ETERNITY TO ETERNITY (4)
ETERNITY TO ETERNITY (4)
AMH Would you mind saying how far the last verse of chapter 3 goes? “Unto all generations of the age of ages”.
JT I have taken it to be in keeping with similar expressions in the epistle, such as “eternal purpose”. Then you have in chapter 3:9, “throughout the ages”, referring to what is past; then again, the “purpose of the ages” (verse 11). I regard the verse you mention as meaning eternity in the future.
AMH I was wondering whether it would be the result of the dip of which you have spoken. God is now bringing into eternity what is suitable to eternity.
JT That is what I thought; He will have something now in the eternity to come, that He did not have in the past. The idea would correspond with Psalm 106:48 to which allusion has been made, which David included in his psalm as the ark was brought to Zion: “Blessed be Jehovah the God of Israel, from eternity to eternity!” It seems as if the apostle is in keeping with that in this remark. It is a beautiful note of worship, because it rises to the full height of what is presented. The expression in chapter 1, “the administration of the fulness of times”, is more limited and describes the culmination in the coming age of the various testimonies rendered, but this verse, being the outburst of his feelings in worship, goes to the full length of the thought of God. It is what accrues to Him in the assembly in eternity.
HD'AC The “administration of the fulness of times” refers to the millennial period, does it not?
JT Yes, I thought so. The phrase translated “all generations of the age of ages” in chapter 3:21 implies [p. 251] eternity. Our minds can hardly go any further than what is conveyed in that expression.
FHB The expression used here is the strongest for eternity.
JT When you have ‘times’, you are within the sphere of testimony. Times and seasons are governed by the heavenly bodies, but “eternity to eternity” is descriptive of God Himself, and implies that which is beyond a provisional condition of things in the heavens and earth. So that being “filled even to all the fulness of God” would suggest what is in view.
JJ Would it be like 1 Corinthians 15:28: “Then the Son also himself shall be placed in subjection to him who put all things in subjection to him, that God may be all in all”?
JT That is the line of thought. The fulness of God is the end here; we are to be filled to all the fulness of God. We are in fixedness, not lost in infinitude. We are in infinitude, but fixed in it intelligently, as I may say. “The fulness of God” refers to what has shone out in Christ.
AMH What would be the force of “generations” in that verse; “unto all generations”?
JT I suppose it is what springs from God. The idea of generation is different from creation. I think it brings in the divine parentage of every family in the heavens and the earth. The whole epistle has God in view as the source of all.
GWW Why does it say, “age of ages”?
JT I do not understand it very much. It is an intensive thought conveying eternity.
HH The “Father ... of whom every family ... is named” would correspond with what you have said about generation.
JT I think so. The two ideas of generation and creation run together, but generation, involves the [p. 252] nature of God.
FHB Is that more connected with John’s writings?
JT I think it is.
FHB And “new creation” more connected with Paul.
JT Well, of course John has the new creation and Paul speaks of the family, but I think that generation is more John’s line. In his first chapter we have it: “who have been born, not of blood, nor of flesh’s will, nor of man’s will, but of God” (verse 13). It brings us into correspondence with Christ as Son.
Ques Could you help us on the thought of families? Chapter 3 speaks of “every family” in the heavens and on the earth. Which families would come to your mind in thinking of that?
JT I have no doubt that families are formed according to testimonies rendered. Besides angels and the church there will be families in heaven. There will also be families on the earth out of Israel and the nations. You have “all generations”. They are generations that spring from God. It is really a higher thought, and brings us more into relation with Christ, than the idea of creation. He is the beginning of the creation, but no part of it, but the idea of generation is attached to Christ; He is the Son of God, and the Son of David.
AMH The assembly is really the central body and conveys all the thoughts of God.
PL Would you connect the tabernacle of God in the eternal state as with men, with the different families?
JT The word ‘men’ would cover them all, though I suppose angels might come in. The tabernacle is distinct of course. It is a very wonderful thought that the apostle should bring it in in a note of worship. He is so absorbed by the depths of the things of which he is speaking, that he breaks out into this wonderful note as to what God would have “in the assembly in Christ Jesus unto all generations of the age of ages”. There can be no doubt that, whilst chapter 3 is parenthetical, it is to effect what [p. 253] we have here in chapter 4, namely, the unity that is befitting to us, the “unity of the Spirit” and the “unity of the faith”. The Lord may help us under those two heads, and then the self-action in the upbuilding of the body.
ASL Is it not one of those passages where the apostle is so overpowered with the infinite greatness of what he is expressing, that he, as it were, coins phrases and terms? As, for instance, not content to say the “least of all saints” he says, “less than the least”. It is that kind of thing. So, “unto all generations of the age of ages” is surely his way of giving some idea of eternity.
JT The epistle is full of intensified expressions. We want to go the whole way, which is the principle of Ephesians; unity here is on the same principle. It is based on the full revelation of God, the three Persons being included in verses 4 and 6.
ASL This morning there was a word on the “prisoner of Christ Jesus”.
JT In chapter 3 it is the “prisoner of Christ Jesus”, but here it is “in the Lord”. The first is that Christ had imprisoned him; in the second it is perfectly evident he is not a felon; it was apparent to all that his bonds were “in Christ”, (Philippians 1:13). Here, he is “prisoner in the Lord”.
FHB In connection with the unity of the Spirit, are there not three circles?
JT “One body and one Spirit, as ye have been also called in one hope of your calling”; “one Lord, one faith, one baptism”; “one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in us all”. So that the unity is really connected with the three Persons of the Godhead, as already said.
ASL Then, would “with all lowliness and meekness, with long-suffering” be something of the character of Peter’s shadow and the virtue from Paul, of which you were speaking?
JT Just so. The “prisoner in the Lord” is enjoining this. “I ... exhort you therefore to walk worthy of the calling wherewith ye have been called, with all lowliness and meekness, with long-suffering, bearing with one another in love; using diligence to keep the unity of the Spirit in the uniting bond of peace”.
ASL That would be the character of those in whom the unity is seen.
JT It involves smallness, in keeping with the manner of divine revelation; it is in smallness here. Otherwise we shall have a lot of extraneous matter in the unity. If it be a unity in which anything of the flesh has any place, there will be extraneous matter that God will have to grind out through discipline. Here we are instructed as to how to avoid that — “with all lowliness and meekness”.
ASL These are the traits of the “new man” he speaks of later.
JT They would be, only that the new man is more public, more for testimony. This has to do with our relations with one another; “bearing with one another in love”.
JJ Why is it called the “unity of the Spirit”?
JT It is the full thought, in keeping with this epistle. There is nothing less than that in the mind of God. It means that we are linked up in spiritual affection. The gold taches of the tabernacle typify this unity; we are linked up definitely in the unity of the Spirit. It is positive.
ASL We have to use diligence to keep that.
JT It was already there and the Ephesians were to keep it in the way prescribed here.
ASL Then “there is one body” is a definite statement; no case of endeavouring to set up another.
JT The three-fold unity that follows is brought in as affording an intelligent basis for the end to which we are moving. God has come down as we see. Revelation [p. 255] involves the unity of the Godhead, the Father, the Son and the Spirit, so that the basis is no less than that. That is what the epistle teaches. It is to maintain us in the height of the revelation of God, this entering into our relations with one another. So the platform is very great and grand, and each one, however obscure, is to move in that light. He sees that the revelation of God involves unity in outward smallness. The Lord Jesus came here in that manner.
ASL What is the idea of the unity of the Spirit?
JT As we were saying, it is a question of the brethren being formed in spiritual affections, so that there are practical links with one another. The “unity of the faith” is a matter of our thinking the same thing and speaking the same thing, holding in our souls the truth unitedly; but the “unity of the Spirit” refers to what the Spirit promotes, including, as we have been saying, what is suggested by the lower organs of man as well as the intelligence, for faith necessarily has to do with the intelligence — what I believe. But the unity of the Spirit goes beyond that, and involves the work of the Holy Spirit in the whole man, so that there are affections in which we are linked together. We have all been “given to drink of one Spirit”, (1 Corinthians 12:13).
HH Do you think Psalm 132 and Psalm 133 correspond in some respects with chapters 3 and 4? Christ dwelling in the heart by faith corresponding with the thought of the ark coming into its resting place, and then the result in the unity seen in this chapter.
JT I think that is right; the symbols of unity in Psalm 133 allude to the Spirit.
HH There is the suggestion of a past history in relation to the matter. The tribes had not been moving together in unity.
JT In his great apprehension of it, David brought the ark to Zion. The time it was at Kirjath-jearim “was long”, it says, “for it was twenty years”, (1 Samuel 7:2).
[p. 256] That, I apprehend, was from the time that it was taken, until Samuel’s ministry began. The people lamented after Jehovah and this was morally giving the ark its place. David’s literal restoration of the ark was the culmination of that movement. The first feature of the restoration was seen when the people of Israel poured out water before the Lord (1 Samuel 7:6) which was a remarkable expression of self-abnegation, the confession of what we are. The pouring out water here is not as the wise woman of Tekoah said, “We ... are as water spilt on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again”. Samuel does not say that of the people under his ministry. They poured water out before the Lord, and that is another matter. What is impossible with man is possible with God; the water poured out on the ground before the Lord, can be gathered up again figuratively speaking. And then Samuel offers a sucking lamb, “a whole burnt-offering” which presents a whole idea. I think this chapter (1 Samuel 7) would promote that, but beginning with that abject state in the soul that God can recognise. David’s movement follows morally, and so the ark was brought to Zion. There you have the idea of a centre of unity; so that when David had to flee from Jerusalem on account of Absalom, going up the hill of Olivet, Zadok and the levites with him brought the ark, as if the centre could be transferred. But we cannot transfer the centre of unity, any more than we can transfer the centre of gravity. God has set it up Himself and it is set up for ever; it is in Zion, so the ark remains there. David said, “Carry back the ark of God into the city”; he was not going to make another centre. There is a danger of that, thinking we can transfer the centre of unity, but you cannot do that; it would spoil the whole moral system if it could be done by man, but it cannot. God has set it up, and everything revolves around the centre. “I, if I be lifted up out of the earth, will draw all to me”, He says, (John 12:32). The ark was only a symbol.
[p. 257] but rightly understood it was the glory. That is to say, it was God come in, in the lowliest circumstances. It was His glory and it was His power, so that we need not be afraid of smallness according to God. The glory and power of God were bound up with the ark. Whenever it moved in the wilderness the enemies were scattered. When David brought it to Zion it was installed according to divine purpose; it had reached its rest typically.
WRP Bringing the ark into the camp was making a new centre, and then David’s action was the answer to that in faith.
JT Quite; he leaves it in its proper place, and, in fleeing before Absalom, said, “If I shall find favour in the eyes of Jehovah, he will bring me again, and shew me it, and its habitation”, (2 Samuel 15:25). So that we need not be afraid of smallness; it is God’s way in testimony. Largeness according to God belongs to the past eternity, and the coming one will also be large. We shall be fixed in it there, according to chapter 3, but the point now is smallness. Smallness according to God means invulnerability; nothing can stand before it. So David says, “Carry back the ark of God into the city”, and there it was during Absalom’s time. It meant the overthrow of Absalom, because along with the ark there was a system set up by David in secrecy within the city, that meant the overthrow of Absalom’s system. Thus David came back to the ark and its habitation. Hence Psalm 133 rightly follows Psalm 132. In Psalm 132:4 - 6, the afflictions of David are spoken of and how he had heard of the ark and found it. “We heard of it at Ephratah”, he says, and “we found it in the fields of the wood”. Then, “I will not give sleep to mine eyes, slumber to mine eyelids, until I find out a place for Jehovah, habitations for the Mighty One of Jacob”. You feel that unity in that connection is fixed, that we are moving in a unity that will never be [p. 258] broken up.
MWB You spoke just now of a secret system in connection with the ark which involved the overthrow of Absalom. Would that apply to the unity of the Spirit? Is that a system that implies the overthrow of the whole world’s system?
JT I think so. There were old and young brothers left behind in Jerusalem (see 2 Samuel 15), and if there had not been the unity of the Spirit, they would have been discerned. It was not the time to say much because talkativeness would have exposed them and what they were set for. It was a question of the unity of the Spirit, old brothers and young brothers being there; and then a little maid is brought into it, and then a well, and corn placed over the well’s mouth by a woman to hide the messengers. All these things are typical of the unity of the Spirit. It was a very obscure thing, but it meant the overthrow of Absalom’s system, and the return of David to the ark and its habitation.
MWB What relation has the walking worthy of the calling with that? We are to “walk worthy of the calling wherewith ye have been called, with all lowliness and meekness”. Does that refer back to the end of chapter 2 or the beginning of chapter 1?
JT I should include all that is said about us in chapters 1 and 2. Whenever you have anything in Ephesians, you have the fulness of it. It is not being called into the fellowship of God’s Son, as in Corinthians, which involves being called out of the world, as does the calling referred to in 1 Corinthians 1:26; so, too, called “out of darkness” in 1 Peter 2:9. Here in Ephesians it is the greatness of the calling in its full and positive character.
JJ It is said of brethren dwelling together in unity that it is “Like the precious oil upon the head, that ran down upon the beard, upon Aaron’s beard, that ran down to the hem of his garments”, (Psalm 133:2). What is the idea of running down?
JT I have no doubt you begin with the idea of headship,
[p. 259] the head of Aaron, and then the beard would be his appearance. That is, it brings in the Person of the Lord in His priestly position. Then you have the “dew of Hermon”, the link between heaven and earth. The ointment flowing down involves the headship of Christ, and the beard the appearance, and the skirts of His garments would be the saints all linked up with Him.
Ques Is the unity essential to eternal life, for it says, “There the Lord commanded the blessing, even life for evermore”?
JT It is in Psalm 133, but we are on higher ground here in Ephesians. We are not dealing in this chapter with eternal life, but with the church and the unity that is proper to it, so that we reach what might be termed a self-acting feature; the body acts of itself.
GWW Are we to learn anything in the incident of the ark being mentioned at the moment of Jonathan’s victory over the Philistines? It is said, “The ark of God was at that time with the children of Israel”, (1 Samuel 14:18). I was thinking of what you said as to smallness and the victory. Things had got to a very low level at that time, but Jonathan in the faith of his soul was in the good of what was indicated in the ark — “Rise up, Jehovah, and let thine enemies be scattered”, (Numbers 10:35).
JT It is a very interesting connection as corresponding with 2 Samuel 15 and entering into this chapter, because the unity here referred to is not a question of what we are saying but of inwardly understanding one another. In the case of Jonathan and his armourbearer, they had to keep very quiet, and the secrecy was effective.
JHT Do you get that kind of unity with Paul and his last contact with the Ephesian elders? It says that he “prayed with them all. And they all wept sore; and falling upon the neck of Paul they ardently kissed him”, (Acts 20:36,37).
JT I think so. Notice, they fell upon “the neck of Paul”. That would mean much, as to what he had staked. The unity of the Spirit is not exactly what is spoken, but involves a subtle relation with each other that cannot be overthrown. We understand one another; the thing is there.
Ques Would Philippians 2:1,2 enter into it, showing that the whole man is involved? “If then there be any comfort in Christ, if any consolation of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and compassions, fulfil my joy, that ye may think the same thing, having the same love, joined in soul, thinking one thing”.
JT Exactly. There is not a word spoken. It is inward correspondence.
MWB Do you link the unity of the Spirit rather with the inner man of chapter 3 and the unity of the faith with the prayer of chapter 1?
JT Yes; that is a very good distinction. I believe that the unity of the Spirit is the invulnerable thing. It means that we are invulnerable, that we are bound to go through, as we were saying about the ark and David sending it back. He knew it was the centre but there was alongside it, that which very aptly illustrates this unity of the Spirit in Hushai, Zadok and the others with them who were with the ark in the city, and their success depended on maintaining that unity. They inwardly corresponded with one another; they felt together and moved in unity.
HH One thinks of it in connection with church difficulties. Do you think that this scripture: “Using diligence to keep the unity of the Spirit in the uniting bond of peace” would mean that so far as we have light and our brethren with us have light, we should seek to move in line with what is fully consistent with the revelation of God as set out in this epistle? We cannot make others agree with us; often difficulties arise; but should we not seek to be governed by the light that has come from the Lord and which is supported by the Spirit?
JT Yes, but I think it is well to bear in mind that this [p. 261] unity as has just been remarked, is more that of the inward man, meaning that we are linked up together in a sort of subtle, or inward way, so that if you go to the care meeting, for example, that principle of unity is there.
MWB It would govern us in relation to one another.
JT You would bear in mind that it must not be interfered with; it is better to leave things over than that that should be interfered with. It is a thing that God intends should exist, and it means invulnerability as far as we are concerned.
HH Nobody could ever break that down.
JT Here, too, it is rather the responsibility to keep it, that is referred to, and the way it is to be done is “with all lowliness and meekness, with long-suffering, bearing with one another in love; using diligence to keep the unity of the Spirit in the uniting bond of peace”. That is the first thing to bear in mind if you go to a care meeting. I do not mean to say that any principles have to be made secondary, but it is better to leave things over for another time than to break in on this. It is imperative, and if brethren do not agree in one matter they may be able to in some other matter; this helps to maintain the unity (Compare Philippians 3:15,16).
JOS Do we see in Paul’s letter to Philemon his endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit?
JT We do indeed. It was written with very great wisdom and patience, without any expression of authority. There are times when we would wisely avoid alluding to any advantage we may have. It may be we want to get a “brother beloved” reinstated. The apostle refers to his age rather than to his apostleship, but mark, not his age by itself; he did not mention how many years old he was. It is not that, because I may be a hundred, and not have any moral weight. He said, “being such a one as Paul the aged” (Philemon 9) — that aged man.
Ques How would you speak of unity without agreement? You spoke of letting things stand [p. 262] over.
JT Agreement must be founded on unity. The unity exists, but if you cannot agree, the matter may be left over, and no ground lost.
Rem I take it, if we find ourselves not in agreement, that ought to be a matter of great concern in view of the unity of the Spirit existing as you say, and which is available to us on a practical line in regard to any question which may arise.
JT I think if the unity of the Spirit is maintained agreement will come, but it may take time; the apostle has that in view when he speaks about “all lowliness and meekness, with long-suffering, bearing with one another in love; using diligence”. It involves much concern and earnestness.
PL Do you get the idea in Acts 21:14? “And when he would not be persuaded, we were silent, saying, The will of the Lord be done”.
JT Very good. They might have quarrelled with Paul, urging how wrong it was to go up to Jerusalem, but they were too much in the unity of the Spirit for that.
SJBC Can the unity of the Spirit be broken?
JT It says “to keep” it. Abstractly it is fixed and eternal.
JJ What link has the unity of the Spirit with the body? The passage goes on to speak of the body, so there would seem to be some very intimate link.
JT Surely. There are the three circles as was remarked; the first connected with the Spirit, “one body and one Spirit, as ye have been also called in one hope of your calling”; that is the inner thing. The next is the unity connected with the Lord: “one Lord, one faith, one baptism”; that is a wider circle, as has often been remarked. Then you have “one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in us all”; that goes to infinitude.
DLH Are there not three concentric circles spoken of here and the Spirit the centre controlling all [p. 263] three?
JT I should say that. The unity of the Spirit would enter into all three; that is, it runs through whatever you are dealing with, the secret relations with one another run right through; you never give that up.
ESH Divine principles are to be maintained, but it is a question of how you maintain them.
JT Yes; there is something peculiarly fine in the unity of the Spirit; it implies the affections being in action.
Ques Why does it say, “one God and Father of all”, not Christ or the Lord?
JT I think it is to bring in the universal idea. The Father is in the supreme place of Godhead and the circle in that connection is widest. Hence one God and Father.
ASL How far does ‘all’ go?
JT It is universal, but refers only to christians.
DLH Has that not a reference to chapter 3:15? “Of whom every family in the heavens and on earth is named”.
JT The apostle is dealing with the present position, the unity of christians, so he brings it down to “over all, and through all, and in us all” limiting the idea in the last clause. I suppose the expression does involve the supremacy of God as the Father in the whole created sphere, but the apostle limits the bearing of it to christians, those in whom the Father is.
FHB Does not this agree with what will be brought to pass in the eternal state? It will be seen then that there is “one God and Father of all” and all will recognise Him in that way.
JT God will then be “all in all”, (1 Corinthians 15:28).
GWW Do you think the unity of the Spirit in this wide universal aspect has any connection with what the Lord said, that “he is good to the unthankful and wicked”, (Luke 6:35)? That is the attitude of God towards men generally which has to be maintained by the saints at the present [p. 264] time.
JT I am sure that should enter into our exercises as in the unity of the Spirit.
After this we enter on the subject of gift. “But to each one of us has been given grace according to the measure of the gift of the Christ”.
HH Would you mind explaining that verse?
JT It is grace for service. John 1:16 says, “of his fulness we all have received, and grace upon grace”. In that passage it is not measure; it seems to be one wave after another coming to you; He gives more and more. But here in Ephesians it is measure, as if the Lord in giving, takes account of the vessel, for each vessel is capable of a certain thing and He knows the measure: “according to the measure of the gift of the Christ”.
FHB Is all this about gift connected with the proper working of the body?
JT I think you come to that in verse 16 where you have the joints and bands which are the outcome of this. The human body is another figure that the apostle uses. But first the principle of giving, as we have it here, is according to measure, and the measure must be in relation to the person to whom the gift is given.
Ques Is the measure seen in the bowl full of water? (Judges 6:38).
JT Just so. The vessel was full.
Rem The grace is commensurate with the gift.
JT The gift here is the grace. The first reference here is not a specific gift such as an apostle; it is a question of what everybody gets. Every one of us gets something, but it is according to the “measure of the gift of the Christ”. It is His measure and He would take account of what you can use.
Ques What about the measure of faith in Romans?
JT It is the same idea. “As God has dealt to each a measure of faith”, (Romans 12:3). Romans of course is the initial thing, and faith is necessary, but here it is grace. Then he goes on to speak about Christ ascended. The [p. 265] One who gives the gifts, who is He? The same One that “descended into the lower parts of the earth”, and He has “also ascended up above all the heavens, that he might fill all things”. Well now, He is going to fill me. But then He gives gifts unto men; that is not to everybody. We are coming now to something distinctive and specific, because the specific gifts are to men.
JRS Why is it “far above all heavens” in connection with giving gifts?
JT I think to show the supremacy of Christ’s power; He has “ascended up above all the heavens”, so that the gift being received from Him there, means that I have something that no power in the universe can overthrow. You will find in 1 Chronicles that when David is anointed, the names of the mighties are given at once, because it is a question of what they will do for him. In 2 Samuel they are given at the end of his reign. 2 Samuel would indicate that the gifts come down to the end and that all are included in the record.
In this second part of the scripture (verses 8 - 14) the apostle is not dealing with what is general to believers, as in verse 7, but with what is specific. These gifts are not contemplated as being given to what is immature; he is not dealing with children. Every believer receives something from Christ, but when you come to these great powers from “above all the heavens” it is men that are in view. Not men who make playthings of them but who will use them for Christ, as the ‘three’ broke through the camp of the Philistines and drew water for David. That is the sort of service that these gifts are for, so that Christ may have in the assembly a full result. “For the perfecting of the saints; with a view to the work of the ministry, with a view to the edifying of the body of Christ”.
JJ As the apostles are put first in the list here, would they belong to the first category of the mighties, [p. 266] the mightiest?
JT I think they are in the order of wisdom. The apostle brings in authority; he establishes his testimony in authority, and the prophet shows that the mind of God is in it, that it is not of man, but the mind of God. The evangelist is to make God known through the gospel, to secure material for the assembly; and the pastor and teacher is to adjust the minds of the saints by teaching. The order is authority, the mind of God, the heart of God, and then the adjustment by teaching.
FHB The teacher and pastor seem to be identified together.
JT That is how it stands; it is one gift. The teacher instructs the saints in power. As pastor he looks after the sheep.
Rem It says, “until we all arrive”.
JT ‘All’ is put there; this is characteristic of Ephesians.
HD'AC Is not maturity the point here — that we are not to be children? Pastors may have to give their lives for the sheep.
JT Was not that spirit with David when he took the lamb out of the lion’s mouth? He rescued the lamb; he did not merely take out a pair of legs or a piece of an ear, but he secured the whole lamb and slew the lion and the bear; he put himself in jeopardy for the flock.
Ques What is the thought of leading captivity captive?
JT I think Goliath’s head is the symbol of it. David took the head of Goliath to Jerusalem, answering to “having ascended up on high”. In the type, I think, Jerusalem is on high; it is the place of power, and then, I believe, the mighties are the gifts, and what wonderful men they were!
ASL Would you say one word on the remarkable expression, “the measure of the stature of the fulness of the Christ”?
JT I think it refers to the gospels. That is where you get the “measure of the stature of the fulness of the Christ”. This epistle is very near to the elevation of the gospels.
J.J. Especially John?
JT All of them. Each one presents some feature of Christ.
ASL So you think the “measure of the stature of the fulness of the Christ” is what is set forth in the four gospels?
JT Yes. So in each of the four gospels the Lord has need in regard of what we are speaking of: “The Lord has need of it”. I do not mean that in each of the gospels that is stated. In Matthew He has need of them; but it would be in relation to Matthew’s presentation of Christ. The need of the Lord would be in that relation. There were two there, an ass and a colt. The Lord has need of those for the assembly, to set up new meetings. That is what Matthew would promote; He has need of the two, the old and the young brother. But in Mark it is one colt which would be in relation to the ministry, the preaching; He has need of preachers. Then in Luke He has need of priests, persons that can pray. In John He finds the colt Himself. He does not use the disciples to find it. I think this is the position now. He indicates that He can get one Himself and get on without us; but in each of the synoptic gospels He uses two disciples.
FHB Is the general thought in this scripture that the Lord has made adequate provision for carrying the testimony through according to His own mind?
JT That is so; hence you come to full growth, and that is the “measure of the stature of the fulness of the Christ”.
HD'AC Each one must come to that.
JT “Until we all arrive”. The fulness of Christ is what has come out in Him. It is not a question of His deity, but what has shone out in Him as a Man.
ASL Would it connect at all with chapter 1? “The assembly, which is his body, the fulness of him who fills all in all”.
[p. 268] JT That is the church. The church is His fulness as His body, but this fulness is what has shone out in Christ in His ways and ministry, seen in the gospels, as a standard for each of us. It has all in view however.