We can only look at one or two points in Abraham’s history but in chapter 12 we get,

• “Go out of thy land, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, to the land that I will shew thee”.

• God is about to introduce the covenants of promise, which are unconditional in themselves, and yet contingent upon the obedience of faith. This is never given up – the principle of obedience is never dispensed with – it could not be.
  • “By faith Abraham, being called, obeyed”,

  • and because of the organised idolatry all around, the call was for separation, “Go out … from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house”.

• Following this, what comes out is the idea of God being God to a person, in the covenant of circumcision.

• That is what God is aiming at, that He should be God to persons. So He says in Genesis 17: 7,
  • “I will establish my covenant between me and thee, and thy seed after thee in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be a God to thee, and thy seed after thee”. Then in the next verse,

  • “I will be a God to them”.

• That is really the vital point in personal relations with God, and it bears on what is collective too, God is operating that He should be a God to persons. He is God but in this world of idolatry He desires to be a God to certain persons.

Rem. In Hebrews 11: 16, “God is not ashamed of them, to be called their God”. Does that fit in with what you are saying?

G.R.C. Yes, bringing in our side of it. In one sense there is what is unconditional from God’s side in the promises, yet they are contingent firstly on separation, and secondly on circumcision. If we answer to those two things God will not be ashamed of us, to be called our God.

Ques. Is it significant that in 1 Corinthians 1, the fellowship is on that principle?

• “God is faithful, by whom ye have been called into the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord”.

G.R.C. Quite so. There is the idea in scripture of being “called out”, and then, “called into”, as you say. We are not called out to a vacuum. God has called us into the fellowship of His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.

Ques. Would you say a word, please, as to the use of the Names of God in this sequence of events, beginning with “Jehovah” calling him out, then the “Almighty God”, and then “It is I”? Does that link up with the thought in your mind?

G.R.C. Yes. First you have the personal Name. We have to keep in mind that the personal Name of God is threefold:

• “I Am”,
• “Jehovah”, and
• “Jah”, three cognate words;

• so the personal Name “Jehovah” is here. But as things proceed, God discloses Himself first as the Most High El, “El Elyon”, then as the Almighty El, “El Shaddai”.

• So that the title “El”, The Mighty, is first used, I think, in chapter 14 as to the Most High. Then it is used again in chapter 16, but prominently in chapter 17 in connection with the covenant,
  • “I am the Almighty El”, and that, one would judge, is the greatest title of God.

Ques. Do you distinguish between a title and a name?

G.R.C. A title can be applied to false gods. There are those that men would call, and have called, ‘El’, for example, Psalm 44: 20, “to a strange god” – ‘el’. But “Jehovah” is the personal Name of the only true El.

• We have to know who the only true God is, so that we do not attribute attributes of deity to false gods. Jehovah was the only true God.

Ques. Is what we have in 2 Corinthians 6: 17-18 similar, yet more intimate?

• “Come out from the midst of them, and be separated, saith the Lord, and touch not what is unclean, and I will receive you; and I will be to you for a Father, and ye shall be to me for sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty”.

G.R.C. Yes, that is very comforting. As the footnote says, Jehovah in the Old Testament is the Father to us, in that setting.

• In another setting Christ is Jehovah – Luke 2: 11 – while the Spirit also is Jehovah – 2 Corinthians 3: 18 – but in that setting it is the Father,
  • “I will be to you for a Father”.

Ques. Can you bring all that into what you are presenting to us in Genesis?

G.R.C. Well, it bears on it because the principle of separation becomes stressed at this point in connection with Abraham.

• But then we ought to notice that Abraham did not move at once. In fact in Genesis 11: 31 it speaks of it as though it was his father’s move.
  • “And Terah took Abram his son”.

• They began to move and got as far as Haran. But then chapter 12 begins,
  • “Jehovah had said to Abram”;

• we do not know quite how far back that went. Stephen says that they got as far as Charran and that after the death of his father he moved on.

• Scripture does not express approval or disapproval of Abraham being detained and not going all the way immediately, but what is clear is that it did not alter God’s attitude. God bore with it.

• He has been very patient with us too in our exercises as to our associations. We have all gone on with these things. It is not only that certain brothers have but we all have because we are in the closest yoke.

• The fellowship of God’s Son is the closest possible yoke and none of us can say, ‘Well, that brother is in certain things but I am not’, because we are all in it with him.

• If this exercise is right therefore, we all have to face this matter; we have all been slow as to it; and just as we see the patience of God with Abraham, where should we be without it?

• We should all be down on our faces about it because we have all been connected with sins of inadvertence for a long time.

• It is a most affecting thing that in Numbers 15, which would have recovery days in view especially, when a sin of inadvertence of the whole assembly of Israel came to light, the burnt-offering was to be brought first – verse 24 – with its oblation and its drink offering,
  • showing that it had not altered their acceptance, nor had it altered God’s attitude. God was regarding it as a sin of inadvertence.

• And so with us; all that Christ is, in the perfection of His Person and the glory of His work, is still the basis of everything – God has gone on with us because of that.

• Then the sin-offering followed the burnt-offering, Leviticus 4 and 6. This shows that an individual sin of inadvertence involved eating the sin-offering,
  • whereas the sin-offering for the whole assembly was to be burned outside the camp – a most awful contemplation.

• I only bring that forward because it may help our outlook at the present time.

Rem. You have said, “If the present exercise is right”. Why do you say that please?

G.R.C. Not that I personally have any doubt that questions current among us as believers are right, only that we should be concerned to look into things more for ourselves.

• It is not for one or two, or any number, to rule over people’s faith. The apostle says,
  “Not that we rule over your faith, but are fellow-workmen of your joy”, 2 Corinthians 1: 24.

• We can only put forward what we feel is right. We may have no doubt it is right but we put it forward so that the exercise may permeate the whole of the brethren and that we may all get before God and be unified in the unity of the faith in the matter.

• We are seeking to arrive at
  • “the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, at the full-grown man”, Ephesians 4: 13, and this is part of it.

• But then the apostle says, We are fellow-workmen of your joy – because none of us naturally understands the way of joy.

• Naturally we have entirely wrong ideas as to how to reach joy, so that it is real hard work, as you might say, to help one another as to the real way of joy.

Ques. Is it instructive in Nehemiah, following all that comes out in chapter 8, and the arriving at joy, as you say, by the efforts of the fellow-workmen, that in chapter 9 when they call upon Jehovah as “the Same”, they speak about this matter of Abram being called and then they say,

• “Thou … broughtest him forth – and foundest his heart faithful”.

• Would that direct our attention to the fact that it is really God who brings matters forth in His faithfulness and patience and yet seeking to find our hearts faithful?

• The prayer to Jehovah comes in after the separation from the strangers in the beginning of the chapter.

G.R.C. It seems very instructive because that came in after the wall had been completed. It says in chapter 6: 15,

• “So the wall was finished … And it came to pass that when all our enemies heard of it, all the nations that were about us were afraid and were much cast down in their own eyes, and they perceived that this work was wrought by our God”.

• So that the thing was completed; and then chapter 9 brings out what you are saying, and the great note of praise, and it is remarkable because what you refer to,
  • “Thou art the Same, Jehovah Elohim, who didst choose Abram and broughtest him forth out of Ur of the Chaldees, and gavest him the name Abraham”, links with Genesis 17, the covenant of circumcision.

• Would you say more what you have in mind as to “broughtest him forth”?

Rem. I was thinking of what you were saying, that he was held up but that scripture does not say whether it approves or not;

• but in days of recovery they regard it as what God has done, that He has brought him forth and found his heart faithful.

G.R.C. So you think we can take comfort from the history of things, though we may appear to be slow, that God has been patient. He works patiently to overcome our slowness so that in the end we can say that He brought us forth. Is that what you had in mind?

Rem. Yes, and also that these persons had obviously been slow because at the beginning of chapter 9, although the wall was built, it says in verse 2,

• “The seed of Israel separated themselves from all foreigners, and stood and confessed their sins”.

• Yet they had one man before them, Abraham, whom God had brought forth and whose heart had been faithful. So do you think we should give credit to one another that as to the general body of the brethren their hearts are faithful in regard of God?

G.R.C. That is just what I do feel, that the spirit of harshness is not suitable because for one thing we are all in it. The fellowship of God’s Son is such a close yoke that we cannot contract out,

• and therefore we need to be very sympathetic with those who are particularly affected, and as you say give them credit for being faithful towards God and doing the very best they can. Is that so?

Rem. That is what I had in mind.

Ques. You have referred to the patience of God in regard to this. Is it an encouragement to us to see that the first word in Hebrews 11 is that Abraham obeyed?

• Would you say that if we are patient with one another it will be likely to secure complete obedience on the part of all?

G.R.C. That is what I feel. If we take a harsh outlook, and say that certain ones have got to do certain things, we are really puffed up in our own mind, as a legal man always is.

• We may think that we are apart from this, and that we are doing great things in helping to purge the brethren; but then, those who take up an attitude like that would surely miss the gain of the whole exercise.

• We are all in it, and we have to move together patiently and dependently so that we are all brought into this matter of obedience in this respect.

• In Numbers 8, when the Levites were to be offered as a wave offering to Jehovah, they were all sprinkled with the water of separation, whether they had personally touched a dead body or not.
  • That is, we all have to take this matter to heart for we are all in it.

Ques. Do you think that there is the opportunity for every believer in that way to be an overcomer? It is to the overcomer the word is

• “I will be to him God”.

• If it becomes what is merely mutually agreed, there is not much overcoming for some of us; but if we all have our part in it, there is the grace afforded for overcoming – each one and all of us must be in it.

G.R.C. That is very helpful. That is the last word, as you might say,

• “He that overcomes shall inherit these things, and I will be to him God, and he shall be to me son”, Revelation 21: 7.

• And that is what we are on now as to the first part of it. God says to Abraham,
  “I will be God to thee”,

• and so we can look upon Abraham our father as a sample of an overcomer. He did not do anything spectacular in one sense. He was held up apparently till his father died, and yet, how patient God is.

• There is never any room for pride on our part. If any one of us is an overcomer in any sense, he will feel that there is absolutely no ground for him to take any credit.

• It is God who brought us out as Mr. — says.

Ques. Do we have this suggested in Philippians 2, the thought of complete obedience in verse 12, and then the working out – as the margin says, “to work into result” –

• “your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works” – “internal operation of power”, is the note –

• “in you both the willing and the working according to his good pleasure”?

• Is that this purification worked out in priestly feelings to a divine result, having in mind especially our part in the service of God in holiness, and our place in the testimony here?

G.R.C. That is very helpful because that is the local company there, “Work out your own salvation”.

• No doubt primarily the local company is in mind but I think we could rightly apply it in this universal setting, in connection with a universal exercise.

• We have got to work out our own salvation in this matter and God will work in us the willing and the doing if we are patient and wait on Him.

• But we have got to work out our own salvation and this is a world-wide thing, is it not?

Rem. Yes. And the purification leads to joy, as seen in Philippians 4, as Paul says,

• “Rejoice in the Lord always: again I will say, Rejoice”;

• “The joy of Jehovah is your strength”, Nehemiah 8: 10.

• Does it suggest a definite objective before the saints, enabling us courageously in faith to go through the processing together. Is this purification in the crucible, do you think?

G.R.C. I do. It speaks, I think in Hezekiah’s day, of the priests and the Levites having purified themselves, so that this process belongs to us all; and we are very slow to learn the way of joy.

• It was when the waterpots were filled to the brim with the water of purification that the water was turned to wine. That is spiritual joy.

Rem. It is interesting that in Hezekiah’s day in 2 Chronicles 29: 16, the priests went into the inner part of the house of Jehovah and carried forth all the uncleanness which they found in the temple of Jehovah, into the court of the house of Jehovah; and the Levites took it to carry it forth into the brook Kidron.

G.R.C. How are you applying that?

Rem. I feel it is one thing to get light about a matter, as to what is inconsistent with the house and the inner parts of it, but the final removal of it would be somewhat of a labour of patience, the Levites working at it.

• The priests determine the situation, but holy sensitiveness would be a wonderful way of arriving at what is unsuitable to God – but that does not remove it. The removal comes on the part of the Levites as from the court, persons prepared to labour.

G.R.C. That is very good; and it is finally dealt with in the brook Kidron.

Ques. Would you say a word about this question of the patience of God in relation to the fact that Abraham immediately obeys regarding circumcision,

• “in the self-same day”?

G.R.C. That is a matter in which Abraham is very commendable and I wonder whether the exercises we are speaking about now would all help us to act thus in connection with circumcision.

• In circumcision there is no thought of delay if this covenant is to be entered into,
  • “I will be God to thee”.

• How can God be God to anyone who puts any confidence in the flesh or gives it any recognition?

Rem. It is the attractiveness of God’s promise.

G.R.C. Well that comes out in chapter 15. At the end of chapter 14 the Most High is introduced and, in the light of the Most High God, Abraham refuses everything of Sodom, from “a thread even to a sandal-thong”.

• Abraham was strengthened by the manifestation of Melchisedec, the king of righteousness and king of peace, the priest of the Most High God.

• What a view, typically, of Christ as the King of Righteousness, the One who has established divine righteousness at all cost to Himself!

• Learning God as the Most High God is a great matter; it bears on the question of government as well as other things. God is Most High; He rules in the kingdoms of men but He is Most High too, in the sense of being worthy of the homage of our hearts.

• Abraham becomes separate now in the sense that he will accept nothing from the king of Sodom from a thread to a sandal-thong. He would not allow anyone to say that he had made Abraham rich.

• He turns his back on the world when it approaches him; he had already gone out of it but here the world approached him.

• That happens, of course, now; the world approaches a believer. The world has benefited through believers, and the world approaches the believer to seduce him with all that it can offer.

• Abraham is superior to all that. And then he has the manifestation in a vision through the word of Jehovah,
  • “I am thy shield”.

• What do we need with human shields? Men would say they need trade unions as a shield; God says to Abraham, “I am thy shield”.

• Then men have their unions and associations in order to get adequate rewards, but God says,
  • “I am … thy exceeding great reward”.

• The world approaches us, and tells us what advantages there would be in organisation and association – what a shield, what a reward we should get!

• When the world approaches Abraham he says No! to it all and then God manifests Himself and says,
  • “I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward”.

Ques. Is there something akin to this in Paul’s doxology in 1 Timothy?

• – “the King of the ages, the incorruptible, invisible, only God”.

• Is there something of the mystery implied in Melchisedec’s appearance at this juncture and Abram lifting up his hand in incorruptibility to God?

G.R.C. Very good.

• “The blessed and only Ruler”, you are thinking about; the Most High who rules in the kingdoms of men.

• Of course in Timothy there is greater fulness but there is the same idea, the blessed and only Ruler. Think of lifting up our hands to God thus; then think of the grace that would lead Him to say,
  • “I am thy shield, thy exceeding great reward”.

• Whatever the world can offer us is just temporary; and whatever we possess here is not our own, it belongs to another. According to Luke 16 we only have temporary use of it. But
  • “I am … thy exceeding great reward”;

• there we get our eternal heritage, God Himself. What a thing this is to have God Himself as our portion!

Ques. What about Abraham’s sons and daughters?

G.R.C. It is the sons and daughters of Abraham to whom God says really, I will be a Father to you and ye shall be my sons and daughters. God takes us on, as it says,

• “They that are on the principle of faith, these are Abraham’s sons”, Galatians 3: 7.

Ques. Does what Jehovah says to Abraham at the beginning of Genesis 15 link on with his own light as to the Most High God being the Possessor of heavens and earth?

• If there is this light in our souls, shall we more readily respond to what God is Himself as our Shield and exceeding great Reward?

• I was thinking of the link between that and “Lord of the heaven and the earth” of Matthew 11.

G.R.C. Yes, it is very precious that God is the Possessor. What cannot He give in a material way? He is not dependent on anyone but Himself, is He? He gave Abraham much in a material way.

• He became a rich man but at the height of his riches he was still known as a sojourner and stranger and that is what the man who knows God is.

• In chapter 21 King Abimelech recognised that Abraham was still a sojourner and still a stranger; if God has trusted him with possessions it did not alter that a bit, he was still a separate man.

Ques. God could not use these words to Lot, could He, although he is called a righteous man? Had he not shielded himself behind the world and so missed the greatest blessing of all – God Himself as shield?

G.R.C. Surely we should all desire “I am thy shield, thy exceeding great reward” to be said to us!

• It makes us completely independent, in that sense, of the world’s system.

• Then what Abraham is concerned about is spiritual advancement; he is not concerned about earthly advancement, and God tells him to look toward the heavens so that the heavenly seed comes into view at this point.

• The earthly seed had been referred to in chapter 13 but now the heavenly seed is introduced for the first time and in that setting it says,
  • “he believed Jehovah; and he reckoned it to him as righteousness”.

• I wonder if I am right in saying that it is the heavenly seed, the saints of this period, who really understand justification. We are justified in Christ, as it says in the New Testament; it links on with the heavenly seed in a particular way.

• Those who have earthly blessing will need to know that their sins and iniquities are remembered no more,
  • but the heavenly seed have this wonderful foundational status before God as justified in Christ.

I think we ought to consider now the covenant of circumcision because it is so important.

• We have spoken of the promises being contingent upon the obedience of faith, that is persons receiving the covenants of promise; and now if God is to be God to us circumcision is a necessity;
  • it is on this principle that God commits Himself unreservedly to a man – and, of course, by extension to a company –

• but what is stressed in Abraham’s history is his relations with God, personally and household wise.

Ques. Do you think there is progress in the relations which you were just referring to? To begin with,

• “God had said”; and then, “The word of Jehovah came to Abraham in a vision”;

• but now in this supreme matter of circumcision, Jehovah appears.

G.R.C. That is remarkable. With a vision there seems to be some distance but here it says,

• “Jehovah appeared to Abraham, and said to him, I am the Almighty God [El]: walk before my face, and be perfect”.

• How can we walk before God’s face? It would appear in this setting that if God is to be God to a person, it must be to one who walks before His face and is perfect.

Ques. Does not Paul illustrate the truths of which you have been speaking and our practical arrival at the truth of circumcision, so that God is God to us?

G.R.C. So that if he could say, “We are the circumcision” –

• and it is certain that Paul had taken this up personally – then he can speak in a manner to bring all the saints into it; it would be a challenge to them whether they answered to what he said, for he describes who the circumcision are.
  • “We are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God, and boast in Christ Jesus, and do not trust in flesh”, Philippians 3: 3.

  • Then he says, “My God”, Philippians 4: 19.

• God was God to Paul; there was a circumcised man but then he would bring the saints into that,
  • “To our God and Father”.

Ques. Does the way that God left off talking with Abraham and then that God went up from him show that God had pleasure in being Abraham’s God in this relation, and how Abraham is honoured as entering into the covenant?

G.R.C. That is what I thought. On these lines relations between God and man become very personal; it is what God desired, personal relations with man; and He secured it with Abraham who is called the “Friend of God”.

• God was securing personal relations with this man, who is the father of us all, with a view to us all having them; and the proposal is:
  • “I will be … God to thee”.

• Now how many of us can really, from the heart and without pretension, say “My God”?

Ques. Does the change of name from Abram to Abraham come in just at that point as connected with circumcision? His relations are to be on a more dignified plane.

G.R.C. Yes, I think so. The change of Abraham’s name from ‘High father’ to ‘Father of a multitude’ shows how he was qualified to be the father of a multitude;

• this is the kind of seed which God is looking for – a seed who accept circumcision.

• So that He is their God and they are His people. But I would like to ask again, how many of us can honestly and properly use the title, “My God”? It is only a circumcised man who can do this properly.

Ques. Must the Spirit come in there, circumcision linking with our liberty with the Spirit, thus finding liberty with God?

G.R.C. That is a great point: we are the circumcision who worship, or serve, by the Spirit of God.

• So that this covenant would mean for us that we are fully committed to God in the Spirit; that we have no confidence in the flesh; so we are committed to walk no longer according to the flesh; it is a definite committal.

• It says in verse 4, “As for me”, the note says; that is God’s side and He enumerates what He would be to Abraham but then He says in verse 9, “As for thee”; that is Abraham’s side.
  • “As for thee, thou shalt keep my covenant, thou and thy seed after thee in their generations. This is my covenant which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee, that every male among you be circumcised”.

• Now as I understand it, it means a definite committal to God relative to the Spirit, that I am to be henceforth wholly committed to the Spirit, in contrast to the flesh. The Spirit is here and the point is that we
  • “do not walk according to the flesh, but according to Spirit” – Romans 8: 4 – it is put upon us.

• The negative is put first; it involves definiteness and committal – circumcision. In taking this up we prove the almighty power of God.

• We tend to link the Almightiness of God with circumstances. Now it does bear on circumstances as we have already been reminded in 2 Corinthians 6,
  • “I will be to you for a Father … saith the Lord Almighty”.

• But the way Abraham learned the Almightiness of God was in his own body; and I believe why we cannot trust God as to circumstances is that we have not accepted the truth of circumcision,
  • and proved the Almightiness of God in the Spirit in our own selves in dealing with the matter of sin in the flesh.

Rem. In “The Signs of the Covenant” published some years ago, it was remarked that distinct progress was indicated in that the sign of the covenant with Noah was in the cloud, whereas here it is in a man’s body.

'The Signs of the Covenant', Belfast, April 1935. See Ministry by J. Taylor, New Series, Volume 38.

G.R.C. That is just it. The sign of this covenant for us is that you see a man who is walking wholly according to the Spirit. He may have lapses as Abraham did, for we all often offend – not that I am making any excuses for that –

• but what distinguishes such a one is that characteristically he is walking, and acting, in the Spirit, and has no confidence in the flesh; and that man can say, “My God”.

• And he proves the Almightiness of God in himself; that is where we need to learn that God is Almighty.
  • The question of sin in the flesh holds us all up and is the root of our going into earthly associations.

• What is required is not only outward separation; what we have here is what we might call inward separation, that we separate between the flesh and the Spirit, and are committed to the Spirit; and in so doing we prove in ourselves that God is Almighty.

• Abraham proved in his body that God was Almighty; we prove it in ourselves.

Ques. So in Joshua 5 the reproach of Egypt is rolled away at this particular point, and it is connected with the idea of circumcised “the second time”.

• Does it mean that what we may understand in the teaching of it is not sufficient in itself but must have its application in spiritual power and authority?

G.R.C. That is very good. You are thinking that the first application would be more the teaching of it?

Rem. Yes, I am thinking of that.

G.R.C. “Make thee stone knives”. I do feel the importance of the fact that we learn the Almightiness of God through the gift of the Spirit. We are to learn it in ourselves. Scripture speaks of being

• “strengthened with all power according to the might of his glory”, Colossians 1: 11.

• Who does that? The Spirit. The Father strengthens us with might by His Spirit in the inner man. We are to know what might is in ourselves, by the gift of the Spirit;
  • and if I have learned that God is Almighty in that way, surely I can trust Him for circumstances.

Ques. Would the evidence of that be seen in our instinctive movements, when we do not have time to take thought, or premeditate action?

G.R.C. Well it does, but then there is the deliberative side of things in a covenant; we deliberately commit ourselves to God relative to the Holy Spirit.

Rem. I was thinking of your thought that we learn it in our beings. The evidence of that would be that we would act spiritually, instinctively.

G.R.C. Well, quite so.

Rem. The sanctifying power, and the glory of the system of blessing, would be in the value of the blood, would it not?

• It rests immutably upon the preciousness and efficacy of the blood of Jesus.

• In its full result among us, whether it is individual or assemblywise, it is to have its sanctifying power.

G.R.C. That is why I suggested reading also Hebrews 13 in addition to other passages, “that he might sanctify the people by his own blood”.

• This great truth is to have a very sanctifying effect, and what is in mind in that passage is practical sanctification.

• Earlier in the book – chapter 10: 10 – you get sanctification from the divine side; there it says
  • “we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” – and that sanctification is complete.

• But then chapter 13 is dealing with practical matters, and it is couched in language intended to touch our innermost chords –
  • “that he might sanctify the people by his own blood”.

Ques. Would you say that the death of Christ, as rightly apprehended and appreciated in this way, would tend to liberty and moral power in our souls, enabling us to do things? Immediately following on this it says,

• “Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel went up; and they saw the God of Israel”, Exodus 24: 9-10.

• Is that based on the covenant?

G.R.C. Yes, that is right; that is what it has in view particularly for us, as Hebrews indicates. The blood has opened up to us the heavenlies; it is not just a question of our being brought into the new covenant.

• This covenant is not made with us in its literality;
  • but Hebrews shows that while the blood of the covenant is the basis of the covenant yet to be made with Israel,

  • for us it has opened up something far greater, and which was typified in the old covenant by the tabernacle system, that is the heavenlies.

• But then in addition to the full thought thus, what you are saying about liberty is seen in the youths. If the truth as to the blood of the covenant and the value of Christ’s death is apprehended in any measure, it will set the young men free, and the young women too.

• The service at Pentecost began with young people – twelve young men. Peter may have been getting on towards middle-age, but it did not begin with elderly persons.

• That has to be noted, that where things are right and the truth rightly apprehended, all the young people are free and they are really in it; God helps them, so that they bring bullocks.

Ques. Is there something significant in the fact that it is the blood which is sprinkled on the people, concerning which Moses said, “Behold the blood of the covenant”? I was wondering whether it was in accord with your own thoughts as to the practical effect?

G.R.C. I wondered whether sprinkling carried the idea that the real force of the thing is brought home to the persons.

Rem. The blood sprinkled on the altar needs no qualification, does it? The blood and the altar are in complete agreement;

• but when it comes to the blood upon the people, is it not intended that the full force should be brought to bear upon us?

G.R.C. I hope that will be one effect of this reading, that the force of the sprinkling of the blood may come home to us.

Ques. Would Psalm 148 suggest that something of the freshness which marked the beginning will also mark the end?

• “Both young men and maidens, old men with youths – Let them praise the name of Jehovah”.

G.R.C. That is very good; Psalm 148 is approaching the climax of praise, is it not?

Rem. Yes; I wondered if being at the end of the books of Psalms, it may be expected in our day as we approach the end.

G.R.C. Would it not show, among other things, that young persons should hold themselves available for service at any time.

• The Lord’s Supper is not the time to wait for the elders first, but to be available to the Spirit at any time.

• In the Care Meeting it is right to wait for the elders first. The Care Meeting is an elders’ meeting; although all are there it is an elders’ meeting in character.

• But at the Lord’s Supper it is not for young people to hold back for their elders to take part first, nor even to think that they cannot take part at the close in the higher levels of the service; they should be available at all points of the service.

• God will help them to bring bullocks. You may say, ‘How could these youths have bullocks?’ But they did have them.

Rem. “Know that our brother Timotheus is set at liberty”, Hebrews 12: 23.

• That immediately follows the allusion to the Great Shepherd of the sheep, in the power of the blood of the eternal covenant; and then there is the doxology,
  • “to whom be glory for the ages of ages, Amen”.

• Is that what might be connected with Timotheus, though youthful?

G.R.C. I think that is very good, because we can think of Timotheus and Paul together at the Lord’s Supper;

• I have no doubt whatever that Timotheus, even though Paul were present, would be quite free to give thanks for the emblems, and quite free to take part at any time in the meeting.

Rem. In Psalm 148, which has been referred to, the concluding verse refers to

• “a people near unto him”.

G.R.C. Quite so; that is the great end in view, is it not, for God to have men in the nearest possible relation? It says,

• “We have been made nigh by the blood
  of the Christ”.

Ques. Is there something akin in Psalm 144?

• “That our sons may be as plants grown up in their youth; our daughters as corner-columns, sculptured after the fashion of a palace …” and then it says,

• “Blessed the people that is in such a case! Blessed the people whose God is Jehovah!”

G.R.C. That is very fine, because that is the point in this covenant – God would have a people to whom He is God.

• We have spoken of personal relations in Abraham; but now it is a question of God’s house, God’s dwelling, and for that He needs a people, whose God He is.

• What you are saying about the young people is good; it seems to give the daughters a very unique place. I do not know how you would apply that scripture.

Rem. They are not cast in a concrete mould are they? They are sculptured after the fashion of a palace; dignity marks them. They go on together, and of them together it is said,

• “whose God is Jehovah”.

G.R.C. It is a wonderful thing, because the sisters particularly set out the subjective side of the truth – not that it should be absent in the brothers, the brothers also should set it out – but sisters are particularly those in whom it is expressed.

• They clothe themselves with good works, and their moral features of beauty shine in the assembly even when we are assembled.

Rem. At Pentecost Joel is referred to,

• “Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy”.

G.R.C. That is very good, because it shows that sisters are to have part in prophecy in their own sphere.

• “Your sons and your daughters” is to encourage our side of it, but,

• “My bondmen and bondwomen” shows how God takes them on.

• Without being committed to God in bondmanship, how can He use us in prophecy? Sisters need to be committed just as much as brothers.

Ques. Do you think that there is something of this carried into the courses under David? The sons of Heman, and also the daughters; and then the words of God to exalt His power; then the courses – the teacher with the scholar.

• Would there be something of this great principle, inaugurated by Moses, carried through into the service under David?

G.R.C. Yes, 1 Chronicles 25 is very instructive, and it is remarkable that the daughters are brought in with Heman, who seems to bring in the top note; he was the king’s seer in the words of God to exalt His power, which seems an extraordinary expression involving prophecy; and it was that man whose daughters are mentioned.

• “All these were under the direction of their fathers” – marked by true subjection.

Rem. There seems to be a certain constitution before the courses are outlined or formally recognised. There is what is constitutional in these households, is there not? And they are under the direction of their fathers, Asaph, Jeduthun and Heman, for song in the house of Jehovah.

• Would it not speak of things working out locally under a good spiritual lead?

G.R.C. Overall, in that verse – verse 7 – they are under the direction of the king, typically Christ; and, as you say, they serve by lot according to divine sovereignty, the small as well as the great, and the teacher with the scholar;

• there is no question of waiting on elders there; all were to come in according to divine sovereignty.

Ques. Does the reference to the youths being sent show that the basic matter of obedience is carried forward in this?

G.R.C. That is very good – the obedience of faith; and really it needs faith to take part truly.

Rem. There was great spontaneity connected with bringing up the ark, and plenty of energy; but when we come to the full position we need regulation, and to serve under direction, do we not?

G.R.C. So David could dance before the ark with all his might when it was brought up, and at every few paces they offered; but as you say, as together

• in assembly service direction is essential. Everything is ordered under the impulse of Christ as Head.

Ques. Would you say what this sprinkling in Exodus 24 involves for us? I am thinking of Peter’s first epistle,

• “by sanctification of the Spirit unto the obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ”.

• That has a distinct reference to Exodus 24, has it not? Would it suggest God asserting His claims over us in view of securing us for His own dwelling?

G.R.C. It has the priesthood in mind, and the youths were taking the matter up, although the official priesthood was not appointed.

• I believe those early verses of Peter have that in mind. I think there it is the blood of the ram of consecration which is primarily in view – that we are sprinkled with it, meaning obedience in relation to the service of God.

Ques. Is it instructive that the gospel writer who speaks of the blood is the disciple whom Jesus loved?

G.R.C. Well, it is. He alone of the gospel writers speaks of the blood from Christ’s side on the cross; he also speaks of it in the book of Revelation and in his epistle, as well as in the gospel.

Ques. Would you say something about the dividing of the blood? Half the blood was put in basons and half was sprinkled on the altar. I do not know whether it would be right to say that God is seeking – and will get – a response in the saints which is commensurate with the offering of Christ.

G.R.C. You mean that the two halves are equal?

Rem. Yes, and nothing will lapse in the final result of that for which Christ gave Himself.

G.R.C. That is very good, so that it supposes a full result in the people.

• Hebrews brings out very clearly that the primary thing in the heart of God was the heavenlies and the heavenly saints of this dispensation.

• That was the primary thing in His mind, and has been so from before the world;
  • so that we see in the heavenly seed of Abraham, and now in the tabernacle system, a figurative representation of heavenly things.

• It is a marvellous thing that God should bring that in alongside the old covenant; that He should fill the old covenant, which was in itself a ministry of death and condemnation, with figurative representations of things in the heavens; because that was what was in His mind and heart.

• So Exodus and Leviticus form a most instructive section of scripture in that respect.

Ques. Is it that God was really unfolding Christianity? These things were written for our learning.

G.R.C. That is a very helpful way of putting it – that God was unfolding Christianity in Exodus and Leviticus. Who would have thought of such a thing? It was not understood at the time; they were not able to look on to the end, it says.

• The old covenant was to be annulled; the objective in view in giving it was the heavenly things. Israel, even until today, have never been able to look on to the end of it. We can. We can see that it is a setting out in type of Christianity.

Rem. “As it were the form of heaven for clearness”, Exodus 24: 10, is suggestive of the incarnation, and the pavement under his feet, and then they go beyond the thought of Israel, and they saw God and ate and drank.

• Is it not right to think that typically that is the full thought of God reached just in the way that you have been bringing before us?

G.R.C. Well, I think perhaps that may be right. So you think the body of heaven in its clearness is a reference to the incarnation?

Rem. Yes, I thought that was why at the end of that section we are able to go beyond the God of Israel, and to reach the full thought of God as Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

G.R.C. It is certain that the full thought of God as revealed could never be reached under the old covenant, nor in Israel – even in Israel under the new covenant.

• Israel could not apprehend what God intended men to apprehend. It is reached only in Christianity, so it is the fruit of the incarnation; and we are to be filled with the full knowledge of God’s will, and to grow by the true – or full – knowledge of God.
  • That is our privilege – the full knowledge of God.

Ques. Christ has entered in by His own blood. Is that power?

G.R.C. The preposition used is ‘dia’ – instrumentality. It is not by the blood of goats and bulls, but, by His own blood He has entered in.

• It is the great basis; but for power we need the Spirit; the blood gives us power in the sense of title, I suppose, but what we usually speak of as power would involve the Spirit. The stress is on the blood in Hebrews 9: 14.

Ques. Would you say a word on verse 14?

• “Christ, who by the eternal Spirit offered himself spotless to God”.

G.R.C. I think it should affect us very much. At the time of the birth of Christ Gabriel says to Mary,

• “The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and power of the Highest overshadow thee, wherefore the holy thing also which shall be born shall be called Son of God”, Luke 1: 35.

• What a part the Holy Spirit had in the preparation of that body –
  • “a body hast thou prepared me”!

• What deep feelings would enter into that, surely, on the part of the Holy Spirit! The incarnation, which had been looked on to from eternity, was about to take place; and the Spirit charges Himself with that side of the matter – the preparation of the body.

• It was an event of such magnitude that I do not think we can call anything greater; there are other great events, such as the death of Christ, which we would not say are any less;
  • but it is difficult to think of anything greater than the incarnation; and the Holy Spirit entered into the matter.

• Then the Spirit’s descent in love, as the Lord arrives at the full Levitical age in service, and in fulness of Manhood there, affords to God in full expression every feature delightful to Him.

• Then think of the feelings that entered into this, when it comes to the death of Christ. The body was prepared in view of this,
  • “Sacrifice and offering thou willedst not; but thou hast prepared me a body”, Hebrews 10: 5.

  • He “by the eternal Spirit offered himself spotless to God”, Hebrews 9: 14.

• How we would like to enter in some measure into the feelings of the Holy Spirit! What a transaction this was!

• There is nothing greater than this; He was doing what He primarily came to do, to lay this great foundation, for God to carry through everything that He had committed Himself to in purpose and in promise. Everything was to be fulfilled on this basis.

Ques. Would you confine the bearing of “offered himself” to His death alone?

G.R.C. It is the priestly side of it – He offered Himself. What would you say?

Rem. I was just wanting clarification of it.

G.R.C. Had you thought of extending it in any way?

Rem. Well, I wondered whether the eternal Spirit being brought in indicated that in the whole of Christ’s path He had this sacrificial measure before Him, culminating in the actual offering?

G.R.C. I think it is true that this was before Him, even as coming into the world. So that this great climax would ever be before Him, and every step was trodden with dignity in view of it.

• I also wonder whether the reference to the eternal Spirit in this great High-Priestly action of Christ, in offering Himself, is to indicate how the system is to work.
  • If it has been founded on the High Priest “by the eternal Spirit” offering Himself; then surely every offering that is offered in the system must be by the eternal Spirit.

Ques. Would you say that this matter of the blood of Christ is particularly to purify from everything which pertains to the natural man – purifying the service of God from everything which has to do with the first order?

• It came in when the blood of Christ was shed; so that everything now which has to do with the service of God in His house is by the Spirit, connected with a new order of man.

G.R.C. That is just what I had in mind, so that the word purifying is brought in here.

• “If the blood of goats and bulls, and a heifer’s ashes sprinkling the defiled, sanctifies for the purity of the flesh, how much rather shall the blood of the Christ … purify your conscience from dead works” – not simply from sins.

• Dead works would be the whole incubus of religious flesh in its activities – all that comes from that man religiously. We are to be completely clear of it;
  • and this brings up the point as to why purification and sanctification are the words used in Hebrews, and not justification.

• Justification is in Romans; but when it comes to a question of drawing near to God, and God dwelling among His people, the essential things are sanctification and purification.

• Justification relates to my need, and God comes out to meet me where I am; and if we use the type of Adam and his wife, He would clothe my nakedness with clothing of His own providing; we are justified in Christ.

• But when it comes to the question of approach to God, and God dwelling, God’s nature requires purity and sanctity; and so the death of Christ is viewed in Hebrews as that by which we are sanctified – that is, made fit to approach God.

• His dealing with the sin question is called purification,
  • “having made by himself the purification of sins”. It is viewing things from the standpoint of the divine nature.

Rem. Conscience is mentioned, both in Hebrews chapter 9 and also in chapter 10. Is a purified conscience the basis for our entrance in view of worship?

G.R.C. I think we need to be conscious of being purified, otherwise we are not free in the presence of God; it becomes a matter of conscience if you are drawing near to God. If you are thinking of judgment, it becomes a matter of conscience – to be sure you are justified.

• The red heifer – as well as the day of atonement – is in mind here in the blood of goats and bulls, and a heifer’s ashes sprinkling the defiled.
  • But the sprinkling is again to bring home the force of the fact that the death of Christ, from the divine side, has purified us.

• It is not so much practical purification that is in mind in the first instance, but to bring home to our souls that from the divine side the death of Christ is fully efficacious.

• It is not only for justification, but for sanctification and purification.

Ques. Is that why it is blood and not water?

G.R.C. Quite so; it is blood particularly for the conscience, I suppose, although the water is implied in the heifer’s ashes – the water of purification; but the main point is the blood, because it is the blood which is needed for the conscience:

• the blood assures us that from the divine side everything has been done.

Ques. Is that why we have the reference to the blood of the Beloved in Ephesians 1 – the sacrificial basis on which the purposes of love can be carried into effect?

G.R.C. I think that is so. So that in the references to the highest truth as to God’s purpose in Ephesians 1 we have,

• “the Beloved; in whom we have redemption, through his blood, the forgiveness of offences” –

• a wonderful thing that it should come in there. We are at the centre of the system there; we are in the presence of the Ark, and He is viewed as the Beloved.

Ques. Could you help us as to why it is the blood of “the Christ” here, whereas when in chapter 10 it is a matter of access to the holiest it is the blood of Jesus? There would be some difference, I expect, in the titles?

G.R.C. Do you not think He is viewed here in His official capacity, as the High Priest of the system? It says,

• “But Christ being come high priest of the good things to come”;

• and the Christ, the Anointed, is the Prophet, Priest and King.

• The title “the Christ” includes every office, but the office in mind here is the High-Priestly office. It is His High-Priestly offering which inaugurates the whole system; and I believe that it is most important for everyone to see this. It is said in Hebrews 8: 3,
  • “For every high priest is constituted for the offering both of gifts and sacrifices; whence it is needful that this one also should have something which he may offer”.

• We have the High Priest of the good things to come, and it was necessary that He should have something to offer.

• But chapters 9 and 10 show what it was which He had to offer. I believe that it is of vast importance to see that what is in mind in chapter 8 is developed in chapters 9 and 10.

• What He had to offer was Himself; it is not a question of what comes afterwards when we come into priestly service under His direction. That is not the point.

• It is the question of the inaugural offering of the whole system; and as having come High Priest of this vast system, what could He offer? What would be adequate for this?
  • Only Himself – there was nothing else that would be adequate!

• I think that that is the point of chapter 9; it is the great High-Priestly offering of Christ, who by the Eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God. This it is which inaugurates the system.

• In chapter 10 it is our boldness to go in, and it is by the blood of Jesus – the personal Name – suggesting the personal affections, that which would most attract the heart. What do you say?

Rem. So that the blood of the Christ would be somewhat in relation to the sprinkling, but the blood of Jesus in relation to the new and living way, the line of affection.

G.R.C. Exactly; what a new and living way it is when the heart is enraptured with Jesus! And it is the blood of Jesus, the One in whose face the glory of God shines; the One whom Stephen saw – the glory of God in Jesus.

• But think of His blood – He is now the centre of glory! So it is the blood of Jesus, and the new and living way which He has dedicated for us through the veil, that is to say His flesh.

Rem. I was wondering whether Luke’s gospel does not emphasise this? The offering of Himself; the Victim thought is not found there; there is no forsaking in Luke is there? There is in Matthew and Mark, where it would be the inauguration of the system.

• Does not even the Lord’s utterance, “Today shalt thou be with me in paradise” give some clue to the greatness of what has been established in the way of approach – the new and living way was being opened.

G.R.C. One has thought that the veil rent in the midst is in view of approach; and the veil rent from top to bottom – God coming out. But in Luke the veil was rent in the midst – the High Priest of good things to come offered Himself. Is that right?

Rem. Yes, quite so.

Ques. Could I ask whether you had in mind that what we are considering should help us in our general approach to God daily, rather than specifically on collective occasions?

G.R.C. The holiest is open to us at all times; serving the living God in Hebrews 9 would include, and might specially have in mind, the Christian service Godward.

• It is the service in full activity, because I think that, although translated “worship”, the word used is “priestly service”. Of course it applies to individuals, but the full service is in mind there;

• but here in Hebrews 10: 19 approach is open to us at all times. Of course what we enjoy individually we enjoy more when together, but according to that passage – the assembling comes after –
  • “Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together”, Hebrews 10: 25.

• No one who frequents the holiest will forsake the assembly, because he gets more there than he does alone; but what we can get individually and in our household devotions by entering the holiest, is unspeakably blessed.

Rem. I wondered whether we need to be a little more clear that through the blood of Christ, and by the Spirit too, we can really enter the heavenly realm at any time.

G.R.C. Well that is the truth; the way into the holy of holies is now made manifest and it is touching that the blood comes in in connection with this. This is a most precious thought of the blood –

• “Having therefore, brethren, boldness for entering into the holy of holies by the blood of Jesus,
  the new and living way which he has dedicated for us”.

• Think of what He has dedicated! How it would lead us to dedicate ourselves! –
  • “through the veil, that is, his flesh”,

• so we have two things – we have boldness through His blood, and we have a great Priest over the house of God.

• We have Him, living in the presence of God, with all our names upon His heart, and all our names upon His shoulders, appearing before the face of God for us to support us there.

• His support in the wilderness at the throne of grace is to ensure that whatever the pressure we shall not fail to enter the holiest.
  • The throne of grace is in view of our entering the holiest; it is not merely in view of relief and going on with things here.

• The throne of grace is there to ensure that whatever the pressure, and whatever the circumstances, there is abounding mercy and abounding grace available to ensure that at all times we shall be free to enter the holiest.

Rem. And is that not on the basis of attraction? “Which he has dedicated for us”. I was comparing it with chapter 9, “offering himself to God”; but the dedication is for us, is it not? Therefore by attraction we would desire to be in the gain of that.

G.R.C. I am sure we would. It is affecting –

• “dedicated for us”.

• There is what He has done for God, and there is also what He has done for us. Then should we not be attracted into the holiest because God is there?

• What we are thinking of in these readings is God; and in the holiest we are in the immediate presence of God and God’s great desire is to have men there; it is a question of man’s relations with God.

• And God has brought in a system where men are in the closest possible nearness to Himself. Our place is within the veil; No other family will be within the veil; no angels will be there – only believers of this dispensation!

Rem. That is what I really had in mind, that in chapter 9, “offering himself without spot to God”, the whole position is opened up to us so that we can be in the presence of God; and then He has “dedicated for us” the way in,

G.R.C. I do not know anything more attractive than to be in the presence of God Himself.

• “As the hart panteth after the water-brooks, so panteth my soul after thee, O God. My soul thirsteth for God, for the living God [El]: when shall I come and appear before God?”, Psalm 42.

• How far behind the psalmist we may be! But if that was the language of our hearts we should be in the holiest whenever we had the opportunity.
  • “When shall I come and appear before God?”

• God, is in full display in a Man – that is the primary thing. How the presence of God should attract our hearts!

• We see two things in the holiest – I am not trying to limit it – one is God in full display in a Man, and the other is perfect Manhood in response to God.
  • God is in full display in a Man, and what can attract my heart more than that?

• In Him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily; in the holiest we are in the presence of that.

Rem. Does the fact that, although the holiest is mentioned in Ezekiel yet Ezekiel himself never goes in, bear out what you are saying as to the greatness of the privilege which is ours in this dispensation?

G.R.C. Yes. I am sure it does.

Rem. In these verses 19 to 22 we have our qualification, so that we can at all times, from God’s side, enter the holiest.

G.R.C. That is important; the qualifications belong to every true believer, even one newly converted.

• So first we have two things – we have boldness through the blood, and we have a great Priest over the house of God. It is not exactly that we go in to contemplate the Priest, although He is a great contemplation as Priest.
  • That is His office, and He is a great contemplation as having the breastplate, the shoulder-pieces and the high turban.

• But He is there to support us, in order that we may be able to contemplate Him as the effulgence of God’s glory and the expression of His substance.

• God is in full display in a Man; and Christ as Priest holds that office with a view to supporting us in such a manner that we can take account of Him as the effulgence of God’s glory.

Ques. Is it interesting now to see that in verse 25 the thought of assembling of ourselves together comes in?

G.R.C. Yes, because no one would forsake the assembling if he had frequented the holiest. What a place it is for us to enter to see the power and glory of God in the sanctuary displayed in Christ!

Rem. So there is something infinitely greater for us to behold as assembling together than ever we have seen as individuals.

G.R.C. Well it is the same thing we see, but we have the benefit of other’s impressions when we are together. Whatever we see individually is much enhanced in the assembly, so that we would never forsake our assembling together.

Rem. So what we have experienced as individuals in the holiest, in the presence of God, we would bring forward into our assemblings together?

G.R.C. That is just what I thought. Then what Mr.— was saying has to be taken account of – that the qualifications are a true heart and full assurance of faith:

• they belong to the simplest believer who is maintained in the faith of the gospel, in living active faith; and there will be unbounded confidence in the Person and work of Christ – that is full assurance of faith.

• The boldness here is a thing which should mark us all as having unbounded confidence.
  • It is a slight upon Christ and His work if we are not bold to enter the holiest.

Rem. Is it not important to see that in the old dispensation there were certain defects which hindered or prevented a person or priest from entering into the holiest? He could go so far, but not into the holiest.

• Whereas the presence of the glory of the Person of Jesus, and the value of His blood in the presence of God, assure every one of our hearts that the way is open on a moral basis which is certain.

G.R.C. That is right. So it is right to be bold in this way; it is not presumption, it is confidence in Christ and in His precious blood.

Ques. Would you get a fresh view of the blood every time you went into the holiest?

G.R.C. I have no doubt as to that. And you go into the holiest and come out to serve.

• We are not exactly detained at the altars on the way in, except to recall what Christ has done.

• It is Christ’s service which takes us in – not our service. It is Christ’s offering which takes us in; nothing we could offer could ever take us in;
  • so this book shows that He has passed through the heavens, and we are to pass through into God’s presence.

• We are to go right through in the power of what He has effected at the altars – to go right through into the presence of God.

• And then we come out to serve, and one of the services of the priests, the sons of Aaron, was to present the blood. That is, they were not thinking of what the blood was for them, but what it was to God.

• It is inside, in the presence of God, that we get the proper bearing of everything in view of service. We get God’s outlook, and in some measure God’s appreciation of everything; and now we are equipped as priests to serve at the altar.

Rem. In this book there are two privileges open to us – the one is to go outside the camp, and the other to go inside the veil.

G.R.C. That brings us to chapter 13. It is a most affecting passage. It begins with the fellowship – we have an altar. Fellowship is properly linked with the altar. It is a question of communion with the altar.

• The altar is the place where we eat; every clean person could eat the peace offering; and the priests had other food at the altar.
  • “We have an altar of which they have no right to eat who serve the tabernacle”;

• then it goes on to speak of how the Lord Jesus suffered without the gate.

• It should greatly touch our affections that the One who is now the centre of a whole system of glory was once outside the pale of everything connected with God, as we might say: outside the camp He suffered, and was even forsaken of God.

• He went into the darkness and into distance, beyond anything a creature could measure; that very One who is in the centre of glory has been right outside for us. And we would never have had any access if He had not been right outside.

• The efficacy of the blood which was taken in and put on the mercy seat was dependent upon the body of the victim being burned outside the camp.

Ques. Are we to understand that the only blood taken into the holiest is that of the sin offering?

G.R.C. Yes.

Rem. So it would save us from taking advantage of the blood on the mercy-seat without being in conformity with the death of Christ without?

G.R.C. Well, that is just it! This chapter is to bring home to us, I think, that the blood has its efficacy on the mercy-seat and has opened the way in for us because of this very reason – that Jesus was made sin, and He suffered without the gate.

• He bore the consuming fire of God’s judgment – not the fire on the altar, but the consuming power of God’s judgment outside the camp. So the exhortation is,
  • “therefore let us go forth to him without the camp, bearing his reproach”.

Ques. Would it be right to think that the answer to that exhortation would find its result in greater liberty to enter the holiest?

G.R.C. Yes, I think one thing works on the other. The more we enter the holiest, the more our affections will require that we should be clear completely of the camp: the more we are clear completely of the camp, the more liberty we will have to go into the holiest.

Ques. May I go back to “without the gate” and “without the camp”? Did you distinguish between these two?

• I thought you indicated that “without the gate” was Christ being abandoned by God; but “without the camp” meant really Exodus 32 – the camp polluted.

G.R.C. That seems to be the allusion.

Rem. But verse 12 would really be Leviticus 16, would it? The great day of atonement.

G.R.C. And of course, there it says the sin offering was to be burned without the camp, so that the camp is in mind; only as it occurred in Jerusalem it was without the gate. So he speaks of,

• “for we have not here an abiding city, but we seek the coming one”.

• The Lord is outside the gate, as it were, of every city on earth.

Ques. Would it suggest, too, that the service of God following on that could not be connected with the camp, but with the place that Christ has in reproach outside the camp?

G.R.C. I think that is why verses 15 and 16 come where they do. Our altar is not in the camp at all; we have an altar, but it is not in the camp. The activity at the altar is spoken of after it says,

• “let us go forth to him without the camp, bearing his reproach”, and then it gives priestly activity at the altar.

• “By him therefore let us offer”.

• The epistle has been occupied with Christ’s offering, the inaugural offering, but now it is,
  • “let us offer the sacrifice of praise continually to God, that is, the fruit of the lips confessing his name”.

• It shows the setting of priestly service, that it belongs to those who go within the veil, and whose place here is outside the camp.

Rem. It is the last “let us” in the epistle to the Hebrews – that we should praise and worship God.

G.R.C. It is a most important “let us”; it is the whole priestly service brought in here, and it says in chapter 9: 14,

• “How much rather shall the blood of the Christ … purify your conscience from dead works to worship” [or serve in a priestly way] “the living God?”

• But here there is the exhortation to carry it out; and it indicates where the altar is that we serve – it is outside the camp.

• There is to be the sacrifice of praise to God continually, and on the other hand the doing good and communicating of our substance; they are sacrifices with which God is well pleased.

Rem. I feel our weakness is in relation to the Person and the place that He has with us; it is going forth “to him”, and “by him” let us offer.

• At-homedness in the holiest would give us to understand what He is in the presence of God, and make Him therefore the Centre to us.