A LARGE PLACE
[p. 282] A LARGE PLACE
2 Corinthians 1: 21, 22; 2 Corinthians 3: 1 - 18
JT We were observing how the apostle Paul was on a higher spiritual level and in easier spiritual circumstances in writing this letter than he was in writing the first. The Lord is pleased to give us more, and to lead us on to a “large place”, Psalm 118: 5. When the activities of the flesh are felt they are necessarily a limitation, but the apostle intimates later that his heart was expanded because of the effect of the first letter on the saints at Corinth; in that letter he had spoken of how they were called into the fellowship of the Son of God, of the One who is now on high; so he is now on a higher plane. The way in which Paul had ministered Christ amongst them shows that it was not an unattractive state of things that he presented to them in the preaching, but finality in the Person of the Son of God who “did not become yea and nay, but yea is in him. For whatever promises of God there are, in him is the yea, and in him the amen”. And so, after that, he speaks about God working on the line of establishment. He establishes us with you, and He has anointed us, and sealed us, and given us the earnest of the Spirit. So that whilst in our meetings there has been a tendency to tear down things and stir things up so that we might be cleansed and adjusted by constant ministry amongst us, the Lord may help us now on the line of positive establishment and building up. What He loves to do is to establish us together. The apostle says, “he that establishes us with you in Christ, and has anointed us, is God, who also has sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts”.
JB [p. 283] He does not speak of the earnest of the Spirit in the first epistle at all, but now he is free to go on to what the Spirit is the earnest of.
JT Yes, you get that in chapter 5 which we may touch on later; it is of the great works of God.
JB In the beginning of the first epistle he speaks of “things which eye has not seen, and ear not heard”, but he does not develop that in the first epistle.
JT I think in this chapter there is a personal touch of God in the particular interest He has in us. So that God is turning round and saying plainly now that He wants to come in and establish Himself with us. He has anointed us and given us the earnest of the Spirit without saying what the earnest is of. He has just given It in that way. Great as the Spirit is, He is the Earnest.
Rem When Joseph spoke to his brethren in the beginning was it not with the intention that a state should be arrived at in which he could enjoy what was his part?
JT That just fits in here. Joseph’s circumstances, under which he appears in administration, apply somewhat to the present time, a universal famine. The famine in Egypt in Abraham’s time was restricted; it was in the land. In Joseph’s time, it was world-wide. The great end in view was to bring the people of God into evidence, to bring them out in relation to Joseph, in testimony to Christ. I think that is what is going on. The Lord is using the great stress of these days to bring His people into evidence, and to bring them into relation with the true Joseph. But there had to be very hard dealings with them before they came into happy, easy, relations with Joseph.
Rem What would you say as to the hard dealings just now?
JT Everywhere you go you see brethren that are in hard circumstances, but there is a lot behind it.
[p. 284] We shall see, and we are seeing, the results. What comes out in that great famine is that the people of God begin to acknowledge smallness. The first expression of the sons of Jacob was for corn. There was no idea of limitation of quantity, but just to get corn. Light was with Jacob as to where the food was; on the second visit he directs his sons to buy a little; “Buy us a little food”. That, I think, is significant. It is the principle of reduction. You have seen great prosperity abounding in the world in recent years; money came in easily. We swell out as we get the money. Of course the more we do it, the worse we are inwardly, the smaller we are inwardly. The Lord does not like that. Prosperity of that kind is only hindering the work. It is a question whether we can say, like Jacob, “Go again, buy us a little food”; I will use a smaller house; I will use a smaller motor car. I am becoming more and more like the Lord as I become reduced, and I believe that the second letter brings out the reduction in which Paul himself was reduced; but his heart was expanded. They were helped; let your heart expand itself. Let it be as if notice was given to me to let my heart expand itself.
Rem So from their hearts they learned, and they got reduced; and from God’s side much was revealed.
HG Does he show them, in his coming to Corinth, that there was not anything at all of the flesh? I suppose there was yea and nay in the covenant made with Israel.
JT I suppose so. The apostle was perfectly simple about his movements. He was not like a man that would say, ‘I will dine with you’, and then cancel the appointment. I think he was perfectly transparent; he has the simplicity of Christ.
HG He moved on the high level of the Son of God in that way. There was nothing fleshly about him. He moved with strict precision as regarding [p. 285] Christ.
JT I thought that. He had called attention to what was needful for ministry in chapters 12, 13 and 14 of the first letter. He brings out what the Spirit was doing but he calls on the vessels themselves that they should be those through whom the Spirit would minister. God makes a great deal of the activity of the Spirit and also of the vessels through whom He would minister. I suppose Paul brings that out in this letter as to himself; how he was a competent minister in keeping with his ministry.
HG What was the point in preaching the Son of God, Jesus Christ? Was it that God has no other thought for man? And would Paul preach with that in view, bringing in a real pattern in the Son of God?
JT I thought so. There was a three-fold preaching, too. I suppose you might have listened to Paul there, and listened to Silvanus and Timotheus. There was a perfect likeness in their teaching but each preached from his own point of view.
JB Does he not allude to the positive character of the preaching, the Son of God?
JT He does. The three-fold testimony makes it complete. It was not only his but that of the other two as well. I think it is very beautiful how he associates the other two with him because when he came down he was pressed on account of the word.
HG Does Jesus Christ present the order of the man, and the Son of God the relationship?
JT I thought so.
HG He was dealing much with the other order of man in the first epistle.
JT He now would bring in that order. The first epistle presented Jesus Christ as the foundation to be built on. The apostle is now freer to bring in the new scene. How delightful to his heart it must have been to talk of the Son of God, that he might announce Him among the nations as glad tidings! How delightful it would have been to listen to one of Paul’s [p. 286] addresses on the Son of God! The title, ‘the Son of God’, is more distinctive but ‘His Son’ is in relation to God. Affection enters more into that.
HG Peculiar intimacy.
JT Yes. The Son of God would stand out in the history of these three brothers, Paul, Silvanus and Timotheus. It was designed that this great testimony should be set out in Corinth in a delivering sort of way. The man in Macedonia said, “Pass over into Macedonia and help us”. That was not the orderly Greek. The orderly Greek was alluded to in Romans 2 “Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man”. That man was strong at Corinth, and I suppose that this threefold testimony would serve to displace him from the hearts of the saints, the Lord’s people. They had that man, the orderly Greek idea, there, but not the divine idea. The Greek idea would be to harden. One has said that the harder the stone is, the finer the polish; in a man that has to be displaced.
LES Would the ministry of the new covenant be that He is seeking the hearts? Would that be in view in the preaching of the Son of God? The thought of affection is there.
JT The third chapter is the divine way of bringing us to the Son of God; it is not the Greek educational idea of polish, the harder the stone the better the polish. But it is by taking away the heart of stone and giving us the heart of flesh, something that is impressionable, something that He can present His Son to. It is to bring all into conformity to the image of His Son, by presenting Him in powerful ministry to us; gift is for us. It is powerful forceful ministry, like the four mighty winds blowing in Ezekiel. I think that the three-fold service here is God’s thought for us, bringing it in in the power of gifts, by preaching. That is the point, the Son of God that was preached by me. Preaching is not merely saying things. Anyone can get up and give [p. 287] the doctrine of the gospel but that is not preaching. Preaching is gift; it has power behind it, the force of the thing in it. As soon as you see this, you say how good God was to force the power of that Man on my soul! You may have the most powerful preaching and yet it cannot affect a heart of stone, so God gives us a new heart of flesh and takes away the heart of stone. It is an impressionable idea in chapter 3. It is remarkable how in such a simple way the idea of God appears in the gospel address that was preached after the Holy Spirit came down. Peter stood up with the eleven. It was Peter and he said, “Give heed to my words”. He has authority behind it; he does not say, ‘Listen to God’s word’. Surely listen to God’s word, but Peter says, “Give heed to my words”. Here is a man that has authority; he has got something. The others were saying things but there were no converts until Peter preached.
WB Are you connecting gift with power?
JT I am connecting power with gift. It is important to notice that there are very few preachers in Scripture. Not that you would discourage anyone from getting up and speaking about the Lord, because the Lord can use what you say. But we do not hear of any converts until Peter preached.
Rem The power of God pervades in the hearts of those that hear.
JT You have to reckon on that, but here you are dealing with Peter.
WB There are very few that can preach. How about the one that feels that he has no power and yet was asked to preach?
JT Why was he asked to preach? Who asked him to preach? In our meetings they go around and ask them to preach. Of course the latent gift has to have an opportunity, but if it is latent, let it show itself. Philip is an illustration. Nothing is said about gift in him but he went down to Samaria and preached [p. 288] the Christ. It is for you to do. You qualify yourself. Do not say, ‘I do not get an opportunity’. It is for you to make it. Nothing is said about Philip being sent to Samaria, he went. I think it is set down in that very remarkable way to show that it applies to all brethren. If you have a gift it is for you to show it.
Rem “It is woe to me if I should not announce the glad tidings”, 1 Corinthians 9: 16.
JT Paul was sent there, and administration was given to him. Philip was most distinguished for service. First he preached in Samaria, and he works miracles there. He goes down to Gaza to a desert place. It is a providential occurrence and as he is in the desert a lone man comes along. The Holy Spirit spoke to him as if to honour him, because he moved in the light given to him. Now the Holy Spirit says, “Approach and join this chariot”. How is he going to approach? I have to learn to approach people. He ran and approached the chariot. There was a most wonderful result. After he had finished that work, and as they came out of the water, he was caught up by the Holy Spirit. He raptured him.
Rem “It pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe”. It is foolish to the natural man.
JB Paul instructed Timothy to do the work of an evangelist (2 Timothy 4: 5). Do you not think that was gift in that way? Was he not engaged in carrying out the instructions in the end of Mark’s gospel in regard to preaching the gospel to every creature?
JT Mark begins with the Son of God. In chapter 3 of this epistle we see that there has been a change of heart. If there is a change from a stony heart to a heart of flesh, the most powerful preaching must have an effect. The heart of flesh was there. It is a question of materials and I think there is a touch in this second epistle as if Paul almost brought [p. 289] in the materials himself. When Moses went up the second time into the mount (Exodus 34: 1), Jehovah says to him, “Hew for thyself two tables of stone”, and I was thinking that there was a little allusion to that in regard to Paul. There was a mighty work in Corinth. Although it was almost obliterated, still it survived. God wrote on the tables of Moses and He wrote on the fleshy tables of the hearts of the Corinthians.
HG I was struck with Mark 1: 17 where the Lord says, “I will make you to become fishers of men”. Simon seems to be the outstanding man whilst Andrew was to work more unseen.
JT John the evangelist brings out Andrew more clearly. He gives him an excellent start. The next time you find him he is talking to a little boy about five loaves and two fishes. John 6 is a sort of test, and the Lord would see if the twelve would get help. He says to Philip, ‘How should we feed all these, Philip?’ Philip was not getting any help. I mean that is the way the thing fits into your mind in a meeting like this. Are the brothers getting any help? The Lord knew what He was going to do, but it was a question of bringing out Philip, and Philip fails entirely. He is on a commercial line: ‘two hundred pennyworth of bread’. It is just a matter of how much you can get for two hundred pence. Then Andrew says, ‘There is a little boy here’. There was a little boy but Philip did not see him. It is to a man’s credit if he knows a man who can preach well; he is a little boy but he has got something. Get your eye on somebody that has something. That is all the company heard about him. Andrew fails too, but he is a little better than Philip. The next time you find them both together is in chapter 12. The Greeks had come to see the Lord Jesus. It is said that they desired to see Him. Philip and Andrew both come and tell the Lord about the Greeks. The Son of man [p. 290] and not the Greeks should be glorified. John’s gospel brings out Andrew and you see the man just as he is.
HG Simon got the touch from Christ. Andrew was smaller but did most at the first.
JT I think John shows us that he has ideas; he has a great idea of bringing out personages. He mentions John the baptist. He shows Andrew up well at the beginning. He found Simon, and Philip found Nathanael. Many of us start well but we do not show up so well afterwards. The Scriptures are not merely historical, but they are moral in their application. Scripture is supposed to have a special power in your midst. I think that this chapter 3 is a kind of challenge as to the ministry that Paul had but which he could not write on them. One is challenged as to one’s work. The writing is by the Spirit of the living God.
Rem It is a good thing that we have directions as to how the hewing should be done.
JT Moses would have to test his memory as to how the hewing should be done. It is a great tribute to his memory. He had seen the stones broken, the tables shattered. He had to remember and the Holy Spirit helps us to remember. All accuracy lies in the Spirit. So Moses had to hew out two stones and they had to be like the first. What a tribute to Moses it is that he was able to do this!
HG How do you understand Paul making the corrections so emphatic in the first epistle?
JT I think there was great jubilance of soul in the report of Titus that he gives here. “Yea, what clearing of yourselves, yea, what indignation, yea, what fear!” God can do nothing with us without judgment. So Moses goes up with these two tables, and God comes down to meet him and proclaims the name of Jehovah, and then He makes another covenant, but it is not a literal covenant; it is a covenant in which the word ‘tenor’ is used. We [p. 291] have the first covenant in chapters 20 to 23, but in the second in chapter 34, we have “After the tenor of these words have I made a covenant with thee and with Israel”. What glory shone up there! He caused His glory to pass before Moses. He wrote on the tables; He did the writing.
Rem It is very encouraging that when we are ready, God will write.
JT Yes. We are challenged whether we have anything for God to write on. Writing material is a great thought in Scripture.
WB That is a very great exercise. Your thought is that Paul’s preaching provides material, just as Moses’ hewing out the stones provided material for God to write on.
JT Yes. But as we were saying, these things are not historical. They are incidents to be thought over for our instruction, for there is always a moral bearing in Scripture. What does it mean today? “And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the nations on the principle of faith, announced beforehand the glad tidings to Abraham”, Galatians 3: 8. When you look at that chapter you wonder what you have that God can write on. To the overcomer in Philadelphia He said, “Him will I make a pillar in the temple of my God ... and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven, ... and my new name”. It is wonderful material.
Rem If you are seeking to produce material in others you would first see that you have it in yourself.
JT Yes. The minister is a feeling kind of man, a tender-hearted man. The Lord was like that.
JB Moses comes into the shining and he grows wonderfully.
JT Yes. You get the shining; you get the glory. The apostle is minimising it here, but he [p. 292] acknowledges that there is a glory in the old covenant. It was a question of comparison.
I have been struck lately with the wideness of the work of God; the wide stretch from the Pacific Coast, and China, and New Zealand and Australia, worldwide. You might say there has been writing under God’s work. Paul had fully preached the gospel of Christ, a wonderful complete work, the full preaching of the gospel of Christ.
LES Do you think the veil remains on many hearts today morally speaking?
JT Do you mean of the Jews?
LES No, I mean generally.
JT Oh, I am sure. That is, you hope that God is turning to account this time to soften our hearts to His own impressions by the Spirit of the living God. It is a rare thing that Paul brings in the living God; it really belongs to Peter, for it is a Jewish touch.
H G. The city is called that: “The city of the living God”.
JT Paul would have used that, too. The idea seems to have been connected with ministry among the Jews where they had to do with dead things.
JB What has been written by the Spirit of the living God?
JT Well, it is the epistle of Christ. It is what Christ is.
JB And as that is written, it comes out in that character.
JT He says, “Ye are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read of all men, being manifested to be Christ’s epistle ministered by us, written, not with ink, but the Spirit of the living God; not on stone tables, but on fleshy tables of the heart”. He applies all that to them. The first thing is the place they had in Paul’s heart. If I want to speak about the impressionability of the place the saints should [p. 293] be in, the test would be the place they have in my heart.
HG I was wondering if Christ was the Writer in our hearts.
JT Yes, I think so, with the Spirit of the living God. Christ has to do with it, too. He is the Mediator of the new covenant. Moses was given the hewing of the tables, and Paul was brought in here as a kind of lubricant in the production of the material, so that he says, “Ye are our letter, written in our hearts”. Now that is a very practical way of presenting it. What are you talking about? You are talking about writing and material. ‘Well’, he says, ‘did you ever hear me speak about the Corinthians?’ ‘Yes’. ‘What did you hear me say about them?’ ‘Well, you always spoke well of them’. ‘That is what I mean; the Corinthians are always on my heart; I love them. They are my work under God’. So what does that mean for us? It means that I want to love the brethren; I should speak well of them. The apostle boasted about the Corinthians; he was afraid that they might belie his boasting. He had a great love for them, for they were his work after all. The word of God in his soul gave him a great range. The Corinthians were Christ’s epistle written by the grace of the living God. But he makes it very simple and practical: “Ye are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read of all men”. Wherever he went he spoke about them. They were not his in the sense of a party, but in regard of the workmanship of God. But he could still bring them out and speak well of them because he loved them.
JB He would recognise what was of Christ written there.
JT Yes, and I think he can widen out now to speak about this great matter, the Spirit of the living God. Then he goes on to say more in regard of the Spirit, which brings in what we are speaking of;
[p. 294] that would be the Lord, the Lord is that Spirit. He goes on from the idea of Christ to that of the Lord. This great operation requires that authority of the Lord in my soul; it is needful to make the new covenant effective. The Lord is the Spirit Itself; without Him it would be a dead letter.
JB If you have the Spirit of the new covenant, you have the substance.
JT Yes. The Lord being the Spirit alludes to the way it brings the love of God into our souls. He does that for each one of us.
WB Say a little on the last verse before we close.
JT “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty”. There is authority in it, but it is more like the king in Jeshurun. He does not have to tell anyone that He is king; it is more that He reigns in the affections now. He is doing the most blessed work for us. He could not do anything greater than bring the love of God in and do it directly, and He acquires a place in the hearts of the brethren; He was king in Jeshurun. One has often found it in meetings like this where the Lord is in His place; the brethren loosen up and they talk freely about the things of God. He brings in again the link between them and Him: “But we all, looking on the glory of the Lord, with unveiled face, are transformed according to the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Lord the Spirit”. It is like the whole human race looking at the sun. It is the only sun, but millions and millions of people can look at it at the same time.
JB Would this be the richness of what we had in the first chapter? “Now he that establishes us with you in Christ, and has anointed us, is God”.
JT Here it is, “we all”. There is a similar effect on all. It is one of the formative features that we get as we behold the glory; we are changed to the same image. We cannot say where the matter ends, or if it does end; it is from glory to glory. The [p. 295] means are there by which we are transformed, formed and beholding. It is the action of Christ as well, “even as by the Lord the Spirit”; His action goes on. I think the word “Spirit” has to be carefully noted here; it is intelligible as He is a divine Person. We are in the presence of very great and wonderful things. The word translated ‘changed’ is the same as is used in regard to the Lord Himself on the mount of transfiguration (Matthew 17: 2). “He was transfigured before them”. It is a word which means a complete change. The same image affects all of us the same in a remarkable way.
HG Paul was a wonderful expression of Christ in this wonderful chapter.
JT Yes, he is indeed. I wish the brethren could get in line with it in regard to the light. It is the Spirit; when the Lord is the Spirit of the meeting, it is a spirit of dominance, but it is a spirit of liberty at the same time. We have all been made to drink into one Spirit. The whole idea is the one Spirit. The Lord being the Spirit is a very remarkable thing. As we are getting to the Lord, He Himself is bringing the thoughts of God into our souls, and one is the sense of dominance. He is dominating, but there is liberty, and there is formation going on.
HG Is the Lord the essence of the thing?
JT Yes. The idea is dominance.