution of one to another, seems to hint that the time was not so long since her death. Abraham was 140 at Isaac's marriage, so that he lived 35 years after that; it was therefore, as I said, towards 40 years. Abraham was some 12 years older than Sarah, assuming her death and Isaac's marriage to be not far apart -- a year or two.
-- 7. Some thirty-four years after Isaac's marriage.
-- 11. Elohim blesses Isaac. Here again it is God, as such -- God's blessing on man.
-- 21. The blessings for which Isaac entreats, and which are given are of Jehovah.
-- 34. "He ate and drank, and rose up and went his way", refers, I think, to his profane indifference.
This chapter answers as to Isaac, chapter 12 as to Abraham, but there is nothing answering to chapter 17, nor indeed to chapter 15, there is something of both in verses 3, 4, but the revelation of God, as all that depends on it -- as the intercession for Sodom -- is wanting. Jacob, returned to Bethel, has this revelation as in chapter 17.
All this must be enquired into -- it is connected with the full blessing of Israel. Then what was Isaac's place, leaving aside chapter 24, or is there any connection with this?
The whole of this chapter is in connection with Jehovah, even Abimelech so speaks -- it is a matter of covenant acknowledgment.
-- 2. Here Isaac comes under Abraham, but the blessing of the nations in the seed is promised. There is no personal revelation as a source of it.
I do not see the free liberty of grace in Isaac as in Abraham (personally), nor the faith of him that left all. He is blessed, but is more tied to earth -- he gives way to Abimelech -- suffers from the Philistines -- makes an oath with the world -- has his title to the land limited. There is no Lot left to choose, nor intercession for Sodom. He is blessed, but less with God, and more with man. No sacrifice of Isaac. It has another tone altogether.
Rich in possessions as he was, he cedes Abraham's wells to the Philistine, instead of chasing the four kings and freeing Lot. How things, the effects of faith and unbelief that is, last in the world; Beersheba and the Philistines are found again in the later history of Israel.
-- 23. Here evidently the Lord furnishes a kind of limit to the land of promise.
-- 24. Here he is on Jewish ground again.
-- 25. Then he has his altar and tent. Jacob has only Jewish promises and the nation's blessing in them. The particular revelation of God's name to Abraham was in connection with the Jewish promises; chapter 17. The first was a personal calling, and establishment in promise. He reveals Himself to Jacob by His name, but there it is Jewish again. The seed stands alone with Isaac, as with Abraham, and on the same ground.
-- 29. That is, had now taken the place of Abraham, as the one evidently blessed of Jehovah, and that is the place He had taken in verse 24.
NOTE. -- In the history of Abraham and Isaac, both had the revelation of God, consequent upon a series of experiences, I mean the full revelation for communion, not that by which grace called them, and, no doubt, Abraham failed, but the experience of Jacob was away from God in failure, and confiding in the flesh, and being, in many respects, in it, i.e., walking after it, and he returns through great grace, but with struggle and conflict.
Abraham's path, in general, was in intercourse with God Himself, leaning on Him, looking to Him, in a word in the main before Him, and the result is accordingly.
The same promise is made, pretty much, to Jacob as to Abraham, as to his own blessing, and that of his family; but all the communications that follow there is nothing of in the
case of Jacob -- no intercession for others -- no blessing of the nations in his seed -- all this is wanting. He is blessed by God, and in communication with Him as to it, but not in fellowship with God in the purposes of God's own heart, beyond Jacob himself. All this is instructive.
How we have sunk down here from Abraham's history -- Isaac's mouth is full of venison; who would have thought of such a thing?
And what a different place too Rebekah has from Sarah. It is a sad picture; nobler human nature indifferent to God and the promise; and he who cared for it, a base and false nature, and led by the cunning of woman; yet all accomplishes the purpose of God, and we know Esau heartlessly despised God's privileges, selling them for a mess of pottage -- he was profane.
-- 33. I do not doubt that the thought of God's coming in to thwart his flesh had greatly to do with Isaac's trembling, e-pho ("then") -- mi-e-pho ("WHO then?")
Sad as Jacob's course was, the overruling hand of God is most plain. We have a mixture of Jehovah and Elohim; Rebekah speaks of the blessing before Jehovah; Jacob says "Jehovah thy God" to Isaac; and Isaac speaks of a field which "Jehovah hath blessed", but in the next verse asks blessing from Elohim. It was God as such giving blessing to man -- it came from God. So in the next chapter it is "El Shaddai (God the Almighty) bless thee", he going on a pilgrimage to a strange land. So Elohim gave to Abraham, it was God as a Sovereign.
We have got out of the venison here, and Jacob is subject to God's mind, not only in his words, but soberly in his will, but then we have come down to earth, and to Israel. Jehovah is there the God of Abraham, and Isaac, and will take care of Jacob even when a wanderer; the land is given to him, and in him and his seed all the families are to be blessed. It is not the promise confirmed to the seed, but the numerous seed the seat of blessing for the earth.
-- 3. Jehovah never appeared to Isaac by His name of God Almighty; he knew Him, we see, as such, but it is not the revealed relationship of the risen seed.
Jehovah appeared to him twice (see chapter 26: 2, 24). Isaac was not to return into Egypt -- the risen man into the world -- he was Abraham's seed. To Jacob God reveals Himself as God Almighty; this is all, I apprehend, characteristic, and is remarkable.
-- 8, 9. Well meant, perhaps, but this imitation was no use; it is, besides, ethnological.
-- 11. M'ra-ashoth (pillows) at his head. Angels of God, servants thus, or messengers, apart from Himself, but of Elohim as such. Clearly John 1 refers to this, but not with the foolish thought that Christ was the ladder -- He held Jacob's place.
-- 13. But we get Jehovah at once in His intercourse with Jacob -- it is specially relationship.
-- 14. Here the seed is Israel, for we are on earthly ground, and so it will be; before, it was in Abraham and in his seed risen (compare chapter 35: 9 - 13), only the earthly seed and blessing -- we have no Galatian promise. To Isaac we have no promise of the land (but see chapter 26: 3, 4); only the personal promise of a numerous seed. He was the seed of promise, and is the figure of Christ thus risen and exalted. The heir of promise ought to be Abraham's, so to speak, not Jacob's; Abraham had all the promises.
-- 19. How striking these earthly memorials, and associations with God. But we are on wholly earthly ground here; this attaches to earth though (and this is to be noted) connected with heaven. The vow and all partook of this character.
-- 20 - 22. The vow of Jacob was a poor thing, suited indeed to one driven out, through his want of principle; faith in a certain sense, but faith used for selfishness. Never did Abraham, or even Isaac make such a vow.
We have men here, not Jehovah, or Elohim, though surely God was behind it all; but it is a different scene even from Eleazar.
-- 14. How different from Eleazar's bringing up Rebekah
to where Isaac was. Jacob was to avoid the Canaanites too, but he does return to Padan Aram himself, and the whole scene, though touching, is, in spiritual elevation, so totally below the divinely imprinted dignity of Eleazar's mission.
-- 32. Sorrowful and wronged Leah alone speaks of Jehovah.
How dreadfully all is sunk morally from Abraham's, and even Isaac's time. It is not barrenness of flesh, and God coming in, in promise, and power; but, oh! what a scene of selfishness, jealousies, and craft. One only spot of green is in it -- Rachel, the barren one, is heard. All the rest is miserable and flesh, only just chastisement, and discipline from God; and how it has characterised the race since! Yet God has blessed and will bless. How thoroughly we have got into man, and man's ways. So Rachel here, even in special circumstances, has no thought of Jehovah's ways; it is "Elohim hath judged me", and so all through, till her heart is softened by grace; then she says, in faith, "Jehovah will add". Joseph is the promise of Benjamin. Laban too owns Jehovah, and Jacob calls Him so. The rest of the chapter is Jacob, but, oh! how far we are from Abraham; yet Jacob is found in Hebrews 11, not this; but it was righteous recompense as regards Laban.
-- 2. No great wonder; but the natural fruit of all this evil and planning. What a path of peace is godly simplicity!
-- 3. Still Jehovah is with Israel in grace; there is government with God's people, but government in favour. We have Jehovah Himself taking up the matter again; He always pursues His plans. But it is a personal God, "the God of my Father"; the true God, but brought down to their relationship.
-- 9. It is God acting as such, save the angelic message alleged by Jacob, verse 11.
It rests on this ground -- a family God, or God, Creator and providential Ruler.
-- 52. This was, after all, a formal separation of Jacob from the world; God had taken care of him till now, He always does of Israel, but even by angels -- He only meets him after this -- He told him to leave, that was all.
-- 1. It is not Mal'ak' (angel) Jehovah, but Mal'akey (angel of) Elohim; God's providential display of sovereign care.
-- 2. "Mahanaim" is not a sovereign covenant act.
NOTE. -- Jehovah can send him away in this character, but, till he is back in his right place, He does not reveal Himself on the way in any way by His name; but he can refer back to that kind of revelation.
-- 9, 10. But it is only as a present thing, Peniel (the face of God); and this was all in its place, a faithful, gracious, but not a revealed God; we ought to have both. It is in His place we have this.
-- 20. This is all wretched and the fruit of evil.
-- 29. We have often remarked, there is no name here, no revelation of God; there was a name at Bethel, not of present relationship, but of promise and care. This is conflict -- he is not returned there.
-- 30. NOTE. -- In confirmation of the view of Jacob's wrestling heretofore given, that all that he can say (and though perfect grace in God, how poor as to communion with Him), is "I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved" -- was that all? Oh, how sorrowful! Note too, the struggle was in the dark which is very expressive.
Preserved, victorious in the struggle of faiths he calls God, here only, El, Elohe Israel; there was faith and even worship, but founded on circumstances, and present interventions of God in favour of self. It was well, but low down in the scale of faith; he was not yet returned to God Himself, as He reveals Himself, though he had found Him faithful to him in mercy.
-- 31. Where evil is, and men are away from God, nothing is right on any side; but grace can come in and overrule the evil and set right, as in the next chapter.
God calls him back to his first point of departure; there Jehovah's name had been revealed to him; then the purified house of Jacob goes to the meeting place where he had become an outcast. Then God reveals Himself by His patriarchal name, directly, and the land comes in sight. But it is not said Jehovah appeared as to Abraham and Isaac, and there is nothing of the blessing of the nations in the seed. Isaac is much more lost in Abraham; God never reveals Himself directly to him by a name, He is the God of his father Abraham.
A vast deal afterwards is history often interesting, and important, but only as a preparation for God's dealings as Jehovah. The only places in which we have "Jehovah" in the rest of the book, are in Judah's case, chapter 38: 7 - 10, where one sees they are His special ways, and government; with Joseph sold and in trial, chapter 39; and, after Dan, Jacob's waiting for His salvation, which is an Israelitish millennial desire, chapter 49: 18; his present wish of blessing for Joseph is from God Almighty, his own name -- of relationship with God. We get "God" often -- His dealings, as ruling all things, in contrast with men.
-- 9 - 11. All is gone through, as if he was then just returned, and he really was then only returned to God at Bethel, where he had last been with Him in leaving Canaan.
-- 11. Here God is revealed, but the promises are only Jewish; we are come down to that now -- Jacob and Israel are their name.
-- 13. God goes up then from Jacob -- as from Abraham, after talking with him.
Experiences are useful to bring us to God, but they all disappear when God reveals Himself.
-- 14. Here we get Jacob upon Abraham ground, because it is renewed in grace, see chapter 17: 1 - 22, but both are on
earthly ground; Isaac was never placed on this, he was still alive too, see verse 27.
-- 18. The true Heir, in figure, of renewed Israel; the former thing -- Israel -- dead and gone, and the new, the Son of its affliction, but of His Father's right hand.
Note the beauty of the order as to the Patriarchs.
Abraham, depositary of the promises, is a stranger in the place of promise. All we read of his journey, as owned of God -- for he failed with Sarah, he had not departed as the Lord had said -- was "he went forth to go into the land of Canaan, and into the land of Canaan he came". We have no sign of the Lord being with him in the way that he went down into Egypt, though He visited Pharaoh with plagues.
His history, of which we have detail, is -- a stranger in the land of promise -- communion with God as such -- and depositary of the communications, and promises of God.
Of Isaac we have nothing, save the fact of his being offered up (which was the act of Abraham, though Isaac is submissive, God provided Himself with a lamb for a burnt offering) and his going out to meet Rebecca.
The history we have is of Eleazar fetching Rebecca to him -- he is hidden; his dealings with Esau and Jacob only introduce these two, it is not his history. He represents Christ unseen, and the Church gathered.
As in Esau we have high-handed rebellion, and self-will -- in Jacob, we have God with him in the path, secretly by His providence, but a path occasioned by his evil and unbelief. In this sense -- God with us -- "in the way", is a humbling, and to us an evil place -- blessed and patient grace, and turned to good and blessing -- still a humbling place; God's name is not revealed to us in it, even when we prevail to have blessing by faith through His grace.
God is with us "in the way", but we should not be "in the way", if unbelief had not, for a time, put us out of the proper place of promise. Jacob was a stranger from, not in, the place of promise; the Lord would keep him, and bring him again, when he was a stranger, and his way and wanderings from Canaan -- but he was going from this place which might be an anchor to him.
It would seem that the wrestling had not set his heart right, for he buys land, and is not a stranger, and, but for God's providential interference, would have settled and made alliance. Also the strange gods were in his household, and he seems to have known it. He had not fairly come to God; chapter 37: 1 alone brings us back to the proper patriarchal, Abrahamic place, and Allon Bachuth and Benoni accompany, or are connected with the altar that was raised; chapter 37: 1 is grounded on chapter 35: 27, and 36: 6.
How entirely in Jacob's history we descend into a lower sphere; also he had reason to say "few and evil". But then we have more of the ways of God, and His supremacy above evil, and yet His dealing with evil, and therein His gracious process with the evil doer, and all this is very precious to us.
Of Abraham, the called man, the friend of God, we have an ample history of what man is in that place, imperfect surely, but most blessed.
Of Isaac, the heavenly man, little or nothing but the fact -- he gets a wife, and does not go back to the place he was called out of.
Of Jacob, we have a long and detailed history, and the blessing of Isaac belongs to it. It is man, though man with promise, and the patient condescension of God with him, making good His counsels, and after all through faith, but giving us a sad history, though life shines through it.
We are still in dealings and providence -- government; Simeon and Levi do what scatters them in Israel, in their cruel wrath. It is a human history, and human ways.
But further, when Israel gets back to Bethel, in which place alone he is fully back to God after his compulsory wanderings -- and even the idols only then put away -- yet kept and preserved, but then when God reveals Himself, we have nothing now of the blessing of the nations in the seed. It is purely Jewish, Rachel -- representing the mother of the seed of power in the earth -- departs, and he, who was the son of her affliction, is the son of his father's right hand. God takes care of him, blesses Jacob meanwhile, but he does not meet Him in the place of promise till Bethel, and then clear from all other gods.
When he had settled his own place on earth, he had to move away, though there he recognised El as the Elohe Israel.
Jacob's dwelling in the land where his father was a stranger, is not, I think, a contrast in evil; the same word ya shav (to dwell) is used as to Abraham and Lot together in Canaan, and as to Lot in Sodom; it is that he was now not a wanderer out of it, but a dweller in it. Still he was more settled than Abraham was, only when he did settle, God stirred him up out of his rest.
-- 1. He was desired in chapter 35 to go and dwell at Bethel; here it is put he "dwelt in the land of his father's sojournings", but the history now is the history of his sons; his history till he went to Egypt is in this one verse. In chapter 35 Jacob has the blessing here below, the seed of power, son of his right hand, and there the mother dies, and the history is the history of his sons, and of Esau besides.
Jacob sinks into the shade, though then Joseph is on the scene, and so verse 2 begins: "These are the tol'doth Jacob, Joseph being", etc. The wanderer was kept, the time for the possession of the land was not come, and that was Jacob's figurative place; only he is Israel, and Bethel the place he has returned to.
Bethel is the second place for Elijah; he begins at Gilgal, which is to be noted -- separation, promise, death, heaven, and return in power (resurrection).
-- 9. This is the general idea, as his mother was now dead, or he must have had the dream before his reaching Canaan in his seventh year, ten years before this. The Jews have noted this, as showing a dream, not properly a prophetic vision; but this is clearly a prophecy.
In the account of Joseph, so deeply interesting, we descend more to history, only, already elsewhere noticed, it is a perfect picture of Christ and Israel. We have only Judah's conduct as soon as Joseph is brought in, and all is connected with Christ in one way or another.
-- 21. This seems to exculpate Israel as ignorant.
-- 26 - 29. Judah sold him to the Gentiles, Reuben was ignorant of it. Judah was directly guilty of selling him to the Gentiles; when the Benjamin character comes in, Judah is identified with him -- is surety for him.
This is Judah's history and genealogy.
-- 10. The God of government had to say to it.
-- 2. Matz' liakh (prosperous), that is the fruit of the Lord's being with one; Adonai -- what matter, if the Lord was with him, and made all prosper with him. Ish-matz' liakh (a man prosperous). He prospered, for Jehovah matz' liakh, Jehovah made to prosper, that is what it is.
-- 4. Vay' shareth (and he served), i.e., waited on him personally.
-- 9. It was a plain moral wrong against God -- not a question of Jehovah's dealings.
-- 21. This was as true as when Jehovah was matz'liakh (prospering) him -- how blessed this! and the consciousness of it makes prison and prosperity alike. And it ends here, as there (though the prison was a little lower than a slave) in favour, Jehovah matz' liakh (prospered) him; this is what we want. It is connected -- though the prison was with the fear of God; but it is all Jehovah in government -- not God Almighty.
If Abraham give us the bright and blessed picture of communion with God, in Joseph we find goodness and unsullied integrity of heart towards God, in the midst of, and where the power of evil was. It is a lovely picture, and, in this, a beautiful foreshadowing of the Lord in His life -- the Beloved of His Father.
Faithfulness is the way of divine spiritual understanding.
How we have got on here from the great outlines and principles of truth, and God's ways, and the freshness of individual faith to the working out of righteousness; the time came that his cause was known, "the word of the Lord tried him", Psalm 105:19. But it is Jehovah who is with him, the governing God, not by His name God Almighty.
Note how far the trial of Joseph, limited by divine ordering from anything that should hinder it -- intended to frustrate God's purpose -- and apparently clean against it -- and his righteous suffering in Egypt only just bring about the whole thing they seemed to frustrate; it was in the Egypt his brothers
sold him to, and in the prison Potiphar put him in that led him to the butler and baker, which set him governor over all the land of Egypt. We cannot put God out of His way. It is better to trust him. How little they thought they were bringing about God's purpose they thought to set aside, still less that they were arranging a touching figure of the blessed Lord, the restoration of Israel after their repentance, and that He that they rejected should be the head of the heathen.
Joseph's history is excessively interesting, but I do not think he is. He was upright and God-fearing, and God's hand was with him, but there is very little of God in his history. We are in Egypt, and it is Egyptian, and worldly, save that God is everywhere. With his brethren at the end he was gracious; he closes with the Sovereign God, not Jehovah, chapter 50: 24, 26.
-- 41. Note, the humiliation of Joseph was God's path to his exaltation.
-- 51, 52. It is all Church ground, not Jewish.
NOTE. -- Joseph presents to us Christ as Wisdom -- as rejected -- first, His revealed claim of dominion and His Father's favour occasion His rejection by His brethren -- then He suffers, and His wisdom is known, "till the time came that His cause was known", etc. -- then in power -- then receiving again His brethren.
-- 15. Dinah is not reckoned in the thirty-three, Er and Onan are.
-- 26. Dinah is reckoned, Er and Onan are not -- they were dead.
-- 3. We have reference to God Almighty appearing in Canaan, but all through here it is God, the One Sovereign, not man. In the great body of Joseph's history, we see His hand, not His name, only in millennial hope, after Dan, Jehovah comes in.
-- 4. All Israel is to be K'hal-ammim, an assembly of nations.
-- 19. Ephraim is to be m'lo-haggoyim, fulness of nations; the last a large word, but not, I apprehend, a number of different nations, and it hardly seems to be a "multitude of nations". Is not that the meaning of it? Is not this "fulfilling" or "fulness of the nations" something else? See Septuagint verse 4 sunagogas ethnon and verse 19 plethos ethnon and compare with Romans 11:12 ploutos ethnon.
At any rate not "a multitude of nations"; see Isaiah 31:4, "all the shepherds together", I suppose. The multitude of nations shall be to Ephraim, not to Manasseh. I am disposed to believe it is the mass of Israel's tribes, but the whole body of the peoples of Israel was counted to Ephraim.
Note it is haggoyim (the nations).
NOTE. -- It is not the Jews but Israel all through.
Here we have, after all, the whole history of Israel clearly set out, besides the history of particular tribes when important.
-- 3 - 7. First Reuben, Simeon, Levi -- Israel according to the flesh -- heir according to nature; it has failed, it is scattered for its violence and cruelty.
-- 8 - 12. Then Judah is the place of royalty; here the coming of Shiloh, and this part of the special history is noticed.
-- 13. Zebulun -- they mix with the Gentiles.
-- 14, 15. Issachar -- they bow down to them and serve.
-- 16 - 18. Dan -- seemingly lost, shall still judge His people; but in Dan the apostasy is brought out, then the remnant wait for Jehovah for salvation.
-- 19. Thereupon we have one -- Gad -- heretofore overcome, at the last overcomer himself.
-- 20. Asher -- abundance and blessing are there.
-- 21. Naphtali -- liberty and good words.
-- 22 - 26. Joseph -- full millennial blessing.
-- 27. Benjamin -- full millennial power.
-- 10. As regards Jacob's burying place, when they carried him into Canaan, they did not go the straight way to the south of Canaan, but they went to Atad, which is beyond Jordan. Yet he was buried in Mamre, so that their carrying him to Shechem or Sychem has nothing extraordinary in it.
-- 23. NOTE. -- The third generation means three, not counting the point of departure, and as Jacob's sons' sons went down, there is nothing to fix the fourth generation necessarily within seven from Jacob inclusively.
The blessing of Jacob is clearly the scheme of God -- that of Moses His dealings in the land as with a people there -- a scheme connected with present conduct in the earlier part, and then His counsels.
As regards Conscience I have more than one point to note.
First, speaking, as infidels and annihilationists do, of its being the effect of education, etc., is all confusion -- confusion between a rule by which it judges, and the intrinsic power to judge. No one denies -- it may be misled by education -- making such or such feelings a rule, an obligation; but a rule, or obligation imposed -- and all such are so -- is the opposite of conscience.
Conscience is the sense that there is right and wrong, and when called into activity by an act, that such is right or wrong, it pronounces, by its own judgment, that it is right or wrong, it pronounces for itself. I may have dimmed, blinded, influenced, misled it, but Consciences are; und fürsich (and in itself) is the judgment I pronounce from instinctive, and uninfluenced persuasion that such an act is right, such wrong. So far from its owning a law, it ceases whenever there is one which has authority, because it has not to judge for itself.
Quite true that the instinctive judgment of conscience is according to some inscrutable law, but that is another thing; it is not the perception of that law, but man's judgment of right and wrong in itself. It is our knowledge of good and evil, not a rule outside us. Hence, when Adam had it not, was not "become as one of us, knowing good and evil", he had a law, to which obedience was to be paid, and as to an act in which there was no right and wrong in itself -- he might have eaten had it not been forbidden.
Man acquired this judgment of right and wrong, because "as one of us knowing good and evil"; of this there was no trace before. It was a question of obedience, law, and authority -- subjection to God; but he enjoyed goodness -- blessings -- had to be grateful -- but had no question of there being a right or a wrong perceived by himself -- no power of it, no occasion for it, no possibility of it; it would have falsified his whole position, -- he would have ceased to be innocent. Indeed the thing was impossible, for he was not as God, holy, i.e., essentially abhorring perfectly known evil -- known because, and by being, holy; and sin was not in him, he could not innocently know evil to judge it. When a law was given, no doubt it might condemn what conscience did, but conscience had no more to do; if godly, under law man had only to obey.
Again, education may corrupt the judgment as to what is right and wrong, but supposes the judgment faulty. I suspect that the true test is, that whenever the conscience is falsified by education, the will and passions will be found to be at work, and though the person may not think of it, it could not be denied by a person not having his passions engaged. It is conventional right and wrong found by circumstances; hence, as in mere civil circumstances, conscience is the ultimate rule. We have Pascal's dictum, "juste c'est ce qui établi, donc tout ce qui est établi est juste"; only when this violates too seriously the conscience, or natural sense of right, or wrong, it tends to revolution, i.e., will breaks out against the pressure.
I suspect the immutable law of right and wrong is founded on relationships, whether with God, or as God has formed them; from them duties flow. Only that man having been set lord over the earth, possession has come in also; it is regulated by convention, only if it too much violates the right to possess in others -- in many -- it tends to violence in order to possess -- wants ministering to this.
Grace has brought us out of law into absolute obedience to a Person, but then it has its own rules which we need, and has set up the absolute authority of a Person, and a relationship which governs conduct, i.e., right and wrong, as all relationships do; Christ being the perfect model of that in which we are with God and man.
But we must not confound the rule of right and wrong with conscience -- the discernment of right and wrong. "To him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin"; that rule varies divinely, even because the relationship is changed. My duty was a man's, a child of Adam's to God, and to other children of Adam, for that was my place, and relationship; it is of a child, a son of God, of which Christ is the pattern. Hence one rule or test of right or wrong is universality, practically what I hold to be right for all everywhere, but modified by this principle, where the same relation exists, i.e., one formed of God, creature, son, daughter, wife, etc., man with God, and with men, general or specific, whatever He has ordered. Only we must distinguish between obedience to God, or what represents Him, and conscience viewed as judging right and wrong. It is right to obey Him, wrong to disobey, and so far conscience comes in, for man had a given, has an instinctive, recognition of God, but it is not any judgment
of right and wrong, as such, in the act itself. It is not what man acquired by the Fall, i.e., the divine prerogative of judging right and wrong for himself, "one of us".
The question may arise, how far grounds of judgment, and so far reason enter into conscience, and I answer, "not at all"; they go to lead to the estimate of the fact of the relationship, and whether it be violated, and I conclude that the thing is wrong. I then pronounce judgment, not on the thing, but on myself, or another conscience is at work, I call it wrong; but conscience always judges the thing. But there are, thus, three ideas connected in our mind with conscience, which we must look at if we would not have confusion in our minds; firstly, the sense of responsibility to a Being above us, principally to God, not the duty of loving Him, that is law -- but authority; this, Adam had before the Fall; secondly, the sense of good and evil; thirdly, the self-judgment or repulsion of heart, as to others, produced by it when an act is contemplated it condemns; the second is properly, I apprehend, Conscience.
The loss of innocence closed evidently the simple enjoyment of blessing in thanksgiving. The knowledge of good and evil being come in, God, in saying "the man is become as one of us", has declared that man, to be with God, must be with Him as suited to Himself -- as knowing good and evil -- in a word, in righteousness. One must, having knowledge of good and evil, be suited to what God is according to it; but there is a certain modification of this to be introduced, not the diminishing or lowering of required righteousness (dikaioma), so as to allow of any evil, for that is impossible -- God cannot allow evil, He would not be holy if He did -- but the taking the measure of the knowledge of good and evil, according to the real light and moral condition of the position in which he is -- I do not mean as fallen in this position -- but according to the moral elements of that position in which he is with God. If he is perfect to the level of that position he may righteously live there, and enjoy God there; man never was, but it was put before him -- it is the law. If, as man, he loved God with all his heart and his neighbour as himself, he would righteously, as man, be happy with God, because he would meet the mind of God perfectly, as knowing good and evil in the position in which He was, according to the knowledge he had of God; He was perfect according to that -- man was never so, because he had lusts -- but the case was put. He never de facto could have been so, because he got the knowledge of good and evil in and by sin; unfallen Adam had not a bad conscience, but he had not a good one. The truth is, there was no such position of man, because he set up to be like God, knowing good and evil -- he made the measure for himself in desire, and would have risen up to God -- by robbery been equal with God; he broke through to be with God, and now he must be with Him or shut out. He cannot, of course, be independently equal, which would be absurd, but he must be morally fit, according to God's presence, or be excluded from it; there is no return to innocence, or to the tree of life on that ground.
The law, however, never took the ground of introducing into the presence of God, as He is, according to the absolute revelation of His nature -- Christianity alone does that -- it
keeps man without, hiding God, "Thou hast said thou wouldst dwell in the thick darkness", and gives to man thus without, but from God Himself, a perfect rule of right for the creature as such, condemning withal all that entered into man's state contrary to this, and, further, putting man into relationship with God on the ground, however, of natural creation, but assumedly in the rest of it -- a thing really impossible now that evil was entered, and meant to show this, but still, for this very purpose, established on this ground.
The perfect rule was, loving God with all the heart, and one's neighbour as oneself -- sin and lust condemned, and the Sabbath added to all. But for a sinner, evidently this had no reality but to condemn, and it did not profess to bring to God; it gave a rule to a people outwardly already brought into relationship with God, but with a barrier, and a double veil, and a priesthood, but it gave the perfect rule of right and wrong to the creature, who had the sense of it according to his nature, in the creation; but he was a sinner, there could be no rule in respect of sin but condemning it, but the law contained, as Christ showed in extracting it, the perfect positive rule; in this respect the perfection of the law's bearing is most wonderful, only it was the opposite of bringing an unjust man to God.
God is unveiled -- He was manifested in grace in Christ, but, through His death, the veil is rent, "He suffered, the just for the unjust, to bring us to God" -- this accordingly is according to good and evil as known of God Himself; and as walking "in the light as he is in the light", we are to be fit for God as He is -- "rejoice in hope of his glory" -- joy in Him. Our estimate of good and evil is the divine one -- what is fit for God's presence; in view of this Christ has made the expiation, He is sitting, in the full condition belonging to it, as Man at the right hand of God. It is an unspeakable blessing, but the necessary result, we may say, of the work being God's according to His counsel, and wrought by Christ; for where should Christ be, as to His Person, or in desert of His work? Then the Holy Ghost is come down thence, while He is there, according to infinite love, to bring us in spirit into it -- to bring us through the rent veil into the Holiest of all.
Such is our knowledge of good and evil, and the fruit of Christ's work -- the darkness passes, the true light now shines; our coming to God is "renewed according to his image in
righteousness and true holiness". It is an immense blessing. There never was really any being with God on another ground than in the light as He is, as brought by grace, and power, out of the darkness into the light, knowing good and evil. He cannot -- and have this knowledge -- do anything short of Himself, i.e., what was fit for, worthy of Himself; so that, as when man was ruined, and got into darkness with the knowledge of good and evil, God only could deliver him, He delivered him necessarily for His own glory, according to His own nature.
He put man provisionally on another ground -- of perfect creature blessing, but as a sinner apart from Himself, to bring out where he was in sin, and which therefore spoke of sin, and a positive curse -- but this was by the bye for a special end.
The only thing is innocence or glory -- innocence in human condition -- earthly; glory in a heavenly, Angelic condition sustained. Hence I apprehend, morally speaking, angels could not be brought back because of the knowledge of good and evil in the light with God; so man, Hebrews 6; but -- innocence lost, with the knowledge of good and evil -- the work of God according to His own glory, and hence necessarily bringing into it -- or, a law, provisionally showing the abstract moral perfection of a knowledge of good and evil in a creature, but actually, relatively founded on a prohibition of evil, which brought in, where really apprehended, the conviction of sin.
Civilisation is the artificial and polished life which arises from the elaborate development of skill, in which the faculties of men have been exercised, and in which men are associated, by common recognised rules, and where the mental faculties are in play, and can act reflectively on themselves, in contrast with men individually, or collectively acting from natural impulses and passions, and, at least in a greater degree, by means which nature affords. For the faculties exist in the savage, and the impulses and passions remain in the civilised, and, if let loose, unrestrained by common recognised rules, can use the means acquired by civilisation to satisfy them, as in revolution, war, etc.
Consequently in civilised society men are more dependent on each other, and more closely united; in savage life more personally free, and individualised, though man is naturally social, if not gregarious, for social is different from gregarious -- supposing mind and speech.
As known in the world, civilisation supposes the fall, but so indeed does barbarism, though in a different way; in fact civilisation began, on man's being driven out from God, in Cain's family; Genesis 4:16 - 24. Adam in Paradise had no basis of civilisation, the simplicity of his life in innocence gave no occasion for it; what the effect of Genesis 1:28 might have been, supposing Adam had remained unfallen, can be only supposition. Barbarism was the natural effect of Adam's state when he had lost God, and civilisation is the effort to make, by the development of human faculties and the resources the earth furnished, the world pleasant without Him. What could a naked creature, thrown upon his own resources outside Paradise, be but a barbarian? -- though the hunting state was a lower state when alone, and the means of life, but connected with natural energy as in Nimrod -- though God had sent him out to till the ground, and clothed him with skins, not utter barbarism, but little more, only peaceful.
If we begin again with Noah, we get something more -- barbarism was that into which men sank.
The earliest record language gives is a keeper of cattle; "daughter" means "one who milks the cows".
The establishment of man as the image of God, and in dominion.
The first verse stands alone as an immense, simple, and unique revelation (verse 16 alone at the end connected).
The second verse, the state of the earth at a given time -- tohu bohu (wasteness, emptiness) and in darkness.
Next there is the divine vivifying agency according to the divine will.
First, God, as regards this scene of power, willed there should be light; it is not said bara (created) -- it did not spring however from the earth -- it was no produce of it -- it shone when God commanded it to shine, God saw it -- no man or eye else was there to see it.
NOTE. -- It was night, and day for the earth. The dividing was now, whether the fiat of God for its existence was, I cannot now say -- it may have been so. If light was made to shine perfectly on the earth -- not twilight -- evening necessarily came first.
I hardly think that hay'thah (was) here is simple existence, but more "was become" (geworden war), yet so that it actually was in that state -- was -- but as a state into which it had passed -- come to be -- still was, but by beginning to be. I have no objection to "there was", but as a consequence.
In Exodus 3:14, we have "I am that I am", in the future or abstract tense, but that seems another thing -- the English auxiliary answers to it; only the tohu bohu was not the effect of creation, so as to "evening and morning" it was an effect.
In verses 8 - 10 we have evidently a descent in the use of shamayim (heaven) and eretz (earth) from verse 1, for the dried place is now eretz contrasted with the waters, not the globe contrasted with the hashshamayim (the heaven) and so shamayim is the expanse between the lower and upper waters, not what is contrasted with the eretz; so in verse 14 rakia (firmament) has a conventional visible sense, not as in verse 8 -- compare verse 15.
Verse 14 is remarkable in this, that God does not make the sun and moon, "and it was so", but, as with the light, "God
said, let there be lights"; in whatever way, He made them appear as centres of light to the earth, He set them for the seasons, and signs of the earth, and it was so. And God made all these lights, and the stars, and set or gave them to light the earth and rule, etc.; and God saw that it was good.
He made them -- when the solid bodies were made is not said -- they became lights to the ordered earth now; all the ways of expressing the creating, or ordering, almost are different, and surely not without intention. In verses 11, 12, there is no making nor creation, nor for the light; in verses 3, 4 He made the firmament "and it was so" -- the atmospheric heavens, I apprehend; in the third day, verses 9 - 13, there is no making; I doubt that verse 17 applies to the stars, but it may be so.
In verse 21, life is in question, even animal life -- God creates again. Man might have fancied the waters teemed with life from the sun or something; it was of moment to distinguish the animal body as coming to-tze (let bring forth) from the earth, yet, verse 25, God made.
In verse 26, bara (created) is again used as to man; before as to the races of animals, verse 21, in sea or air, and originally heaven and earth. Image represents, and presents likeness -- does so fitly -- the thing is like, because it corresponds to what the image presents. An image represented Jupiter -- likeness was only ideal. A picture is "like" -- it is the very image, when it presents himself to my mind; here it is "image", according to His likeness -- as to the first he had God's place, a centre of subject dependent creation, looking up to him -- no angel had that; likeness was another thing.
The delight of God -- intelligence as to the man's creation.
The inheritance of delight, and the wife taken out of him while sleeping.
This is all in responsibility of obedience.
NOTE. -- The heir or governor is also spoken of as being born of the woman, i.e., when fallen, for so great is the grace in purpose -- made out of the man in accomplishment in evil -- He born out of the woman; marvellous grace -- "for neither is the man without the woman, nor the woman without the
man, in the Lord", but the man was created first, not the woman, and "the woman being deceived, was in the transgression", but as the woman is for the man, so is the man by the woman, quod nota, for, as we have said, it is marvellous grace.
Howbeit this chapter is the creation or forming the delights of God, and of him whom He had created.
I doubt the order (verse 4) eretz v'shamayim (earth and heavens) is changed without design; we are here descended to the present ordering of the earth, and earthly heavens -- yet hanging on the original creation.
In verse 7, man, dust from the ground. There is no forming spoken of for animals -- life was a different thing, though real, for here man becomes a living soul by God's breathing into his nostrils.
In verses 8, 9, the planting the garden is a special act of power and will, as verse 9 shows -- verses 8, 9 have no time here, save putting the man into the garden. I cannot but think, verse 10, that the force of the passage is this, "and a river went out from Eden" (not the garden) -- that practically stands by itself -- then its object, "to water the garden"; then, a river system going forth, it separated itself and became four sources, i.e., of large streams, which flowed through the countries elsewhere. Ethiopia (margin Cush) is then a difficulty as to what country.
In verse 22 we have another character of a creative act -- He builded it into a woman -- it was no doubt creation, but formed, as to its materials, out of the rib.
In verse 23, these words, zoth (this) and hap-pa-am (the time) are to be noted, because they connect this with all that went before, as to the beasts, etc., and the same word is used in verse 19, vay-ya-ve (and He brought). It is a remarkable and interesting proof of who the Lord Jesus is in Ephesians 5:27 - 30, particularly in verse 27; note both the points are united.
Note the intelligence of Adam and his knowledge of the mystery of the woman's creation; so, I suppose, the names of the beasts were right, only here the point is dominion -- this is so, as to woman, for he gives her a name, but owns she is part of himself. This time it is so, as indeed the name shows -- part of himself, but subject -- he can give her a name, himself
too -- she was taken out of Adam, but Ish; so, no doubt, she is divinely called, but Adam gave her the name from himself, and to himself in giving it. All this is very striking.
Judgment -- but on Satan, and, connected with fruit here, the curse of present sorrow.
NOTE. -- The present sorrow is not the pronounced judgment, which is not touched upon, it remained in its full force in se.
Note, also, that fallen Eve is the mother of all living; and the Lord clothes with skins, but bars the way of nature, under responsibility in sin, to life.
There is more in it, but Adam gives here a name also to his wife -- one of faith and authority, not of relationship with himself, Ishshah -- still the mother of all living is a wonderful word, when death had just come in. But they are not yet clothed in divine righteousness, but though in sorrow, their curse to be children, and this he would take up on the judgment of Eve. Children and posterity -- yea the bruising of the serpent's head was promised, though in judgment on it, by the woman's seed; but clothing the nakedness gave no return to undying life on earth -- eternal life was not yet revealed, nor incorruptibility -- these were brought to light by the Gospel.
We have then the principle on which thus fallen men can stand, or do stand with God -- this on the ground of coming, and how they could come.
I should question "accepted" in verse 7, the rather as s'eth (exaltation) is used for it here. The whole question of relationship -- faith, by a sacrifice -- doing well, if it existed, recognised, and therein eldership -- lifting up -- Abel's desire would be to him, as Eve's to Adam, and he would rule over him -- otherwise, it must be khat-tath (sin offering), sin was at the door.
All this is the ground of nature -- faith knows how it is met in Christ, He has been made sin for us; the whole history of nature and grace is here.
Then it is secondly, not merely "where art thou?" as to sin against God -- but "where is thy brother?"
Then, "cursed are thou" -- but neither is this in se final judgment -- it is "from the earth", as the Jews of whom it is a type.
Then, the whole effect of going from the presence of the Lord, and settling in the world, i.e., we have the extent and character of sin -- the suffering of the righteous, and the substitution of the appointed Seth.
NOTE. -- Ish (a man) the name of strength and honour -- Seth calls his son Enos (a fallen man) the contrary. Ish was the head of hope in nature -- Ishshah was taken out of Ish. Nature also takes Jehovah with it in accomplishing its hope, according to promise, and says "I have gotten", but it must come to Abel (vanity and emptiness) -- if accepted, and come by death and to death, be rejected of men even to death.
Then the whole family of God, who only die here.
Enoch specially presents the redeemed, translated Church.
There is a difference here from chapter 1: 26; "in his image according to his likeness", here "in his likeness according to his image" (verse 3), this is natural, I think. God meant man to be His image, and created him according to His likeness therefore; man could not create anything -- he begat him in his likeness, he could do nothing else -- and hence according to his image, to take the place he was in, this was a consequence of begetting necessarily in his likeness. Hence indeed we have not "a son" -- he begat after this manner.
But calling him "Seth", I apprehend, was an act of faith; Eve gave it him in gracious thankfulness -- God appointed to her -- Adam adopts it indeed, but with him it is simply the appointed one, not appointed to him. Eve was not wrong, but this was quite right -- by the divine Spirit, I apprehend, which moved Eve's heart, but it was prophetic in Adam.
In verse 32, I apprehend the date is vague, indicating about the time in which God began to deal in view of the Flood, but
if the genealogical age of chapter 11: 10 be taken, Shem was born three years after Noah was 500. I suppose Japheth was the eldest.
We have in Noah, the coming in of a new world after testimony to the old, and judgment in his circumstances, representing the Jewish remnant, as Enoch the Church. "The Lord cometh with" (not to) "to execute judgment against those who spake against him".
NOTE. -- The occasion of the judgment was, the mixture of the heavenly family with the earthly -- the daughters of men.
He cannot be alone with God -- must through weakness, or through love (as in Christ) take the sorrow and trouble in the flesh.
Here the restraint of this curse, on the earth, came in on the sweet savour of the sacrifice of Christ, viewing and in full view of the sin of man, which was the occasion of it -- such was the new world, founded on that death and sacrifice.
Externally hitherto merely creation, of which God could repent, and destroy on corruption and sin -- not so of His calling -- but typically, a complete history of all God's dealings, to the end, in their principles; the roots, thus early shown, of that in which we degrade, but through which God has glorified Himself, and shown His righteousness; this is to the end of chapter 8.
In verse 3, I suppose it is (the flesh) "leads him astray"; but God's Spirit should not always deal with man in remonstrance. He would judge him, but give him 120 years delay. I see no difficulty in "in that he also".
De Wette reads "my Spirit shall not always strive with man on account of his going astray, he is flesh and his years", etc.
Young -- "in his folly (or error) he is flesh, and so let his days be", etc. All take it as wandering. The sense, after all, is the same, for "he is flesh" is the reason at any rate.
The important question is the force of basar (flesh); now I do not think that, in the Old Testament, an instance can be found in which basar is used in contrast with "spirituality" -- with "Spirit" or "the Spirit" and with "God", it is -- but that turns the other way here; hence, because of flesh leading them astray cannot I think be the meaning, to say nothing of
hu (also); "flesh" in this sense, is the discovery of Christianity, consequent on the Spirit being in the Christian down here.
Thus hu basar goes together, and I apprehend it is, that God will not always go on striving uselessly with a mere mortal, fallen and resisting, and an occasion of disorder -- evil, and flesh have not to be respected with patience for ever.
He is flesh -- mortal man -- and not God; "the Egyptians are men, and not God -- their horses flesh, and not Spirit". "He is flesh, and so let his days" -- this with a slight change of stop, to give emphasis to hu basar, is De Wette's translation. But I apprehend De Wette applies 120 years to the length of life -- this I believe to be a total mistake. It is the space allowed for preaching repentance, and the ark; "in their wanderings" would be quite as good as "because of", or better. It would then stand thus: "My Spirit shall not always strive with man (or amongst men) in their wanderings -- he is flesh -- but his days shall be 120 years".
This was the end of Adam as created -- Noah's was a new world, though still of fallen man -- but dispensational, founded on sparing through mercy and grace.
Note the continued difference between God and Lord; God is a more secret, and at the same time universal name -- Lord, of positive relationship. There is no question of sevens, or clean beasts with God, but with the Lord. God in speaking to Noah speaks of His own thoughts, and what is before Him; the Lord commands him in certain duties and relationships.
In verse 21 and the like, we have the witness of the way in which the corporate nature of man -- the ha-Adam is spoken of, so in chapter 6: 1. o protor anthropos.
God is to Noah a faithful Creator; at the close He accepts the sacrifice, and smelling the savour of Rest, alters the terms of His relationship with the judicially judged earth. The passing away of judgment was gradual, and the dove -- the
peaceful reign of the Spirit -- though it bring token of peace to them in the ark, of whom we have spoken, found no rest till they were all passed.
Note also, the ground was cursed for man's sake; this is arrested on the typical sacrifice, because God finds a savour of rest in that, and, on the recognition of the evil in man, which had led Him to destroy, declares He will no more smite, but the regular order of creation should subsist while the earth remained.
The world is here begun again -- we cannot say "a new creation", but "the world that now is" -- the other is entirely an old "world that then was". Compare the donatives in chapter 1: 28 and also verse 22 -- so far it is, in part, man animally, yet withal in the image of God too, and dominion here; the terms of the new donative are quite other, and suppose, though no more curse on the ground, or destruction, sin to be there, and the sword in man's hand for righteous judgment -- life, which was reserved before to God, now is put in government, and restraining vengeance into man's hand -- so are they called Elohim.
We have then here, on restored blessing, not all peace, but subjection, government, security against evil, and the earth -- the entire subject here -- its failure in Noah, who began to look for the earth's blessing -- and on the sin of his younger son, the distribution by God of the three great families by Noah's prophecy.
Note too, verse 6 -- God never loses His rights by the failure or evil of man, nor His privilege so to consider it -- so with the Church as against His enemies, or Israel either, for they ought to have recognised God's title in it, though He may punish and chastise at the same time.
But death and life are prominently brought out and the value of life manifested by death.
It is evident this chapter is a complete new ground and beginning of the world, though sin be still there, and death seen to be reigning, but life claimed as belonging to God. Man was made in His image, thus man in se connected with what was before, though the dispensation and footing of man
with all things and God also, be quite new; also we have the failure, and then the generations as in chapter 5.
Blessing here is conferred of grace -- on sacrifice, for that is ever needed -- and Noah and his sons are blessed without reference to what they are. It is a primary analogous blessing to Adam's, though not anything of federal headship in sin for the sons are blessed with him.
Also the covenant is made with the earth -- the Lord would not again curse it -- Adam's present judgment was dispensational, so we shall find here. But this present rest and comfort concerning the work of their hands, because of the ground which the Lord had cursed, was abused, as before disobedience had been shown, Noah drinking himself drunk, and losing his intelligence, and the true place of government as head in wisdom, was thus against Him who had set him in blessing, and then relative sin comes out, as before in Cain, in not loving his brother -- Canaan, Ham, does not respect his father. Hence the first prophetic testimony of patriarchal family announcement (for descendance now comes in -- the blessing having been on their seed after them) opens with a curse, and hence it lights on Canaan; but this does not touch the covenant blessing given in grace, for the rain still descends on evil and good, and the sun rises on just and on unjust. Special government under law there may be, but on the earth in general this continues, and will, so long as it endures.
The taking off of the curse -- dispensational curse -- is not the redemption of the creature absolutely, as to death necessarily -- this is an everlasting covenant with man, independent of law and righteousness. The new curse -- prophetic -- falls not on Earth -- that Noah could not do -- but on the unrighteous despiser of the Father and the reverence due to Him; hence it lights on Ham in his child, and is strict prophetic righteousness, but while so, as in pain and sorrow to Noah's heart too, for he has to see this prophetic judgment in judging his own ways, by a curse on those whom God had instituted in the blessing of creation with him (verse 9).
What sure ways of righteousness here, and quite a new feature of providential righteousness and judgment, and that in descendants too, while grace rules supreme before -- independent of -- and over all. The same consequently, the spirit of prophecy taking up this, plants Shem in the place of blessing, and relationship in this state of things; the governmental mind
of God, in dispensation, prophetically revealed as to this relationship with Him, "Blessed be the Lord God of Shem".
Hence, the curse reversed on earth as Creator in new successional dispensation, it lights on the head of the rebellious son amongst the families, only election is placed in the place of relationship with God -- He is the Lord God of Shem. And yet other general providential purposes and ways preserved for the history of the world, but not in this relationship; God, in His own will and thought, shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in Shem's tents. God does it, but He is not the Lord God of Japheth; Japheth may come in these tents for the blessing, or at least in relation with the blesser, while he possesses in providence the power, but we must rise up to God in supremacy, beyond the relation of this covenant dealing, to find Japheth in this blessing. It was the dealing of God prophetically with the earth -- here Japheth might have power, but He was not the Lord God of Japheth in it; for him revealed foresight begins, but it begins (as the testimony in Paradise) after sin entered in, and therefore with a curse, adding thereto elective relationship, and supreme providence.
Thus was, while the earth was concerned in it, all the basis laid for what was carried on in Israel. This was the first prophecy; it is not that the Lord has not been pleased to reserve us the prophecy of Enoch -- even He who knows the end from the beginning -- but it was the first revealed order in prophetic dealing and government in the progress of God's dealings with the world.
Noah -- as John Baptist -- closed one scene and ushered in another in which he died, as those of the old before him, for really in man nothing was changed, though in circumstances, and even guilt, much; for blessing and grace was sinned against -- Gentiles or nations soon begin now to have a place in our thoughts in the Word.
We have the sacrifice, blessing or promise, and covenant, and for the earth. This is distinct from the position -- he is set in the failure and the curse, and the ministration of divine government in it.
The important division into all the different nations, and tongues; Japheth, isles of the Gentiles, and see verses 5 - 20, 31. In Ham's family, the first human kingdom by means of man's violence; "he was a mighty hunter", "and the beginning of his kingdom". This chapter throws light, by these nations,
etc., on all the after prophecies. The dates, and ordering of providence go in Shem's family, and in fact on Eber being brought to light, Joktan was east; by them were the nations divided after the Flood.
This gives one great branch of prophecy -- providence and pride, and more peculiar relationship to God, the God of providential ordering.
The generations of Adam were after the full ruin, so here, after the curse. Also they are the generations of the sons of Noah, for they go by descendance; now it is not ha-Adam.
We have the nations and the beginning of a kingdom -- quite a new thing -- there were violent men before, now nations and a kingdom individually set up. They broke off from the stem and settled there, "in their lands" -- thus countries had their origin too; this was settled in Peleg's time, only these were they who could not stay at home.
The isles of the Gentiles are all from Japheth; except Javan and Tiras -- these we may say are all in Gog's expedition besides Peres, Cush and Phut -- not Japheth's sons -- Madai is not properly so perhaps, but in the kingdom it is mixed up with Peres -- these we shall see afterwards.
Tubal and Javan are mentioned in Isaiah 66:119 -- the stopping of the accents there, in the Hebrew, does not join Tubal, Javan and the isles, but separates them as distinct, semiclosing the sentence at Javan -- verse 4 here shows the connection. Tarshish, and we see Cush -- Asiatic, it was part of or adjoining the land of Assyria -- Babel was the portion of Nimrod his son; for Havilah, see chapter 2: 11, there was, however, a Havilah, son of Shem, also we have those who with Tarshish attended Gog for spoil -- Sheba and Dedan.
In verses 7 and 8 we have instances how this genealogy supplies us with two things -- the great families which appear again in the latter days, and the detail of families by which God's purposes, and Satan's plans and wickedness were brought about in the course of events. This Nimrod has much to be noted in character; note also -- as in Cain -- the city
building. The whole character -- the city building is nowhere else.
Chittim or Kittim, we are familiar with; Elishah, Riphath and Ashkenaz alone are not expressly mentioned in the latter day array. Mizraim is not mentioned with Gog -- the land of Mizraim does not escape the wilful king; Cush and Phut we have seen with Gog. Lebim and Cushim are also connected with the wilful king -- the former from Mizraim, see verse 13. Canaan also is well known, only so far as it remained, in Sidon, etc.
Note the language as to Shem in verse 21, Elam, Asshur, Lud and Syria alone are spoken of Shem nationally, but he was the father of all the children of Eber. The three distinctive characters of the three are to be noted; is ga-dol (greater) certainly "elder"?
The purport of all this is obvious -- only we remark Japheth haggadol -- Elam, Asshur, etc.
In verse 32, they settled by breaking off from the parent stock, or settled branch. Note this principle of nations, consequent on Babel, was entirely a new one.
Note, "the Lord" comes in here; also note, even Shem's families come in after the curse of dispersion on the sons of Noah, for this chapter is the history of the sons, the government is there, Noah stands alone.
It is national, derived from families, the government of the Lord now, but then that as a consequence of the judgment on Babel. Here, in Shem now, one family is taken up, and progeny, not death, is noted in the catalogue for, though under ruin, the Lord comes in as the Lord God of Shem, and this was now His way of blessing, i.e., as to the earth. But the order of God is here, the dates, families, and division of the earth -- unity in evil -- then Babel, Nimrod and Peleg give the three great types of this state of things.
We may also note that the characteristic title of the nations is consequent on the judgment on the public sin of the dispensation -- the tower of Babel -- for they are divided "after his tongue"; Japheth has the isles of the Gentiles, Ham is first great, Shem is noticed as younger, but the father of all those counted among the name of descent of God's people -- their name among the peoples -- "the Hebrews" say the Philistines.
Note that in verse 5, we have B'ney ha-Adam (the sons of Adam) -- still their common generic name, no nations yet. As in chapter 10, the first human kingdom, so here the first great human confederacy to maintain themselves together, and exalt themselves in a joint centralizing name, which God has called "Babel" (confusion). This, though another point, was the head or beginning of Nimrod's kingdom. This was the occasion of a new character of judgment -- scattering, to confound the pride -- not simply destruction, to put an end to wickedness. We have then the chronology of Shem, in whose special family -- for the Lord God was the God of Shem, though Japheth might be enlarged, and dwell in his tents -- was the calling of God, an entirely new principle, now manifested actually, though doubtless true before; this was the principle.
We learn from Joshua 24, the occasion was idolatrous worship, i.e., ascription of power to demons, and not to God, which made judgment unavailing, for it was ascribed to the misleader of man; such was the occasion of the principle of God's calling. Till entirely disconnected from his family, he could not go to the land; Acts 7.
We have the public sin, and the Lord's judgment of the world, in providence, for it, and the descent of the chosen family from the chosen head of it. This was prepared in providence, for calling must stand by itself. Though the family afterwards were called, the immediate family are called, and the notice de facto that the separation of Abraham was incomplete, for he was obliged to be left a good while in Charran, because his father was with him; afterwards, God's mind and way in the matter is seen -- he "went forth to go into the land of Canaan, and into the land of Canaan he came".
Thus we have man (ha-Adam) and the end of all flesh -- Noah, and the new world, and his failure -- the government of the world based on this failure by calling and judgment (on Ham's family), and the preference of younger to elder -- providential arrangements thus ordered, and then further -- Babel and violent power, beginning the subsequent history -- and then the family of the owned seed. The call of Abraham begins all on a new basis.
The national order had its root and occasion in the sin, as all
in the sin of Adam -- the family order of the world was completely ruined in the tower of Babel; this was the beginning of Nimrod's kingdom. And there man's renewed empire began, not only with violent Nimrod, but with the divinely established throne of Nebuchadnezzar. In general, we have association in unity of men, and power in an individual as king of Babylon. We learn from Joshua 24 that Satan had set himself up as the head of providential agency, as god, even in Abram's family, so that some new intervention of God was absolutely necessary, unless He should have destroyed all, He Himself had created, again. As the sin of Adam became, in the knowledge of good and evil, the occasion of blessing far higher, so the sin of Babel and confusion became the platform of blessing in Abram -- he is to be a great nation; yet the widest blessing reaches back beyond -- the families of the earth are to be blessed -- so did grace as to Adam.
NOTE. -- It is upon his return out of Egypt to the altar at Beth-el, the house of God, that the separation takes place, and the world and the inheritance become clearly distinguished.
This great principle is brought out -- called to act -- on faith, in God's Word for a promise only in hope, and when there only in earnest, a land to be shown -- a nation -- blessing -- and all families blessed in him -- this was the most general promise -- he was the man, the depositary of promise, and promised blessing.
The Canaanite -- the power of already announced evil -- was already, and now, in the inheritance where he was brought; so we, see Ephesians 6:12; but the principle, "they went forth to go" and "they came" -- that was their condition -- through this, and in this, however, he moved in liberty; but there was a famine in it -- he, without call, or direction, goes down to Egypt -- the world -- then denies his wife, gets presents for it, and the prince of this world, and his house judgment, till they are let go.
This is entirely a new principle in the world; God had, under Peleg, settled them in countries of their dispersion. They had not only settled in their countries, but it was divided -- allotted out. Abram is told of God to leave his country -- he
becomes a stranger and a pilgrim upon earth, as regards original natural ties in flesh, but he has not here done with earth as the scene of blessing -- he was to go into the country which Jehovah would show him.
But the calling of an individual, and settling blessing in him, is a most important principle. It is not the responsibility of ha-Adam, nor individuals owned and godly through grace, but the purpose of God calling one out, and setting and centring blessing in him; and it is remarkable how blessing is dwelt on and repeated, cursing only coming in as a fence -- a judgment on any who should wish it on him. But Abram was called to a land (country), and the races or families of the earth (ground) were to be blessed in him -- he is taken from them to be a blessing to them. Making it a blessing means, I apprehend, the type of it -- "the Lord make thee like Abram" being the best wish of blessing possible; but all that was an earthly habitation he was separated from.
This being the very type and model of divine blessing is most remarkable, and more so far in us, for indeed we are -- being in Christ -- beyond all comparison; this is grace and a sovereign, original purpose.
Note, too, not only was he the model and type in which divine blessing was expressed, but he was the depositary and so source of it to others; this, far more fully and actually the case, in its complete fulfilment in us, is a very divine place. We have so the divine blessing in God Himself in Christ, in conscious communicated possession, that we become the communicators of it to others. This is first of all Christ's place, but he that dwells in love dwells in God, and God in him, and so it is shown and flows forth. Compare John 1:18 and 1 John 4:12, as showing how this is.
This principle is not only supreme on the part of God, and the accomplishment of His counsel, but it is clean contrary to, and out of the order His natural providence had established; the world was ordered by families, everything arranged by families settled in such and such terrestrial divisions, and kindred was the tie that bound the earth together.
Abram is called to loose all these, and leave them; corruption was come in, and they that were of God must be to God, but then the great principle of calling out by special grace -- God interfering because of His grace, and in grace having one for Himself in the world -- was manifested.
Yet Terah acts for himself, and takes Abram a certain road towards the place; Abram did not act on the call at once. The expression "the Lord had said" is correct, from Acts 7.
Although the call was from out of the world as settled by providence in families, yet, being called out, the blessing ran in that order, whatever might be contained under it, or however God might bring about its accomplishment.
NOTE. -- This is "the Lord", as acting within the sphere of covenant, and dispensed relationship, not simply in supreme Godhead; the land he was to go to was of God the Lord's showing; "he went out not knowing whither he went" -- it was dependence and confidence in the Lord -- the ear opened to hear His will. Then the promise -- a great nation -- blessing, his name great -- to be a blessing -- kept, owned, so that blessing and curse should depend on treatment -- and lastly besides, all the families of the earth blessed in him, I say besides, for making him a nation was one thing as called, and the families of the earth, left where they were, being blessed, is another; there we have, on Terah's death, his acting on the call -- kept, perhaps, hitherto to himself, Terah had no part in it, and he dies in Haran, for Abram was to be out of his house and kindred; on this, Lot accompanies him, but he had neither after all -- Sodom was his place of loss of all -- on the contrary, in verse 5 we have the purpose of obedience, and its certain accomplishment in grace according to the calling. "They went forth to go, and they came" -- the whole effect of the promise in a certain sense.
Abram passes through the land -- the powers of evil, which are to be destroyed, are still in it.
By calling, the depositary of promise is brought into a place which is to be the rest, but he is there as a stranger -- the powers of evil, afterwards to be exterminated, being still there.
Here the Lord appears to Abram -- reveals Himself -- now for the first time spoken of; this is in the land, where he is brought by faith -- there is the revelation of the Lord Himself to him; hence it is a promise of the land -- this land -- to his seed, for he was, though in hope, a stranger in the effect of the promise, as regards the part of it here taken up, therefore this land.
Here also is worship ordered before the Lord -- "he builded an altar unto the Lord, who appeared unto him".
It was also a promise of the land to his seed, that is, in fact,
it was the assurance of futurity -- of perpetuity according to the nature of the thing.
This is the place of communion and worship -- "in the heavenly places" -- the Lord revealing Himself there, the seal of faith in communion, and so ground of worship, carrying with it the assurance of eternity in it, and the consciousness that we are in the place, with the Lord, to which he had called us; for He has called us to His own kingdom and glory. But in these heavenly places, the power of wickedness -- the race on whom the curse ruled -- still are; we are strangers, yet the Lord appears to faith, in secret as it were, and, though moving to and fro, the Lord's altar is ours, in spite of the Canaanite, in every place. These are the two subjects in verse 9. In the end of the chapter we have Abram, not in the title of the Lord, but acting on distress, on his own wisdom, enriched outwardly, but his wife in the hands of the prince of this world; the end is judgment on the prince of this world, for, if man be unfaithful, God vindicates His own titles.
We have in verse 16 a remarkable picture of the departure of the church from God -- Abram, whose acts are in question, representing the persons in it who dealt with the Church in this way, and got rewards -- rewards or gifts of a harlot specially, as they say such in character. All these things they got from Pharaoh (king of Egypt) -- everything they could wish, and in favour, but in dishonour of God and of her too, through whom the seed of covenant was called -- beautiful in the eyes of the world, Egypt had nothing to produce like it -- but besides being beautiful, she was the espoused of Abraham, the spouse of promise in the purpose of God. It was distrust of God in Abraham, which led to it, and to deny his inseparable bondship with her, as separate (for ever) from all others -- this in spirit, but it has striking reference to the Jews when the bride of the Lord; he was not Abraham (father of nations) yet.
Abram returns to his former altar -- "at the first"; this is a great principle, be it for Christian or Jew; it is the history of the stock of faith -- great principles. Lot, favoured hereto fore with him, chooses what is good, and well watered, but the scene of God's judgment, into which he gets.EVOLUTION
ANGELS
GENESIS CHAPTER 1
GENESIS CHAPTER 2
GENESIS CHAPTER 3
GENESIS CHAPTER 4
GENESIS CHAPTER 5
GENESIS CHAPTER 6
GENESIS CHAPTER 9
GENESIS CHAPTER 10
GENESIS CHAPTER 11
GENESIS CHAPTER 12
GENESIS CHAPTER 13
GENESIS CHAPTER 14
GENESIS CHAPTER 15
GENESIS CHAPTER 16
GENESIS CHAPTER 17
GENESIS CHAPTER 18
GENESIS CHAPTER 19
GENESIS CHAPTER 20
GENESIS CHAPTER 21
GENESIS CHAPTER 22
GENESIS CHAPTER 23
GENESIS CHAPTER 24
GENESIS CHAPTER 25
GENESIS CHAPTER 26
GENESIS CHAPTER 27
GENESIS CHAPTER 28
GENESIS CHAPTER 29
GENESIS CHAPTER 30
GENESIS CHAPTER 31
GENESIS CHAPTER 32
GENESIS CHAPTER 33
GENESIS CHAPTER 34
GENESIS CHAPTER 35
GENESIS CHAPTER 37
GENESIS CHAPTER 38
GENESIS CHAPTER 39
GENESIS CHAPTER 40
GENESIS CHAPTER 41
GENESIS CHAPTERS 42 - 45
GENESIS CHAPTER 46
GENESIS CHAPTERS 47 AND 48
GENESIS CHAPTER 49
GENESIS CHAPTER 50
CONSCIENCE
INNOCENCE
CIVILISATION
GENESIS, TYPICALLY CONSIDERED, CHAPTER 1 - CREATION AND FORMING
GENESIS, TYPICALLY CONSIDERED, CHAPTER 2
GENESIS, TYPICALLY CONSIDERED, CHAPTER 3 - RUIN
GENESIS, TYPICALLY CONSIDERED, CHAPTER 4
GENESIS, TYPICALLY CONSIDERED, CHAPTER 5
GENESIS, TYPICALLY CONSIDERED, CHAPTER 6
GENESIS, TYPICALLY CONSIDERED, CHAPTER 7
GENESIS, TYPICALLY CONSIDERED, CHAPTER 8
GENESIS, TYPICALLY CONSIDERED, CHAPTER 9
GENESIS, TYPICALLY CONSIDERED, CHAPTER 10
GENESIS, TYPICALLY CONSIDERED, CHAPTER 11
GENESIS, TYPICALLY CONSIDERED, CHAPTER 12.
GENESIS, TYPICALLY CONSIDERED, CHAPTER 13