THE ASSEMBLY AS SEEN IN THE REVELATION (2)
[p. 48] THE ASSEMBLY AS SEEN IN THE REVELATION (2)
JT To complete the introduction to our subject a few remarks are required on verses 17 to 20 of the first chapter of Revelation. John says, “And when I saw him I fell at his feet as dead; and he laid his right hand upon me, saying, Fear not; I am the first and the last, and the living one: and I became dead, and behold, I am living to the ages of ages, and have the keys of death and of hades”, Revelation 1: 17, 18. And then the Lord says, “Write therefore what thou hast seen, and the things that are, and the [p. 58] things that are about to be after these. The mystery of the seven stars which thou hast seen on my right hand, and the seven golden lamps. — The seven stars are angels of the seven assemblies; and the seven lamps are seven assemblies”. The adjustment that the servant needed is indicated here, an important matter as to service and those who are bondmen. John is affected by what he saw. The Lord brings certain facts before him with a view to his complete adjustment for the service. So He says, “Fear not; I am the first and the last, and the living one: and I became dead, and behold, I am living to the ages of ages, and have the keys of death and of hades”. So that the Lord sets him up in view of the service He was committing to him and tells him the order in which he is to write, which is applicable in principle to what we say as well as to what we write, that is, the order in which we set out our subject matter. First, He says, “What thou hast seen”, then “The things that are”, and then “The things that are about to be after these”. The order of the writing is made plain, as if the Spirit of God would have the truth ministered in a certain order [p. 49] the order of one, two, three. And then there is this matter of the mystery (verse 20); if one is to be initiated into that, it would be number one. The seven stars are the angels of the assemblies, and the seven lamps are the seven assemblies, so that the servant is now set up in view of his service. The book bears in mind too, that as servants we are just creatures and liable to error or failure, even though commissioned. A very solemn thing! At the end of what he saw in chapter 22: 8, John says, “And when I heard and saw, I fell down to do homage before the feet of the angel who shewed me these things”, showing how one may be mistaken in one’s understanding and outlook even although commissioned and in actual service; therefore we are reminded that we are to be in constant dependence. Even in the exercise of our service we may begin well and get through well and yet finish ill. The book contemplates the perfect Servant, which Mark also presents, but it warns us of our creature limitations and creature liabilities, so at the end of chapter 1 John is set out on his service to write messages to the seven assemblies severally.
CHH Would this dependence be secured in the knowledge that the Lord holds the seven stars in His right hand? Would that be our security?
JT That is a good suggestion. In the danger attaching to us it is establishing to know that we are held in the Lord’s right hand. It says, “These things says he that holds the seven stars in his right hand”; it is not simply that they are under control, though He has them under control, but that He maintains them, too.
HH How would the thought of His having the stars in His right hand fit in with decline in the assemblies?
JT In the general position of man if the servant were upheld absolutely it would mean almost complete disregard of responsibility, that is, if he were held in [p. 50] immaculateness. The Pope, for instance, is held to be infallible under certain circumstances; that is, if he takes a certain attitude. He does not assume to be infallible absolutely; it is only under certain circumstances. But that is going beyond creature liabilities, because a creature is liable to fail at any time; although there is the side, for instance, of the inspiration of the Scriptures which is infallible. Then too in the ministry of certain persons like the apostles, servants have been preserved; yet there is in all of them the evidence of liability to fail, for “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us”, 1 John 1: 8. We shall be in a state of perfection ultimately, and that is what God has in mind, that abstractly the saints are in a state of perfection now because Scripture says, “We know that every one begotten of God does not sin”, 1 John 5: 18. But that is abstract, assuming what will be, and what can be in a certain relation even now; but whilst we are in a state of flesh and blood there is no guarantee against failure, even though it be only in a small sense. Yet the holding of the seven stars implies that that is the general position of the dispensation; the Lord has taken up this attitude of holding. Later, in chapter 3, He says that He has the seven stars “These things saith he that has the seven Spirits of God, and the seven stars” (verse 1). The word ‘has’ there is not ‘holds’. Holding them is more active and definite. Having them is just the fact of possession, and I suppose when we come to the conditions of Sardis there will even be the suggestion that ministry is not being preserved and supported.
SJH Is it a good indication that at the start, having seen the Lord in this way, John falls at His feet as dead?
JT The Lord does not reprove it, but He says to John, “Fear not”. You could hardly think of John in his ordinary service as taking up this attitude.
[p. 51] I think while it is not reproved exactly, yet it is a little out of accord with the position of the servant as set up in the Spirit. In fact he says he was “in the Spirit”, “I became in the Spirit on the Lord’s day”.
SJH I wondered if it was in the presence of what is judicial.
JT Quite; I would not like to say much, but the Lord says, “Fear not”, which might be interpreted that he might be justified in fearing; but really I think the Lord meant there was nothing to fear. He intended that John should know Him. John’s own gospel shows how the truth of life works out, as the Lord says to Martha, “I am the resurrection and the life: he that believes on me, though he have died, shall live; and every one who lives and believes on me shall never die”, John 11: 25, 26. I mean to say, the truth of life in Christ implies that there is really nothing to fear; the full apprehension of the truth would lead to that.
CHH Is it an essential thing in the servant to feel his weakness in the presence of this? David says in Psalm 39: 4, “Make me to know, Jehovah, mine end, and the measure of my days, what it is: I shall know how frail I am”. Would that be a wholesome exercise?
JT Well, you get illustrations of commendable lowly attitudes. Daniel, for instance, was very weak in the presence of the angel or minister from God; he describes his gradual recovery and finally he is made to stand by the angel, who says, “Fear not, Daniel”. Later he says, “Let my lord speak; for thou hast strengthened me”, Daniel 10: 19. But christianity certainly supposes a perfect condition, that is, that on the principle of life in Christ one is made perfect.
SJH And the knowledge that “perfect love casts out fear”, 1 John 4: 18.
JT Quite so, and chapter 1:7 of the same epistle says, “But if we walk in the light as he is in [p. 52] the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanses us from all sin”. It is admitted that we are weak, but we know the priesthood of Christ preserves us. At the same time christianity involves what is perfect, abstractly anyway.
AAT Would you make a distinction in your mind between John’s failure and that of Barnabas and Mark, in that the two latter acted in self-will? They did not go on with Paul in the service.
JT At the juncture you refer to Barnabas and Mark were morally wrong. They were acting somewhat on partisan lines. But that is not the same as a brother like John in the presence of such a vision. You may say you cannot wonder at his being affected. It is true you cannot attach any wrong moral element to John here; at the same time the question is whether he is in the full sense of what christianity implies. Abraham had a vision and he was not in this state, and others too had visions. But John is recording what happened to him and the Lord said, “Fear not”. It is therefore for us to judge, and I would say that the full thought of christianity should have supported him. The Lord intended to support him in the presence of the vision.
CHH Would Mary’s attitude in the presence of the angel be a good example?
JT Quite so; she was not abashed at all. That is a good illustration.
HH John had never seen the Lord in this attitude before.
JT Did he not see Him when He took a whip of small cords and drove the sheep-dealers out of the temple? What would he have seen in the Lord then? He would have been in similar garb then, would He not?
HH I had not thought of that; this is a very full-sized picture, [p. 53] is it not?
JT Quite so; at the same time christianity is involved, it implies a perfect state. John knew what it was to be in the power that is available to the believer; he says, “I became in the Spirit on the Lord’s day”.
CHH So he would have seen the Lord in both aspects: on the mount of transfiguration he would have seen Him as glorified, and then as acting judicially in the temple.
JT Just so; the Lord would have been seen by the apostles in many ways, so that in some sense this garb would have been seen in His dealing with evil, and with good too. It is very beautiful, as if the Lord would say to John, There is nothing to cause you fear. There was much to cause others to fear in their delinquencies that He was about to speak of; He spoke only to make them fear, but I think the Lord meant that for John there was nothing to fear. Surely christianity implies that!
HB Is there a suggestion of all that in Daniel, where it is one like to the appearance of a man who touches him and says, “Fear not”?
JT Just so, Daniel had a similar experience, as we have already noted.
CHH It would link on with the angel’s words, “Fear not ye, for I know that ye seek Jesus the crucified one”, Matthew 28:5.
HH Is the thought in your mind that we need not fear in seeking to go on with the testimony in these days?
JT That is what we should gather. The Lord knows how to approve and He knows how to disapprove. If a person is not going on well and comes into the Lord’s presence, the Lord would not say to him, There is nothing to fear! But with John it was different, he was going on well. In fact the description he gives of himself would show he was fully in accord with [p. 54] the truth.
MWA John himself says in his epistle that “perfect love casts out fear; for fear has torment, and he that fears has not been made perfect in love”. Does that have a bearing?
JT It does indeed. I think God would perfect the apostle in all that christianity means. Christianity is absolutely perfect in the abstract; when we can eliminate all else we have an absolutely perfect thing; and the Holy Spirit is capable of maintaining us now in that abstract state.
RH Is there a link between the emphatic “I” here and the “I” in the end of Matthew? “And behold, I am with you all the days, until the completion of the age”, Matthew 28: 20. Would the perfection of the position you are speaking of be linked with that?
JT You have the emphatic “I” here, you mean, in verse 17. Quite so; “I am the first and the last, and the living one: and I became dead, and behold, I am living to the ages of ages, and have the keys of death and of hades”. That comes in after He says, “Fear not”. All that is really to emphasise the idea that there is nothing to fear at all in John’s case.
SJH Is there a suggestion that if any one will take up these issues which the Lord is taking up with the seven assemblies, the Lord will hold him in His right hand and support him?
JT I think that is His attitude, the attitude of holding the seven stars, and any one under commission should be strengthened by it. John is actually under commission and the Lord is saying to him, There is nothing in this position to fear. It will not do if I am capable of cowering before anything; if I am under commission I must be strong, as was said to Joshua, “Only be strong and very courageous”, Joshua 1: 7. So when the man with the drawn sword appeared to him he did not cower, but he said, “Art thou for us, or for our enemies?”, Joshua 5: 13. He carried on the partisan idea in the presence of the Lord and the [p. 55] Lord has to adjust that. When Joshua asked, “Art thou for us, or for our enemies?”, He said, “No; for as captain of the army of Jehovah am I now come”.
Ques Why is the appellation, “Son of man” used here?
JT It is another element in the position; it is what He is in His universal attitude, what belongs to christianity as over against judaism in this book. Although it recognises Israel in many ways, yet it is in the midst of christianity. Its setting is in the time of christianity, just as the wrath that came out at the fall of Jerusalem happened in the period of christianity. We are never to forget that we are here in christianity, and that it is a perfect state that God has set up.
CHH What would Paul mean when he says, “I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling”, 1 Corinthians 2: 3?
JT That is a question of the state he had to deal with, and the Lord made him realise that he had such a state to deal with. It was really governmental. The persons he had to deal with were the cause of it. He had not the same fear with others, it was the state he was in the midst of. And so it is in ministry, if you are dealing with unspiritual people God in faithfulness will have to deal with them as unspiritual, and you may not get the same support because of their state.
CHH Would it depend on you to define the assembly state before you in ministry?
JT Quite so; and you have to be faithful, and bow to what God may do in view of persons who are unspiritual.
WFK “I am ... the living one”; is that a statement to encourage the servant?
JT First he hears the statement, “Fear not”. That is a clause in the sentence and what follows is to [p. 56] strengthen the exhortation conveyed in those two words. It goes on, “I am the first and the last, and the living one: and I became dead, and behold, I am living to the ages of ages, and have the keys of death and of hades”. Well, what is there to fear? If John has a good conscience-and he has according to what comes out here-what is there to fear? The Lord is not against a man like John, He is against evil. The Man that supports a man like John has the keys of death and of hades.
RH Was Timothy needing adjustment on this line when Paul wrote to him, “For God has not given us a spirit of cowardice, but of power, and of love, and of wise discretion”, 2 Timothy 1: 7?
JT Just so; he was likely to be nervous in his service, as often young brothers are, and that word is just to strengthen such, to strengthen Timothy.
Now these verses in the end of chapter 1 are necessary to complete what we are saying about John, because we are comparing John with Matthew in affecting the personnel at the inauguration of the assembly. These verses give the full position of John as set up in himself. There is nothing morally out of the way with him, evidently, but he needed strengthening; he needed to be reassured that all was well in his dealings with the Lord. There is nothing in His appearing to cause John fear. And now he is set up at the end of chapter 1 for his service; but as we were saying, the order of his writing is emphasised. It is not only that I am to be set free and in power, but that I am to minister according to order and as governed by the primary apprehension I may have of the mind of God in any given circumstance. If I have that apprehension I am to proceed according to order; and the order is one, two, three. If it be only one, keep to it; or two, keep to two, but in the order of one and two, because God, even in ministry, is the God of order, and of measure too.
[p. 57] Ques In chapter 1: 20 the Lord speaks of the seven stars as on His right hand; and in verse 1 of the next chapter, He speaks of them as in His right hand. Would there be any difference?
JT The first would be, you might say, the ornamental position of the stars; the second is that He is dealing with them, using them: “He that holds the seven stars in his right hand, who walks in the midst of the seven golden lamps”. They are actually in function in the second instance.
RWS The right hand is a very comforting thought in apostate days. The stars are on it and they are in it. John also says, “And he laid his right hand upon me” (verse 17).
JT As in it they are more immediately functioning, in fact they are in function. They are available to Him in that sense; they are actually there.
WWM Would that represent the responsible element in the assembly?
JT Yes; that is what is meant, I think.
AAT If I get your thought, you do not recommend that a brother giving an address should present six or seven points, but just one, two or three in order?
JT I should much prefer to keep it to one, two, three, than to go to six. In prophecy it is also very important. I think brevity is one important matter in ministry but one would not limit or criticise any. But the Lord’s order here is very significant; it is one, two, three.
RWS Would that apply to the number of scriptures read?
JT I think so. You want to make things clear, to be concise. The Lord has given you your thoughts and now He is telling you how to use them, how to subdivide them. Do not put number three first; begin with what you are seeing, as He says here, “Write therefore what thou hast seen”. He begins with that. Then, “The things that are, and the things that are about to be after these”. So “what thou hast seen” is first.
Ques Are you suggesting John as a pattern to be followed under present conditions assembly-wise in view of the public breakdown, but now in regard to recovery?
JT I think so. He is the one servant before us, a commissioned one, and he certainly is a model, particularly in the use of Scripture and the subdivision of the subject that you wish to present. You do not make it any more difficult than necessary for your audience. Of course if you are speaking parabolically, you might be hiding the truth; that would be judicially. But the principle of ministry generally is to open up the truth, “opening and laying down”, it is said of Paul. You bring the thing out, and then lay it down so that the saints can take it in.
CHH If you had the order of one, two, three, definitely before you, these points might be sub divided to bring in other scriptures.
JT Well, we do too much of it. I shall probably be under fire myself this evening.
CHH It used to be said that you could have four points, having a universal bearing on the subject.
JT Quite so, but the use of the numeral three is more frequent in Scripture.
Rem In chapter 1 this morning you referred to “the tribulation and kingdom and patience”, all three under one head; then the numeral three is emphasised again in these closing verses of the first chapter; and you connected it also with Exodus 21: 5, “I love my master, my wife, and my children”. You have the order of one, two, three, there too. I was wondering whether that in itself does not cover the whole divine scheme.
JT Very likely, because things emanate from God, really from the Trinity, we might say. There is [p. 59] much more in the Scriptures than we think in that respect, the voice of God being heard, not always spoken in words, but very often implied.
RH The Lord refers to the law of Moses, the prophets and the Psalms.
JT He spoke of only two divisions, you remember, when He talked with the two disciples on the way to Emmaus; He brought up just the law of Moses and the prophets. But when He is speaking in the assembly He adds the Psalms, the completion of the divine way in the Scriptures.
WFK Are these first three churches past history?
JT Yes. The four others, the second division of the seven referred to, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea run concurrently and exist today. But first it is a question of Ephesus, then Smyrna and then Pergamos. In Ephesus what is stressed is the fall. She fell; not absolutely, as Satan fell or as Babylon falls; the word ‘fallen’ does not imply that it is absolute, that there is not some hope of recovery. It is relative: “Remember therefore whence thou art fallen”, that is, Remember the extent of the fall; that is what is stressed in the word to Ephesus. And the Lord says, “but if not”, if you do not remember that and do the first works and repent, “I am coming to thee, and I will remove thy lamp out of its place, except thou shalt repent”. Then He adds, “But this thou hast, that thou hatest the works of the Nicolaitanes, which I also hate”. The Lord brings that in as reducing somewhat what He had against her. So the position is that there is hope of Ephesus, not for a complete recovery, but there is hope on the ground of repentance and doing the first works; otherwise the fight, the candlestick, is to be removed, that is, she is to cease even having the commission to shine. She is not regarded as any more usable for shining. This would happen unless she repents.
[p. 60] WFK Is love the only thing for us today, love among the brethren? I was thinking of 1 Corinthians 13 and that Ephesus had fallen from love.
JT Yes, the first love. You can hardly say that she had left love altogether, but she had left her first love, which was the greatest. The idea of grade is very important in Scripture, and she has left the highest grade here, first love.
WFK Is that love for the Lord as well as for the brethren?
JT It is love for Christ by the assembly. It is collective love responding to His love. It is really the greatest presentation of love in the sense of what is indicated here.
CHH Would there be any indication of this in the fall of the young man at Troas? There is no suggestion that he had love but there is restoration from the fall.
JT There is the suggestion I think, but of course the thing was yet in prospect; it had not yet happened. That chapter does not say it had happened at all, because it is a great love chapter. It begins with love, love is in the middle of it and it ends with love, how the elders fell upon the neck of the apostle and kissed him. Nevertheless the apostle is indicating the possibility of it, as he tells the elders, but there is no sign that it had yet happened. If the danger or the reason of it was immediate, as suggested in Eutychus, well, it is curable, it is remediable, because the boy is alive and is taken away by the saints; they have not lost. They are better off I would say.
HH Do you connect that incident with church recovery as under Paul?
JT I would think so. I think that is what is suggested and it is complete so far as it goes. It is a successful action because Paul went down; it is the love in him that is stressed. Paul’s position is in mind, how far he was ready to go: if a young person [p. 61] is tripped up and falls, he is ready to go that distance. As the Lord goes after two, Paul is ready to go after one, to go down from the third floor and enfold him in his arms. And he is able to say, not as Elijah said of the child whom he restored, that the life had gone out of him, but that “his life is in him”, showing that he was in some sense in christianity. Life was there, the condition was remediable, and in fact was restored. The boy is said to have been taken away; he is worthwhile, “They brought away the boy alive, and were no little comforted”, Acts 20: 12. It is all in connection with the Lord’s supper.
FKC Do you think the effect would be to turn their minds to Paul’s teaching, especially to the words he said when he called the elders over to Miletus?
JT They were affected by the fact that they should see his face no more, you mean? Quite so. The chapter is devoted to active affection in the saints, especially in Paul himself, the peculiar kind of affection he had and how he himself was the object of affection.
RWS Paul says in writing to Timothy, “Even as I begged thee to remain in Ephesus, when I was going to Macedonia, that thou mightest enjoin some not to teach other doctrines”, 1 Timothy 1: 3. I was wondering whether he was living when this epistle reached the assembly at Ephesus. He was to enjoin some not to teach wrong doctrine.
JT Just so; he was left there to set things in order, so that there would be a perfecting of the work through him, which is remarkable. Order is the thought. Paul left him there to attend to that.
AAT In speaking to Ephesus the Lord says many good things about them before He speaks of what He has against them. Is there a principle in that?
JT Quite so; that is very evident. Say all the good things you can. See what Paul said of the Corinthians, “Ye are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read of all men”, 2 Corinthians 3: 2. What was it that was “known and read of all men”? It was the good things that Paul was saying about them. He says, You are my letter; when I am among the saints I delight to talk about you Corinthians, because you are my letter. So they were. Who, that knew Corinth, could question his apostolic commission? That is what he means. “Examine your own selves if ye be in the faith”, he says (2 Corinthians 13: 5), so that his apostleship is attested in them. If I do not speak well of the saints my ministry is questionable; not what I am saying but what I am personally. I am not entitled to minister unless I can speak well of the saints.
EIE The Spirit of God seems to stress the idea of repentance in every instance here.
JT Quite so; christianity is therefore the basis of much joy in heaven. The question arises how much repentance there is. Every one of us is to repent; surely none of us but would say, That is true, I have to learn to repent and to cause joy in heaven. There is one of whom the Lord says, “She will not repent”, Revelation 2:21. Her will is in it! That is a terrible thing: if one is not repentant when there is a cause for it. The Lord has to say of Jezebel, “She will not repent”. But here it is, “Remember therefore whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; but if not, I am coming to thee, and I will remove thy lamp out of its place, except thou shalt repent”. He repeats the need for repentance. Then He adds the word, “Thou hatest the works of the Nicolaitanes”. It is “works” here, not the doctrine, that had not come in yet, the destructive doctrine of Rome, the great feature of Babylon. They had not begun to promulgate their doctrine yet, showing that the Nicolaitanes may have works among the brethren even without the statement of doctrine. The doctrine [p. 63] appears in the third church; they had it and that is really where the evil is entrenched. If you have the doctrine of an evil, if it has turned into doctrine, then it is positive wickedness.
A.A.T. Is it clericalism?
JT Well, that sort of thing, and it is legalised by doctrine. That is what has built up christendom. They had not the doctrine at Ephesus and they hated the works, showing that they were in a comparatively good state, and that explains these things we are saying of them. But when we come to Pergamos it is said, “So thou also hast those who hold the doctrine of Nicolaitanes in like manner”.
Now in verse 8 we come to the second assembly, that is, Smyrna. We can look only at the main features of it and how they may be brought into our own times. This is an assembly affected by tribulation, and in our own times, at this very moment, certain conditions of tribulation which God has manifestly ordered have arisen on certain saints. It is no accident; it is to bring out what there is of the work of God. What has been transpiring in the last four or five years is to test out the work of God in His people, especially in certain parts of the earth. How much can you stand? What is needed? Why is it needed? So it says, “I know thy tribulation and thy poverty; but thou art rich; and the railing of those who say that they themselves are Jews, and are not, but a synagogue of Satan. Fear nothing of what thou art about to suffer. Behold, the devil is about to cast of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days. Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give to thee the crown of life” (verses 9, 10). It seems to me that God in His governmental ways with us in our own times has allowed this to come about. It is speaking here of ten persecutions and how the devil directly was ordering these persecutions; but what we are dealing with today is [p. 64] actually what God has permitted, and we may say, ordered. Certain conditions have arisen in certain sections of the earth where there are more of His people than in any other section of the same size, and it is not simply that they are persecuted in a spiritual sense but they are suffering physically to bring out what the work of God in them is capable of. It is to show the extent of His work, and to purify the saints and make them fit for more testimony. I believe that is the present moment.
WWM Is that the meaning of the words, “That ye may be tried”?
JT That is the divine thought. Satan is the instrument. Notice the word ‘Satan’ in verse 9 is changed to “devil” in verse 10. There it is, “Fear nothing of what thou art about to suffer. Behold, the devil is about to cast of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days. Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give to thee the crown of life”. “That ye may be tried” is in the government of God. The devil is working as if he would overpower the brethren; I believe that is his aim. He would just overpower the brethren with trial, but they have not been overpowered, and that is the triumph, the work of God triumphing in such circumstances. It is the direct aim of the devil to crush the saints by the terrible physical attacks that have been made.
CHH What a testimony to the triumph of the work of God we have in Daniel! How Satan worked so that he should be cast into the lions’ den! Yet that act became a testimony, as also with the three in the fiery furnace.
JT Daniel brings out clearly what the work of God is capable of standing in the most distressing and trying circumstances.
WWM Do the ten days give us encouragement in seeing that there is to be an end to the [p. 65] trial?
JT Just so; it is only for a certain number of days. Satan has not a free hand and he has not a very long time in which to act. Still, God may use him and does use him though his own furious attitude against the saints comes out. He says, as it were, If all these bombings keep on they will be overwhelmed; but they are not overwhelmed. It is a question of God and His work in His people.
HB Why should all this apply to an assembly for which the Lord does not seem to have any reproach?
JT It is a remarkable thing that the present extraordinary effort of the devil should take place. In truth a wonderful thing is happening to the people of God before our eyes. But nevertheless they meet together to worship God and to carry on His service in a general way. The trial goes on and on, and yet they are there, and they go on with the service of God.
I think it is a wonderful triumph. But to God be all the praise! Without Him who could stand?
RWS You spoke of a further testimony as a result of this purging. Just what have you in mind?
JT The Lord may do something, something in the way of freshness perhaps, bringing about freshness and a little more light and clarity; but above all a little more love for God and for Christ and for one another. Satan is the adversary. “The devil” is accuser-he is called “the accuser of our brethren”, Revelation 12: 10.
HH It is important that God orders things, He does not just allow them, and He uses Satan (1 Corinthians 5: 5).
JT That is very solemn indeed, and yet it is limited. Yet we often quote, “If those days had not been cut short, no flesh had been saved; but on account of the elect those days shall be cut short”.
RWS Is the testimony more in your mind than the rapture?
JT [p. 66] Yes, I would think that the amount of youth coming along, the number of persons, young brothers and young sisters too, would mean that another generation is in view and the Lord will be in it.
JLP He will utilise those who have been faithful in these conditions in our day.
JT Yes; it is to bring out the work of God in its moral features; including what the saints are developing in the way of loyalty to Christ and care for one another.
Ques Would Habakkuk fit in? God would make him to walk upon his high places.
JT Yes. He would continue on although certain things should happen that were adverse (Habakkuk 3: 17 - 19).
RH Would “the crown of life” answer to Samson’s hair growing again at the end?
JT You mean his hair beginning to grow: it was not a matter of grey hairs. Grey hairs would be a sign of old age, but hair beginning to grow would be an evidence of life. White hair is a guide in determining the beginning of leprosy, it is a sign of decline in life. But the recovery of Samson’s hair-whatever his age, he would not have been very old when he died — would look like the suggestion of life.
CHH Would you say that God does not test His work until it is established that the work is there? In Abraham’s case it was not until he had recovered from denying his wife that it says God would prove him.
JT I think that is good. It comes out in God’s way with His people Israel. He did not lead them in the way of the Philistines because they had not known war and He would not have them exposed to it at first. I think that is very touching! God is considerate of us; He does not allow us to be tempted beyond [p. 67] our capability.
SJH Does the fact that the Lord is causing the breaking of bread to continue even in Europe and the occupied countries lead you to expect to see results in this way?
JT I am sure all that is very encouraging. We do receive some letters from northern Europe, Switzerland and Italy. It is remarkable how the brethren go on. I am sure that is what God is aiming at, that at the end there will be something answering to the beginning, able to go on even in suffering.
Rem The ministry of verse 8 seems suggestive, “These things says the first and the last, who became dead, and lived”. That would be something special for the brethren at Smyrna. I suppose that idea would enter into our services too, the ability to touch a note that would apply to the particular need of the brethren at the moment. Then one notices that to every one of these assemblies we have the word, “Write”. That service is still open, to minister to the brethren by writing, bringing in Christ in that way.
CHH Though historically these three churches have passed away, yet the divine principles involved would still remain good for us.
JT Quite so; none of such things are just for a moment. It involves the matter of contributions, the collections among the brethren for the saints. Sometimes it is said the “special” one mentioned in a Corinthians was for a special occasion, whereas the principle governing that special occasion applies to special collections under any circumstances. It is a question of love working out and that cannot be limited at all. In fact these letters contemplate not only what is local either in time or place, but what is universal both in time and in place, that the principles that refer to Ephesus, for instance, can be applied universally wherever you have like circumstances. So if it is a matter of persecution, as we have here in Smyrna, we can transfer that thought to today. There [p. 68] are ten days of persecution, and the Spirit of God enables us to face them. It may be more physical than religious, but nevertheless it is Satan’s work and it is his effort to overwhelm the brethren. But God is saying, I have ordered this to bring out what the brethren are capable of. It is His own work and so we do not say, ‘What has the devil wrought’, but “What hath God wrought!”. It is what He is doing to overcome what the devil is doing.
AAT So do we give support financially?
JT Quite so; it is to aid what God is doing.
JLP I understand that these expressions that come in earlier in this book, “the word of God” and “the testimony of Jesus”, relate to John’s commission. Are they two governing features that run right through the seven assemblies?
JT Just so, I am sure that is right; even the use of the seven assemblies of Asia is for convenience sake, to bring out other things, not simply to confine what is said to the province of Asia Minor. It is to govern the whole dispensation from that time onwards. “The scope of no prophecy of scripture is had from its own particular interpretation”, 2 Peter 1: 20.
RDG Is the expression, “The synagogue of Satan”, a suggestion that the opposition is combined, something organised? It is not something incidental.
JT I would say that. Organised opposition is the most potent; therefore a well-known religion, so prevalent in this very province, is organised first, last, and all the time. It is the very acme of organisation, probably sixteen centuries old. There is nothing else like it at all.
CHH Is that what is spoken of in Ephesians as “systematized error”?
JT That is just what it is. The assembly at Ephesus would know that.
RWS Is the synagogue a local thought as over against the assembly?
JT [p. 69] It would be, I think, to stress the idea of religion. It is a local thought but universal in its bearing. Of course Rome talks about the universal holy Catholic church, but it is not that, it is a local idea spread abroad. The Vatican is an organisation locally but its tentacles are gone abroad; it governs the Catholic system.
Ques What about the next church, Pergamos, “where the throne of Satan is”, and “where Satan dwells”? And then the next one, Thyatira, which speaks of “the depths of Satan”?
JT It is remarkable the way Satan is brought into these churches; the depths are in Thyatira, but the throne and the dwelling place are in Pergamos. Both of them refer to what was just mentioned, that it is a local idea only become universal. It cannot in itself, in its essential position, become universal, because the essential thing is in a locality; otherwise the Pope might live in Montreal or New York. There is something in the local idea: his throne and dwelling place are in Pergamos. That is what the Lord refers to as to the saints there, that they are peculiarly exposed. “I know where thou dwellest, where the throne of Satan is; and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in the days in which Antipas my faithful witness was, who was slain among you, where Satan dwells” (verse 13). It is a local position but became spread out and out on the principle of organisation, but not to strengthen the outer edges but the centre. It is a matter of the centre and circumference. The circumference may be weak in some cases, very weak, but the centre is always kept strong; that is the point: keep it strong. Hence the last great effort was to strengthen the central position by according infallibility to the Pope under certain conditions.
CHH Would that indicate progressive evil, against which Timothy is to be strong in the faith?
JT [p. 70] Just so; the progressive iniquity begins, that is, the mystery of iniquity. I believe it can be traced in these letters. We are to understand mysteries, but we are not to dig into the depths of Satan; we are not capable of that; besides, there is danger in it. We know it is there and can name things without prying into them. The Colossians were in danger of entering into things they had not seen in the worship of angels; things that are beyond us. The devil works on these lines and we are to keep out of it, but at the same time we are to name things, even if evil; and in a certain way we can know them afar off.
Rem Isaiah helps when he says, “Ye shall not say, Conspiracy, of everything of which this people saith, Conspiracy; and fear ye not their fear, and be not in dread”, Isaiah 8: 12.
JT Just so.
CHH Would Ephesians 6 help us to contend against these powers of darkness?
JT “Against the universal lords of this darkness”; it is a spiritual matter. The devil is not concerned about mere local positions; he is aiming at the whole world. He is the god of this world, and he is the prince of it too. He is not concerned about leading men as such, he is concerned about himself, but he would support certain things and persons. He supports the beast, for instance. The dragon is the devil; he is only using other creatures for his own ends, nothing else.
WWM Would it be necessary to be an overcomer at Ephesus in order to become an overcomer in Smyrna? In other words, is it requisite to return to first love in order to stand in Smyrna against the terrible onslaughts of Satan?
JT I think it is cumulative; that is, the overcomer in Ephesus ought to be able to go through. The same principles ought to go through in all the overcomers, only different features arise; but I would [p. 71] say the overcomer in Ephesus would be equal to any combination of the devil.
HH Does Pergamos represent the idea of worldliness instead of tribulation?
JT Clearly; so we have the thought of Satan’s throne and Satan’s dwelling, and of the saints there too. They are in that position. Well now, what will the devil do if the saints are there? One of them is out-and-out, he is Antipas. He is thoroughly against the thing that the devil is working in and he is killed. He is not a young man, you may be sure. I mean that the devil cannot overcome him by worldliness. John says to the young men, “Love not the world, nor the things in the world. If any one love the world, the love of the Father is not in him”, 1 John 2: 15. So the devil would endeavour to overcome young people by the world. He is the god and prince of it and he has the means if he dwells there and his throne is there. He has all the means to bring in pleasures, plenty of arenas and plenty of things to keep young people going. He would aim to draw the young into the cinemas and theatres. He aims at that, he has the means of doing it in the various sources of pleasure in the world, as indeed the prodigal experienced. If possible the devil will overcome our youth by the world. He wants them; he does not want them to be slain but he wants them under the influence of the world. But Antipas, he did not want him! Antipas is against the father. Who is the father? Well, it is a fatherly system of wickedness and that thing has come into the locality, the idea of the father; and because Antipas is against it they put him to death. So the Lord says in regard to that: “Thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith”. Notice that: My name and My faith. “Even in the days in which Antipas my faithful witness was, who was slain among you, where Satan dwells”. Satan would not tolerate an Antipas. Satan represents the father, the [p. 72] father of the system, and if there is anyone against him, as Antipas was, he must die! That is the devil’s way: he will either corrupt us or destroy us. So the Lord is speaking here of Antipas as being out-and-out, representing what He is looking for.
CHH You mean he was against the devil in the sense of father?
JT Yes, whatever he would be in a fatherly sense.
CHH I was thinking of Barabbas; is that the same thing?
JT Quite so.
RH Why does it say, “Slain among you”? Has it any connection with the Lamb in chapter S?
JT “Slain among you”, I should think it is a reflection on them. Why should he be there? It looks as if they were under those circumstances themselves. “Slain among you, where Satan dwells”; it is a suspicious combination of words, “Among you”, and “Where Satan dwells”.
MWA It speaks of those “who hold the doctrine of Nicolaitanes”; do you think that would stand in contrast to “Antipas my faithful witness”?
JT Quite so, and “the doctrine of Balaam”, these two go together. What Balaam would bring in would be out-and-out worldliness, of the worst kind. “Who taught Balak to cast a snare before the sons of Israel, to eat of idol sacrifices and commit fornication”. That is out-and-out wickedness. It is the doctrine, not simply that the thing is there. It was there at Corinth but it was not taught as a doctrine; here it is taught as a doctrine. Then the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes would be the clerical system as doctrinising and allowing these things as running along with the doctrine of Balaam.
WWW Would 2 Timothy be the outlet from this? “Let every one who names the name of the Lord withdraw from iniquity” (chapter 2: [p. 73] 19).
JT It would be, because the Lord speaks here of the sword He had, that it was the sword of His mouth (verse 16). It is not simply what was written but what had been said against the evil. It is the word of God spoken in the mouth, ministry, not simply writing but in the mouth; and that is what He would use: faithful men like Antipas to speak to people. Antipas had stood as a faithful witness.
CHH Would you say that people who hold bad doctrine will ultimately teach it? Do you not think when people seek fellowship amongst us they should be challenged as to certain things: for instance, household baptism and sonship? I have known people seeking the fellowship who do not hold the truth as to household baptism. Do you think it should be a test of the fellowship to challenge people as to what they hold?
JT I am sure that is right. If we find one who refuses household baptism it is very questionable if he is in fellowship. If he is ‘in’ formally you would allow him to be there as in it; but the truth of that matter has been clear for years and years and has been followed generally by the brethren. How could you regard anyone refusing it as suitable for fellowship? But the word, “With the sword of my mouth” is very important. Let us have the thing clear ourselves by our mouths; the things we speak of. That is what is spoken, that is the sure antidote to all this that is described in verses 12 to 16.
RWS It speaks in verse 12 of the “two-edged sword”. Would the minister use that on himself first? He will examine himself.
RH Would this work out in a ministry meeting?
JT I think that is right. The Lord is helping us on these lines. Since ministry meetings became customary, God has used them to call attention to current things that are wrong, bringing in the positive truth to correct what is [p. 74] not right.
CHH Would not these addresses to the churches be a true indication of what the prophetic subject is? “The spirit of prophecy is the testimony of Jesus”, Revelation 19: 10. It is what Jesus has to say to conditions that are abnormal.
JT It is really illustrative of ministry meetings. The Lord is blessing them in the meetings.
JLP The Lord constantly says here, “I know”. Following up our brother’s remark, what we know would help us in ministering a word to the saints.
JT Just so.
RDG Is there any significance in the fact that Balaam’s activities in the Old Testament are made so clear in this scripture? We do not get so definitely there that he was as evil as the New Testament points him out to be.
JT It shows that the New Testament is essential to the right understanding of the Old. But they slew Balaam. He was found in the last battle with the Midianites; he was slain, showing he had links with them. The New Testament explains it; that he taught them what to do. The Old Testament tells us what they did, the outcome of his doctrine, and also that he was slain in the battle.
RH Do you make a difference between going on with a man who is not fully with us on every point and receiving one into fellowship in the same position?
JT I do. If we receive such an one we are allowing in through the gates someone we know is not right and that is not commendable. If he is already inside the gates, that is another matter. Then we have to be sure as to what he holds, whether it is a root condition or a leprous condition in him. That would all have to come up. Certainly if the thing is there at all before he is inside it will never do to let him in, because the wrong doctrine he holds is coming through the gates. No gate-keepers who are gate [p. 75] keepers according to the figure in this book of Revelation will let a man in unless he is in accord with what is inside. He could not eat of the tree of life unless he has washed his robes, and that applies to what he holds in doctrine.