Gooding, David: 4 - Structure and Pattern

Ladies and gentlemen, the chairman has been nodding in my direction to indicate that I have his permission to begin again. So now, at great personal risk, I have distributed among you my own little, uh, analysis, for what it's worth, of the book of Daniel. Just let me explain, uh, one or two little things about it. It follows, as you'll see, my notion that thought flow would tell us that there are ten major elements in the book of Daniel. That the first five are in some sense bracketed together because of the occurrence at the beginning of chapter one, Nebuchadnezzar's beginning raid upon Jerusalem. He takes the golden vessels. Those vessels come to the fore at the crucial climactic moment in chapter five that spells the end of the Babylonian Empire. This morning I argued that the second set, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, uh ten, eleven, twelve together, in spite of the fact that they are written in different languages, are intended by the compiler of Daniel to form another set. As you'll see, it is in chapter six, this matter of the writing that is not some little minor circumstantial detail, lies at the very heart of the story. Hence the constant repetition of this phrase, sign the writing that it be not changed. It lies at the heart of the story, not just as a word, but as an important concept in politics, and therefore is an integral part of Daniel's critique of Gentile politics, their strength and then their weakness. And chapter six shows you the power of that concept, but introduces you, of course, to a story that exhibits the fatal flaw in that, uh, political theory and practice. But the s- uh, the five elements on the second side are bracketed together because when you come to the last element, then again the question of the writing of truth. Very unusual phrase in the Old Testament. It's not the Bible, as you'll see. It is the heavenly councils before the throne of God, now brought down to Daniel, and he's assured, of course, that these writings will never be changed. We notice here, of course, the, uh, groupings within each set, the introductory chapter one, then the chapters two and three dealing with the images, and chapters four and five dealing with the two kings and their discipline. In the second side, the introductory chapter six, then the two visions of beasts, seven and eight, and the final two visions concerned with this matter of books and the fulfillments of what is therein written. The book of Jeremiah in chapter nine and its prophecy about the timing of Israel's desolation and the timing of her restoration. The books, therefore, and chapters ten to twelve, the writing of truth and how it shall be worked out in history. We noticed yesterday that when you look and compare the elements in the first set with elements on the second set, there are, of course, striking, uh, uh, striking similarities. Chapter two and chapter seven are obvious ones. But we emphasized to ourselves this morning that where you get similarities, then the more important thing is to notice the differences between them. Uh, yesterday we pointed out, it might be worth pointing out again, the very poignant similarities and contrasts between chapter four in the first set and chapter nine in the second. Chapter four is about the king of Babylon and the glory of Babylon. Is not this great Babylon that I have built for the pride of my excellence and glory? Whereas chapter nine is about Jerusalem city, and no theologian or student of prophecy either will need to be told how important these two cities are, both in the ancient world and what they stood for, and of course in the New Testament, particularly in the book of the Revelation, where Babylon is judged, described in great detail in two chapters, and then is judged to make way for the bride of the Lamb, the New Jerusalem that is thereafter described likewise in great detail. So then in chapter four, Babylon in its glory, chapter nine, Jerusalem in its desolations. In chapter four, uh, you meet Nebuchadnezzar. He was the king that did the desolation of Jerusalem city. And in chapter four is the story of how God had to discipline Nebuchadnezzar, and the breathtaking and unexpected thing is from Daniel, the story tells how God restored Nebuchadnezzar. I wonder what the Jews made of that bit when they first read it. We'll see. What, the desecrator of their city Jerusalem restored by God? Wow. Well, Daniel was certainly no narrow-minded bigot, was he? Anyway, uh, the time of Nebuchadnezzar's chastisement was to be seven times. We notice that emphasis on the duration. Over in chapter nine, it's a question of Jerusalem's discipline and desolations. How long before it shall be restored? And the answer is, well, if you want the full answer, it's not seven times, it's seventy times seven. Obvious connections of thought. And it's not a mere matter of a railway timetable either. The disciplines of God upon men and nations are an exceedingly important part of history. It is a thing to be observed that God thought it while, worthwhile disciplining Nebuchadnezzar, pagan though he was. And no, uh, uh, no critical thing is stated of that wonderful tree that in the vision represented Nebuchadnezzar. And I pause at this juncture just to fill in a little of the detail, my old hobby horse, you'll see, that while thought flow and structure and pattern are important, then in the last analysis you must expound every detail of every story. That's where the word lies. And in the visions of chapter four, uh may I point out this. We have moved from politics, chapters two and three uh are about politics and government. Chapters four and 5 are what you might call culture in the very broadest sense of that term. In chapter four, it is high culture, the beauty, the architecture, the city planning, the gardens, the ziggurats, magnificent, exciting stuff. Nebuchadnezzar was the rebuilder of that Babylon that became famous throughout the world for the sheer beauty and glory, that magnificent product of the human spirit. In the vision Nebuchadnezzar received, Nebuchadnezzar himself is likened unto a tree, a beautiful tree. Its leaves were fair to look upon, and it brought forth fruit for man and beast, and under its shade the animals reposed gratefully, given the heat of that part of the world, you'll see. And in those dry and sometimes arid countries, to have a beautiful city like Babylon with its gardens and its river running through, what a delight that was to the human spirit. Hmm. Is art wrong? Or Christians to be interested in architecture? Well, yeah, perhaps. In literature? Um, in music? What does God think of Nebuchadnezzar and his city and its art? Oh, look at, look at those wall. Look at the east eye gate. Those blue enamel tiles, oh, magnificent, aren't they? Even yet you'd like them in your bathroom, surely you would. A- a- and the design of the place and those great boulevards. You'll see. What does God think of it? Is Daniel saying, rotten worldly stuff, I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole. Jerusalem is a thing. Well, compared with Babylon, Jerusalem was like a city in the outback. Tiny little affair. Uh, no, God thought it was marvelous. When he came to depict it and the Babylon and the and the Nebuchadnezzar who had built it, it was like a tree, beautiful to look at, lovely fruit, and shade for the repose of men. We must, as Christians, have a healthy and balanced attitude on life, mustn't we? Art and beauty, I nearly s- and architecture and city planning and gardens and things are part of God's provision for us. The tree was, well, it had leaves that were fair to look upon. You'll notice God's taste, won't you, and the order of it. In the Garden of Eden, he made a lot of trees, and they were in the first place good to look at, and then they were good for food. Sometimes Christians, particularly in difficult economic times, get that reversed and think the more important thing is potatoes for your stomach rather than pictures on your wall. But the God who is interested in the stomach is also interested in the mind, isn't he? And if you had a friend in hospital, dangerously ill, you wouldn't necessarily take him a sack of potatoes, would you? You would take him a bunch of flowers. One hospital I knew of, they took, um, auto harps in and played them to the patients who were desperately ill, quietly. And it was reported that for some patients, the sound of that music helped them in their will to live and recover. God's a marvelous God, isn't he? What a lovely creation. We've no need to criticize and carp it and damn it as though it were in itself bad. Carrots are good, except when the farmers use poison insecticide and poison you in the eating of them. Carrots are normally good, aren't they? And so is art and architecture and all the rest of the lovely things. It can get poisoned. We have to look out for the poison. And it was, uh, good for food. And sh- and relief for the colossal temperatures in that part of the world. There lies sanity. Why did God, uh, uh, get upset about it all? Well, because if you read the detail of the story, we have to do that, don't we? Nebuchadnezzar one night was walking on the, on the roof of his palace and surveying all this, and in that moment a surge of pride came through the emperor's heart. Is not this great Babylon that I have built for my glory? Here speaks the man. The whole end and object of it was his own. Man that had lost his hold on the true God, using all his gifts, but not for the glory of God and in fellowship with God. And that is a grievous sin. You'll see, if we will, uh, take the lovely things of life, and then in our love for them, lose our love for God, and our motivation becomes our own glory instead of God's glory, then we are on a dangerous and slippery slope. Which is why John says, love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him, because all that is in the world, the lust of the eye and the lust of the flesh and the pride of life, these are not of the Father. These things may be good in themselves, but if the good things draw our hearts away from God, then the good things are almost worse than the bad things. I fear sometimes there will be more people in hell because of good things than bad things. The majority of people don't like horrible crime and evil and wickedness and debauchery, but they can love the good things so well that they've no time for the God who gave them. Isn't that so? Here's the bright young thing. He's absolute marvel at music. Glorious. And when you listen to a play, you say, thank God for this marvelous ability is given to human beings. It's gorgeous, isn't it? And you go up to the young lady and said, hello, my dear, that's marvelous music, isn't it? How are you getting on with the Lord? Oh, she said, no, I, I, no, I'm not interested in religion and God. My music is an... She carries on like that, and there's no time for the God who gave it. One day she'll go to where there is no music anymore. You see, this is an important dimension in life, isn't it? I use the illustration, that's how ignorant bachelors do. I use my illustration o- o- o- o- of an engagement ring, you know, do I don't know if you have them here, we do in England. Uh, this finger, I think they go on. And, uh, when a girl gets engaged, suppose it's your secretary, you know, you're not allowed to fail to notice it, because when she hands you your cup of tea in the morning, you notice this. Somehow, you think, what's wrong with her? She got the paralysis or something? And then you, you, you, you, you, you see it. Oh, you say, is that an engagement ring? Yes, it is indeed. Oh, do tell me, do tell me what it is. I- I- is that gold? No, that's platinum. And those things are there? What are they, bit of glass? No, no, no, these are, these are diamonds, you'll say. Oh, magnificent work of art, you say. Yeah, yeah, marvelous. Um, he is to be congratulated who got you as his betrothed. Tell me, who is the man behind the engagement ring? And suppose the girl replied, what do you mean, man? Well, the man, you know, who gave you the ring. There is no man. I'm not interested in men. You say, well, what would you say next? Well, you said, it's a beautiful ring anyway. Shall we get on with the letters and... A beautiful engagement ring without a man who gave it has lost all its meaning except its aesthetic meaning. And that is a tragedy in life, isn't it? When men and women try to enjoy the lovely things of life in culture without God. And what God did to Nebuchadnezzar when he did that and wouldn't repent was to cut his tree down, but not intending to destroy it. The angels in charge were given, uh, instructions to preserve the stump and bind it around to make sure it grew again. But Nebuchadnezzar had to be taught a lesson. And God so touched him, whatever the means, who knows, that instead of being the magnificent emperor and the past master at all things to do with art and architecture, oh, magnificent, he started to live like a veritable animal. No form, no... didn't even cut his hair, cut his nails. Went out to grass, and like an animal, ate the grass upon which he lived and walked. And became an animal. Well, as good as. Some of you have been asking me, what on earth do you mean by talking about structure and pattern and thought flow, and what in particular is the difference between thought flow a- a- and pattern, and pattern and structure? Well, you see what, uh, I suggest to you that the structure is, the first five are to do with Israel in relation to Babylon, and the second, Israel in relation to Medo-Persia and eventually to to Greece. But pattern, you will find a similar idea reoccurring through the, uh, the book of Daniel, and that is man and the beast, man and the animal. You'll see the imagery that God uses in these visions and histories is not arbitrary imagery. It's meant to be taken seriously. It isn't just a code, so that if you know the first beast is Rome or is Babylon, you say, all right, I don't need to, um, listen to the imagery anymore. That's just a code for Babylon. So when I, I see this great beast, I say Babylon. Uh, some people treat prophecy like that, don't they? The prophecy is not normally meant to be code. For instance, let me diverge again. In the Revelation chapter five, the challenge goes out, who is worthy to take the book and to open the seals thereof, and no one was found worthy. And I wept much until the angel says, weep not, for the lion of the tribe of Judah hath prevailed. Ah, now here's a problem. Uh, what does it mean by the lion of Judah? So I asked some dear brother, oh, what is the lion of Judah? Oh, he says, that's the Lord Jesus. And I say, well, why on earth didn't it say the Lord Jesus to start with? Make it so much more simple, wouldn't it? Oh, I see. So now I can, I know how to read it now. Weep not, for the Lord Jesus has prevailed to open the seals. Now, and I looked and behold, there was a lamb as it had been slain, having seven eyes and seven horns. And I say to the dear brother, now who is this lamb with seven eyes and seven horns? He says, that's the Lord Jesus. I say, dear. Why can't he speak straightforward sense? Why must this be written in code? Well, at least you've told me what the key to the code is, so I needn't bother about this lamb with seven horns. It's, it's the Lord Jesus, you say, so we'll rewrite it, shall we? That would make revelation simple. I sure someone will do it one of these days and make a lot of money by selling a Bible rewritten for the simple to understand. Weep not, uh, for the Lord Jesus has prevailed to open the, uh, seals and to loose the, uh, uh, to take the book and loosen the seals thereof. And I turned, and having been turned, I looked and saw the Lord Jesus. What would you lose if it was merely a code? Well, ladies and gentlemen, sorry to say this, but if you don't know the lion is the Lord Jesus and the lamb is the Lord Jesus, perhaps you oughtn't to be reading the book to start with. That was never in doubt who it was. It's the Lord Jesus, of course, but what is the Lord Jesus like? Well, if you want to to to get some concept of the Lord Jesus, he is the lion of the tribe of Judah. Do you know what lions are like? And do you know why he's the lion of the tribe of Judah? Hult there's a whack of history behind that. Listen to the prophets talking about the kings as lions. It's not code. It's imagery to help us grasp with our imagination and our emotion and our intellect as well, for that matter, something about the Lord Jesus. He's a lion, isn't he? And a great lion of history, the lion of the tribe of Judah. Then you say, well, why is he called a lamb? Oh, that's another aspect of the Lord Jesus. And we need the symbolism to enrich our appreciation and understanding and of the significance of the blessed Lord. That's how prophetic imagery is normally to be used. It's not code. And hence, sometimes, when you ask, people ask you a difficult question, who do you think the twenty four elders are? You can get out of answering that, you know. Well, at the first level, you can, by saying, yes, well, I'll answer you that when you tell me what they are. You say, what do you mean what they are? Well, they're elders, aren't they? What are elders? Why are they represented as elders? And why is their gear represented, their clothing and their crowns? More of that perhaps tomorrow. Uh, where was I? We were talking about the use of imagery. And you'll notice that in the imagery that is used, the question of man and the beast, man and the animal, is a constant sub-theme in the book of Daniel. So here, uh, in four, under the discipline of God, Nebuchadnezzar lapses into living like an animal. Man and the animal. In chapter six, among those sophisticated politicians who were all for the rule of law, if you please, then Daniel was cast into the, um, pit with the lions and got out. The other polit- the other civil servants got thrown in and didn't get out. More of that and on. Man and the beast. In, uh, seven, Man and the beast, explicitly so. For the first animal representing Babylon was a lion, wasn't it? And there was given him a heart like a man. And his wings were clipped, and he stood up, good old him, on his hind legs, became positively huma- humanized. Man and the animal. The fourth beast was also given certain characteristics of a man. He was given the eyes of a man. You just imagine that. Human intelligence linked with animal instinct. Wow. And, uh, he was given the mouth of a man. Alas, he didn't get the heart of a man. That combination was lethal. Man and the animal. Oh, here's some more beasts. Chapter eight. It is a theme. It will be worthwhile anybody taking these chapters that deal with man and the animal and listing them as a series, saying the same kind of patterning, and then you'd have to ask once more, they're all dealing with this question, man and the animal, what's the differences between them? If you start with old Nebuchadnezzar here, what a vivid discipline that was. Wasn't arbitrary on God's part. You'll see there's a difference between m- man and the animal, isn't there? Even in such lowly matters as food, give old Fido, nice respectable dog he is and law-abiding citizen in his way, give him, uh, a bone or a beef steak. He won't mind how he eats it, he'll go out into the driveway and eat it all covered with dust and mud and so on, and I won't mention all kind of the behavior patterns he exhibits in this process, we'll say. It's an animal, isn't it? You wouldn't have food like that, would you? You watch your hostess the next time, she's got a beautiful table, and there are placemats, or there's a cloth, and the spoons have to be put this way, and the forks that, and and the knife somewhere else, and uh, the color of the carrots has got to stand in opposition to the green of the beans, you'll see, and even on the plate, oh, you don't just have the potatoes all up mixed up with the, with the mushrooms and things. These are nicely put, aren't they? What ho. There's a difference between animals and food and humans and food, yeah? Because even food, you know, it's not just for the satisfaction of our stomachs. There's the aesthetic side to food, isn't there? And they say that it does the old juices in the stomach a tremendous lot of good to see the food nicely presented, yes. And, uh, sometimes your hostess is so super duper duperish that there'll be some low, nice, beautiful classical movement to get you over the soup. Music, I mean. It'll say beautiful. Yes. And it's God who gave us the ability as humans to impose order on creation. The Genesis story is very interesting. When God made man to till the ground, he started him off with a beautiful exhibition of what could be done with earth. For the Lord God planted a garden and put man in it, which shows the whole earth wasn't garden. It was God's way of saying, there you are, Adam, that's what can be done. You could make something of earth, Adam, my good man. Look what can be done with it when you impose order on it and discipline. Cor, what a garden this isn't it, this distinct from a just a wild forest. That human thing that expresses itself in order and beauty, whether it's in literature or in music or in food even, as I say, and architecture. When Nebuchadnezzar forgot God, his culture went bad, didn't he? And he lost his sense of order and beauty. You'll notice that dogs, when it comes to food, they may be nice, obedient creatures, but they have no sense of art. They don't have any sense of morals. They'll come begging and licking you and pretending to be friends until you give them the beef steak. You try and take it away, my boy. And if another dog has got a beef steak bigger than the first one, we'll be tied the other dog if he isn't looking when the first one gets his as well. No sense of morality. Poor old Nebuchadnezzar, that fine, beautiful aesthete, living like an animal, half naked, brutalized. Ladies and gentlemen, what has public television come to in our modern age? When under the name of art, sheer debauchery, filth, violence is offered us, and disorder is thought to be the wonderful thing, both in music and literature and poetry. We ought, like our God, to have concern for people's cultural health. And we who have anything to do with maintaining standards of intellect and beauty and truth and morality in the realm of literature, and not only in science. Could do well to study what God has to say about Nebuchadnezzar. When he lost his sense of God, his culture went to disaster, became an animal. Um, he was recovered and found the true God and stretched out his hand in all the bewilderment of his animal experience and found a God that restored him to his majesty and brightness. Gentlemen, these are not, you see, ladies and gentlemen, these are not just stories, and we play crossword puzzles with them and make structures and so on. We come back to the point that, uh, we have to expound all the detail and take all the detail seriously. Eh, but you see, here is, uh, the, uh, first occasion, man and the animal. The imagery is exceedingly eloquent. And so it is later on when we come to seven. These, uh, beasts. The opposite critique in chapter two, pictured man, uh, pictured Gentile government as a man, yes? Beautiful, magnificent. This puts the other side, man and the beast once more, isn't it? And then, as I said earlier, in chapter seven you are told how the first beat beca- beast became more humane. He was lifted up from the earth, his wings were clipped, he was given the heart of a man, walked on his back legs like a man. That is God being very kind. It may be to- talking about Nebuchadnezzar's personal experience, um, but it's true in general. Over the course of history, governments have become more humane, haven't they? Mm. They did so until recently in Britain. I can remember the days in my hometown where children ran without shoes, with scarce one vest on them, where people couldn't afford doctors and died in agony and filth. Uh, since the war, the government has become very much more humane, and people are cared for. It's good, isn't it? Um, if you had come to Britain in the early eighteen thirties and you dared in your hunger to steal a sheep, we'd probably have hung you. If you stole a sheep today, we shouldn't hang you. Do you approve of that? Or would you have us hang you? We have become more humane, you see. Tell me, is that humanizing of government, so it's no longer so barbarous, is that the key to man's progress, and one day it will bring in an age of, um, wonderful peace and... No, it won't. Why not? Well, look at the fourth beast. Here's an animal. But combined with his animality, he got, um, the eyes of a human being. That is the intelligence of a human with insight and a mouth of a human, but not the heart of a human. And the mixture was lethal. You imagine, if you like, a lion or rhinoceros or dinosaur that not only had colossal strength, but understood about atoms and how to make hydrogen bombs. But it hadn't got the heart of a man. No, you'll be in for trouble. This fourth beast with this lethal mixture of human insight and animal nature became such a destructive force in the earth, with what C. S. Lewis would have called that hideous strength, that in the end God had to destroy him to save humanity. And in the place of that kind of thing, God substituted the kingdom of one who is the ideal man. Oh, how civilized. Uh, our blessed Lord himself. And one can't help remembering that when the Lord was here on earth and the animals got hold of him, what they did to him, didn't they? What, oh, what a beast. Herod and the Sanhedrin were. And Pilate. So they tore him till he was scarce recognizable as human, and it wasn't their whips that were so bad. Even Pilate could see it was for envy that the high priests had charged him. Animal. But he's the one that's destined by God to rule. Thank God for that superb man. Man. Oh, but you see, that chapter six is an animal story, isn't it? It's nice to talk about the rule of law. Isn't it beautiful? You never did see monkeys making laws, did you? They have them inherent, apparently, dear monkeys. They have their little societies and pecking orders, don't they, and this, that, and the other. A very interesting, uh, study, uh, how animals control the herd and the group and so on, and their little rules and regulations, and who's boss and who's second, and all this kind of thing. They do have their patterns. They never wrote them down anywhere. As far as we know, they don't philosophize. Monkeys are doing what monkeys always have done. They make no progress in politics. No. It's the marvel of human beings that they can theorize about the law and write written constitutions and things, and they are marvelous. The rule of law, that will curb, won't it, hot temper and arbitrariness, um, will it? There are some civil servants, gentlemen, expert in theorizing the law, but at their heart, sheer animal jealousy and envy. And they used the law to get Daniel put among the animals. Well, now your faith is going to be stretched just here. Animals go by instinct, not rather than law, don't they? And when they see a fine Daniel coming down for dinner, what is there to restrain them? Do you believe there's a power that did and could subdue animal nature so it didn't gobble up Daniel? If you believe that, you've got a gospel message that you could preach to the world, you know. Is there a power anywhere in our universe that can subdue the animal inside us. Not only the ugly base animal, but the higher instincts of envy and jealousy. You believe in such a law? You'll say, of course we do, preacher, we preached it thousands of times. Job good, carry on. But, um, yes, that would be worth saying because if the, if there's ever his own hope of a paradise and a millennial kingdom, there'd better be a law, hadn't there? That can subdue the animal. Else the whole idea of heaven is a myth, you know. And we in our Christian churches ought to exhibit the fact, so that we don't tear one another to pieces. Say, but we do some. Oh. Hmm. Uh, beside that, however, yes, we do believe that there is a law that can subdue the animal. And God, uh, prevailed upon the lions with his superior law, not to cease being lions, but to obey his superior law. And they didn't touch Daniel. But you know, the dear politicians, being found out by the king, they in their turn were thrown to the lions. They didn't believe there was any law above their own that could subdue lions. Neither did the lions. When, when they saw the politicians, the angel that had kept the lions in place when Daniel was there happened to be somewhere else. And that was the end of the politicians. Yeah. And so, yes, man and the beast. You have a whole array of stories, and they are not just ditto repeato, and the imagery is deliberate, and it's a very important part of the message. God doesn't write just little comic strips, you know, with grotesque illustrations. The m- the the imagery is part of the message. And yes, it's what I would call a pattern, this recurring thing of man and animal. But as I would suggest to you, and you now see it from this layout, I don't think that the theme of man and animal, genuine pattern though it is, is the key to the structure. You have been asking me, many of you, what do you mean by the difference between structure and pattern? May I use one, uh, simple little illustration. If ever you came to my house in Belfast, it's a cottagey kind of a place, you'll say, but you open the front door, you would find yourself in an entrance hall, small entrance hall, and there are doors leading off, lead the door shut, and you would be in entrance hall. Structurally, it's separate from the rest. Um, it is paneled wood round the hall. That's the pattern, and it has a carpet with pattern on it. If you open the door straight in front of you, that would lead into the dining room. Structurally, the dining room is separate. You wouldn't confuse, uh, the hall with the dining room, would you? With the the the the structure, the walls and the divisions. Mm. But when you open the door, you'd find that the dining room is paneled as well. The pattern on the wall goes right round the dining room. So the hall and the dining room share the same pattern, but not the same structure. Somebody, in the kindness of their heart, gave me a series of pictures, thirteen of them, all upon a theme. And so I hung two of them in the hall and the rest of them around the dining room. So if you open the door, there is a pattern of pictures going right through the hall, through the dining room. But the pictures don't determine the structure, do they? Then if you looked at the pattern of the carpet in the hall and the pattern of the carpet in the dining room, you'd find they were two different patterns. Ah. Patterns don't d- don't determine structure, do they? Sometimes in the Bible, one story can belong to several different patterns. You will know, won't you, from your reading, how that in the Gospel of John, uh, there are a number of signs. And the first of those signs is the story of the wedding in Cana of Galilee, unusual for the fact that at this wedding the bride isn't even described, nor her dress, nor what she went away in. But, uh, the the the mother of Jesus was there, you'll see, at this wedding, and you know the story very well. Mm-hmm. It's the first of the signs. And the first sign, of course, is in the same series as the other signs. They form a pattern in the book. But if you take that first sign, which is predominantly about women, the mother of Jesus being there and so forth, mm, you will notice that quite apart from miracles, there are a number of other stories peculiar to John in which women are prominent. All ladies have noticed that, if not the gentlemen, you see, constantly preach on it in ladies' meetings. But anyway, there they are. There is, uh, the wedding with the mother of Jesus there, and then in chapter four, there's a Samaritan woman, and chapter eight, there's a woman taken in adultery, and then in chapters eleven and twelve, there's Mary and Martha at the death of her- their brother, and at the cross there is that piece that no one else has, Mary at the foot of the cross, and our Lord turning to Mary and saying, behold thy son, and to John, behold thy mother. And then there's the story of Mary Magdalene in the garden, and only John has this bit. Our Lord says to Mary, don't hold on to me, Mary, I've not yet ascended to my father and your father, to my God and your God. Six stories about women peculiar to John. They form a pattern, don't they? Oh, beautiful pattern. And the pattern is significant, you'll see, because the thing groups. There's the woman in, uh, uh, uh, well, let me spill the beans. The, the, the, uh, the, uh, theme running through the pattern is relationship, of course. What on earth are weddings if they're not the public formation of a new relationship, aren't they, whatho? And at that wedding, our Lord said to his mother, woman, what I've hid to? Oh, ah, yes, relationship. And the woman, uh, in Samaria, what was wrong with that dear lady? Well, among other things, she was living with a man who wasn't her husband. The relationship was not true. And the woman in chapter eight, well, you say obviously the relationship was very bad. She'd committed adultery, unfaithful to relationships. And Martha and Mary? Martha and Mary then at the death of their brother. And in the story of the cross, Martha and Ma- uh, Mary, the mother of the Lord, at the death of her son. And the word that was spoken indicated a new relationship, yeah? Woman, behold thy son, son, behold thy mother. He- she wasn't his physical mother, nor he her physical son. A new relation formed. And Mary Magdalene in the garden, and the word was about relationship, wasn't it? Go and tell my brothers, I ascend to my father and their father, to my father, your father, my father, your God and my God. Six stories about women peculiar to the Gospel of John, all about a theme, relationship. They form a pattern. They don't form the structure of the book. As you will see, they are very unevenly distributed throughout the book. The book itself is structured, and its basic structure on certain visits that our Lord Jesus made from Galilee up north to Jerusalem and back again. That is its structure, basic, geographical, and its purpose to visit the, uh, Jerusalem on the times of the festivals, to take part in the national worship and service of God. And those journeys, the first one occupies to chapter eleven onwards, or is it twelve, right through till our Lord gets back to Galilee at the end of chapter four. And when that's ended, chapter five begins with what do you suppose? Well, a journey to Jerusalem. And there he is down at Jerusalem in chapter five and back again in Galilee in chapter six. and that's that second journey finished. And chapter seven begins? With the journey to Jerusalem, of course. John is the story of about four journeys to Jerusalem and back again that our blessed Lord made. That is his basic structure. Now, within the structure, there are patterns. And as I say, one story, like the wedding of Cana of Galilee, it is not determinative of structure. It is a, but it is a member of two quite distinct patterns. It's the first member in the pattern of signs. It's the first member in the pattern of these stories about women. The Bible is like a magnificent tapestry, you know. I suppose you've studied tapestries, haven't you? Look at a feature here, and you look along that row, and you'll see a whole, oh, a pattern going through the tapestry that way. You start at the same point and look over there, ah, oh, you'll see it's part of a, a another pattern. These ladies are magnificently clever, aren't they, when they make tapestries, you see. So, if he won't mind my saying, so God is when he writes. God's word is simple. It's much more complicated than we sometimes think. It is inspired by the God who made the universe and made the atoms. Oh, it is magnificent glor- magnificently glorious. Where was I? Talking about Daniel, not John. And we talked about patterns, therefore, and I would give that as an example of what I mean. I don't know whether it helps you very much. Here's a pattern, Man and the Beast, to be taken seriously. Going through the book, and each member is to be taken and studied. You can study them as a group, and they have the same common element, but they have different messages. But they do not control structure. That said, we come back to this little, um, sheet that I gave out, and you'll see, uh, uh, uh, certain other little details that, to my mind, determine structure. The first five come to the end of the Babylonian Empire, do they not? To that great climax. And if you are studying literature, narrative, of course, you will naturally look at stories to where they start and where does the climax come. And sometimes there are minor climaxes, and then there are major climaxes, you'll see. And stories in the Bible are similar. And so when you start a theme like this, and there are many chapters, but the theme of the golden vessels begins and comes down to this climax with old Belshazzar drinking from them, and then the divine judgment on, on Belshazzar. It marks the end of the Babylonian Empire. This arrogant king, who took vessels that were designed for the service of God and committed the ultimate san- as, uh, uh, uh, uh, blasphemy and desecration, used vessels that were there for the sole glory of God and drank from them himself, putting his own pleasure as the ultimate thing for which he lived. That arrogant king, under God's judgment, spelt the end of Babylon. Oh, but if you look across the page to chapters ten and twelve, and what are they describing? Well, they'll tell you in so many words. They are describing when will the end come, and this time it is the end. Not just the end of Babylon, but the end of all Gentile rule. You'll have to distinguish carefully the terms used. There is when will the end come, you'll see, but then there's another phrase used, the time of the end. That means a special period at the end of human history called the time of the end, and Daniel will inquire how long that time of the end will last, and he's given the figures. And then the end comes, and how will it come? Well, as you know from your reading of chapter 11 of the book of Daniel, it will come when there shall stand up the willful king, that God-defying king, who exalts himself above all that is called God or is worshipped. That's when the end will come. And that will be the end. You see how chapter five, though it is a history, carries prophetic overtones, doesn't it? This is the end of Babylon. And Babylon met its end, according to Daniel, in this arrogant king who usurped the service due to God and brought it to himself. Ah, but he was but a pale foreshadowing of the willful king, who will be the last in the succession of Gentile powers, who will exalt himself above all that is called God, all that is worshipped. Yeah. Mention of him is made in two Thessalonians two, isn't it, according with, uh, Daniel's usage of the terms. So we're back to structure. Then in the second two little paragraphs on the sheet, I have suggested some, oh, here we come, thought flow. Some l- light motifs, as people would call them in literature, that run through these two sets of chapters. In the first five, I suggested that one of the light motifs is questions of value. Watch how that is got across. Chapter one, the golden vessels of divine service. Why gold? Because the Israelites had made them, making them of gold to express their evaluation of God. This was, God was their supreme value. These vessels, they weren't of tin, they were of gold, dedicated solely and sanctified to the service of God. Expressions of value. You'll see. The Gentile empires described in this series, not as wild beasts, but successions of valuable metals, as you'll see. Indicating, of course, that different governments were different kinds of government. None of them was of absolute value. They each had different strengths, and they each had different weaknesses. They were different forms of government, none of absolute value. You'll see. We need to notice that. So very often, generations think that their form of government is the ultimate. People have got it into their heads that democracy is the ultimate, as though it were an absolute value. Daniel's image is telling us that no form of government is of absolute value. Moreover, Daniel is telling us that, uh, forms of government come and they go. You don't have the same thing remaining. And then Daniel's in chapter two is telling you a very interesting thing. Well, governments change, do they? Yes, but Marx was quite wrong. He said that it was the very change that would bring in the utopia. By the law of thesis and, uh, counter thesis and then synthesis. That the very process of change in history was an inevitable, irresistible law of history that would come from your peasantry or your serfdom through eventually democracy and then to the rule of the party and then to complete communism, and that would be the utopia come. It would be the irresistible laws of change in history that would bring in the utopia, and Daniel two was already saying, no, it won't, Marx. You'll get the change, but the change itself won't bring in the utopia. The whole lot will have to be destroyed, and it isn't difficult to see who was right, Daniel two or Marx. We'll see. Yeah, values then, and change, uh, you'll see. I might add in passing that chapter three tells us how Nebuchadnezzar tried to stop the change and exalt his government to an absolute value. He made an image and called upon men to worship it, to give to his system of government that loyalty that should only be given to God himself. And many a totalitarian regime has tried to do that, to exalt its form of government to an absolute value that therefore requires our absolute devotion, and the state must be worshipped as the final absolute value. This is serious politics, and it's happened. Thousands of your fellow brethren and sisters in Eastern Europe have died for it. Thousands of our fellow Christians under the Roman Empire died for the same thing. In order to make the Roman Empire stable after periods of civil war and oceans of bloodshed, they invented the notion of the worship of the emperor to bring stability to the government. They didn't mind what other gods you, you worship, but you had to be prepared to worship the state in the form of the emperor, and it brought about peace throughout his multi-ethnic empire. Nebuchadnezzar was after the same thing, to stop change, and thus to invest form of his form of government with absolute value. And the three Jewish men said, not on your life. Prepared to obey you all we can, but, uh, your government is not the absolute value in the, in the universe. God is. And there is a devotion that must be given to God alone. If that upsets your state, uh, Nebuchadnezzar and your, your political system, well, so it'll have to. Value then. It's rather a different issue at stake, isn't it, from the one we were talking about in chapter six? Value. And of course, uh, four and five are obviously concerned with values. And when the hand came out to write upon the wall, to issue God's evaluation of Master Belshazzar, it wrote a curious thing, uh, Mina Mina shekel yufasin. Belshazzar couldn't read it. Why he couldn't is a mystery, because these words would have been stamped on the bits of metal, gold and whatnot that were their equivalent of coinage. They didn't have coinage at the time. They we- weighed out valuable metal, and the metal was stamped with weights, which then came to denote the value of the piece. Mena, Mena, shekel yufasin, a mina, a mina, a a shekel and two halves of a shekel. And that was written on the wall. You say, what on earth was that about? Why couldn't he read it? Because, well, what would you think if you got home tonight and sat down your wearied limbs upon your sofa, and a hand came out and wrote upon the wall, dollars and cents, pounds and shillings, marks and pfennigs, you see. What on earth would you make of it? So what is money? Is this God talking to me? Does God talk about money? What on earth would God write up stock exchange figures on my wall for? Money. Wait a minute, yeah. What is money? Is money value? No. Money is our reckoning of value. Give a man, give a child a dollar and he'll buy the biggest ice cream he can set eyes on. Give a businessman a dollar and he'll put it with two thousand others and buy a golf club. Depends on your values, doesn't it? Is there an ultimate value? What's man himself worth? And where does man's value derive from? Oh, what stories they are. Belshazzar had come to his own evaluation. He was the chief value in the universe and God's vessels. God could go hang. The chief thing to live for, the chief value in life, was Belshazzar himself and his pleasure. Last did Belshazzar come to his estimate of human values. And when he made his decision, God came out and wrote God's valuation, and the scales were set. That's how you counted money in those days, by weighing it. And God weighed Belshazzar. And without God, what is a human being worth? In my, when I was a youth, he was worth three and sixpence pence in English money in the chemicals that composed him, which wasn't much, still isn't much, even in dollars. Without God, values? I suggest to you that the first five deal, therefore, with values. And the second five? Questions of law and truth and time. If you care to take the notes home, and you have five minutes to look at them, you might consider what I could possibly mean by those, um, suggestions, and trace them through. They are the leitmotifs going through, as I suggest, the second five paragraphs as well as the first. So that the second five do not just repeat the motifs of the first lot, but are concerned with rather different things, both being necessary. So, let's cease there, and God willing, come back tomorrow. We shall spend a few moments on Daniel tomorrow, and if you are boiling over with questions that you want to ask, then will be the time to boil over, and when you have finished dealing with your questions and things, then we shall begin to talk about the revelation. It will be mostly in the form of humble observations and leaving you with a set of notes upon which you may care to work yourself in the days to come. Thank you very much, and have a good lunch.