PRAYER AS SEEN IN THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES (1)
PRAYER AS SEEN IN THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES (1)
Acts 1:14; Acts 1:23 - 26; Acts 2:42 - 47
JT It has been thought that by looking into this subject we shall see how the dispensation was introduced and maintained in prayer, in the power of prayer. As seeing the relation of prayer to the various turns the testimony took, we shall perhaps learn how to pray in the present time according to all the changing circumstances, and find relief, and learn perhaps how to pray more. We may learn how to pray, how to expect answers, and how to prepare ourselves for answers; for answers usually take the form of using those who pray.
The first scripture is characteristic, and is the key to the whole position, for it shows the composition of the company at that time, believers, and what authority there was and ability, and how they abode together; also how women had to do with it, for it is said, “These gave themselves all with one accord to continual prayer, with several women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren”.
The second passage shows how the difficulty occasioned by the defection of Judas was repaired, how the damage was repaired so that there should be the full administrative principle. Then finally we see how, the Holy Spirit having come in, the assembly itself was inaugurated as we have it now, that is, at least in principle; how prayer was a part of the general features in which the assembly functioned, and how it qualified as the instrument or vessel to be used of the Lord. It is thought these scriptures will suffice for us for this reading.
SP [p. 2] Would it be right to say this is the expansion of the Lord Jesus teaching the disciples to pray?
JT Just so; it is really the expansion of the gospel of Luke in which the Lord Jesus is seen praying so many times; and in chapter 11:1, one of His disciples seeing Him praying “in a certain place” — pointing to a local position — said, “Lord, teach us to pray”(Luke 11:1), which He did. So that we should begin with that thought: prayer began in the Acts with persons who knew how to pray.
JWD Do you think prayer always refers to something specific, or is it the attitude of heart Godward, the idea of prayer continuing?
JT The suggestion in verse 14 is the key position.
The need of prayer is always very great, pressure is always great, and it says, “These gave themselves all with one accord to continual prayer”. Now in chapter 6 you will remember, in view of deacons being appointed, the twelve said it was not meet that they should leave the word of God and serve tables, and then they said they would give themselves up to prayer and the ministry of the word (Acts 6:4). The ministry of the word is omitted here, it is just prayer: “These gave themselves all with one accord to continual prayer”. As yet there is no mention of the word of God, but prayer is always needed; whether we have persons of gift or not, prayer can always be exercised. So they “gave themselves”, meaning a definite giving up to that service, or should I say, that exercise in view of pressure. When those of the remnant were restored in the return from Babylon in Zerubbabel’s time, as written in the book of Ezra, they first of all set up the altar on its base; instead of beginning to build the temple, which requires the word of God, they just set up the altar on its base because of the enemies in those countries (Ezra 3:3). I think that is the position here. The need is great, [p. 3] the position required that they give themselves to this feature at the outset.
AR Is it because of the fact that on the one hand the Lord had ascended to glory, and on the other hand the Holy Spirit had not yet come?
JT Their position was therefore all the more vulnerable. That is what is meant when it speaks of the entire giving of themselves up with one accord to prayer and does not say anything about any other feature of service.
JS Do we have the beginning of assembly prayer here in verse 14?
JT It is the principle of it, but, of course, the assembly was not yet formed. It is in the second chapter that we have prayer as a formal element in the general assembly position. There, other things are mentioned as well as prayer; here it shows what consciousness of need there was before the Holy Spirit came.
CAM Connecting this in the Acts with the gospel of Luke, would it be right to say all God’s operations are in answer to prayer?
JT I do not know who prayed for the creation. What do you think about that?
CAM The matter of counsel was prior to everything else, but I mean God’s present operations.
JT Yes, and even as to eternal life and promise: the idea of promise includes eternal life which involved the expression of need, though very faintly suggested. But as to creation, you cannot say anybody prayed for that; it is a pure matter of sovereignty.
ANW Along with continual prayer, would it appear specific prayers flow from ministry such as Peter’s? It opens the way for specific prayer.
JT Yes, and specific need which, I suppose, might enter into all our local positions, that the administrative side might be furnished, that there [p. 4] might be administrative ability, because that is what the numeral twelve has in mind. Damage had occurred, which is very common and humbling, administrative ability fails or is damaged or wanting in some way. That is a specific matter. There were only eleven apostles whereas there should have been twelve. The Lord had gone on according to Matthew; the eleven met Him on the mountain; He did not stop because of the damage. But when we come to Luke, what is needed must be furnished. It is an important matter in our localities to discern what difficulty there may be, what damage may have occurred, so that the administrative side shall not be impaired and that we may go on in some little way representative of God. It requires the idea of twelve to represent God.
JS Is that why they returned to Jerusalem from the mount of Olives?
JT We must come in and get refitted; if we are damaged we must become subject to repair, have recourse to the Lord about it so that repairs may take place and there may be a representation of God, whether in any of us or in a local company.
HGH Does the thought of continual prayer imply spiritual understanding to know what to pray for?
JT I think it would. Allusion has been made to Luke 11 where the Lord is seen praying; it is in relation to a locality. He had just been to Martha’s house and she was very naughty; it is a very common thing in our localities; she persecuted the Lord and Mary her sister. The Lord is immediately seen praying and what required that prayer was the state of the locality, or rather, of Martha’s house, for the locality is not formally mentioned here but John supplies that side. Luke would say, A pretty hopeless case! John would say, It is not so hopeless. John would make full allowance for the smallest [p. 5] grain of the work of God in Martha. The Lord felt it very much; and so right on to verse 13 of Luke 11 He enlarges on the idea of prayer and what may accrue from it; the very greatest thing may accrue, the Spirit comes in answer to prayer. What can meet a state like Martha’s, a sister so naughty? It was her own house and she formally extended its hospitality but robbed it of all its pleasure by the way she spoke (Luke 10:40). The next chapter is the way of meeting it, and it is by following the Lord’s move in prayer. “Teach us to pray”, one of the disciples says, “teach us”; the whole position is affected and the whole position must be righted.
SMcC Is it of note that in the first introduction of the idea of twelve in the scripture it seems to be in regard to prayer? God listened to Rachel and God hearkened to Leah, as if in the mixed relations in the mothers in Genesis 30 the beginnings of the twelve are seen.
JT That is a very good allusion. Rachel finally says after Joseph is born, “Jehovah will add to me another son” (Genesis 30:24). That is the completion of the administrative principle, and it encourages us. The women are praying with them here; the motherly side will find an outlet in our prayer meetings.
ANW Say a little more about the women praying with them before assembly order had been set up by Paul.
JT “With several women” does not imply the women prayed audibly here, although we do know that Mary the mother of Jesus had spoken in Luke 1 and contributed to the service of God. We do know she could do that and do it well. It is what is called in ecclesiastical terms, the Magnificent, it is given such a status in ecclesiastical places: “My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit has rejoiced in God my Saviour”,(Luke 1:46) as she went on she covered the ground as Hannah of old. Hannah’s composition is called [p. 6] a prayer but there is not a word of prayer in it. The spirit of prayer must have been behind it. That is what is in mind here, Mary would thoroughly support any prayer that Peter or any of the apostles would offer; her spirit would be with them, especially in the knowledge she had of the Lord Jesus; no one else had such knowledge as she.
SP Would the thought of the support of prayer be seen in 2 Kings 19 in the matter of Sennacherib, where the priest and the prophet and the king all enter into the position?
JT That is a good example of what may accrue from prayer. Of course it is a special obligation now because of the war and the testimony; but here what the Lord would help us in is to get into the spirit of the company in the upper room. They had come from the mount of Olives and, as has been remarked, names are given of those who were there. We are told how far it was from the mount of Olives to Jerusalem, “a sabbath-day’s journey off. And when they were come into the city, they went up to the upper chamber, where were staying both Peter, and John, and James, and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James son of Alphaeus, and Simon the zealot, and Jude the brother of James. These gave themselves”, that is, the apostles by themselves first, “these gave themselves all with one accord to continual prayer, with several women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren”. The conjunction putting Mary and the Lord’s brethren by themselves is to be borne in mind. They are by themselves at the outset with their knowledge of the Lord, that is, any who have special knowledge are by themselves; it is a question of subjective conditions that are there at the beginning. The apostles are the ones that took the lead in this matter [p. 7] of prayer.
JWD What is the difference between this kind of prayer and what we get in Romans 8:26, “For we do not know what we should pray for as is fitting”?
JT Romans is an elementary epistle, it does not speak of the formation of the assembly, although it leads to it. It is rather individual formation, so that we readily admit we do not know what we should pray for as we ought. It is suitable to bring that in. It is a good, wholesome thing for each of us just to accept that we are very defective in this matter of prayer. That chapter shows how the Spirit comes in and adds to us so that we should pray as we ought.
SJH Would the getting to the upper chamber help us in knowing what to pray for?
JT I think all that preceded this, from Luke’s point of view, entered into the upper room. It is a question of what was there on heaven’s account, on the Lord’s account, and how they acted on instinct; they did the right thing: “These gave themselves all with one accord to continual prayer, with several women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren”. These are by themselves, and this last element joined in adds its immense subjective instinct and power to the position.
AB In regard to your reference to the base of the altar in Ezra, the eleven are mentioned here, that they gave themselves “with one accord”. They are going on happily together; the spirit of dependence is amongst them and the spirit of confidence in God is there in a position that was outwardly hopeless, the Lord having gone and the Spirit not yet having come.
JT They are conscious of exposure, for no matter how advanced you are in the truth you are the object of attack. What can you do in prayer? The passage as to the armour of God in Ephesians 6 ends with, “Praying at all seasons, with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching unto this very thing with all perseverance and supplication for all the saints” (Ephesians 6:18). Because you are in the very front of things the enemy is dead against you.
AR I suppose Asaph in Psalm 73:17 did not know how to pray until he got into the sanctuary and got the right sense of things.
JT Quite so, then he understood their end; he knew how to name things. One of the most important things is the armour of light, the armour of God in Ephesians 6, in order to be able to name things. You know what to say when speaking to God, how to put right names on things.
ANW “Gave themselves” in Acts 1:14 is a strong term, is it not? James adds the word ‘fervent’ in connection with prayer, which is important.
JT Elijah was an example. The Lord Himself was the great Example. That fact enters into the prayer in the upper room; His mother was there to furnish the details so that we might understand Him in prayer. How many times He must have prayed in His mother’s house. His father’s house! How many times His brethren must have seen Him pray, although not entering into it! No example that He set would fall to the ground. No doubt it would be taken on in time, and His brethren are now nearly right. They had not been so before, but they are now. He dwelt with them, we are told in John 2:12, with His mother and His brethren for a short time. Now they are brought around to be thoroughly with Him and His apostles.
CN So that the exigency here is met. There is a breach, Judas has gone to his own place, but now they are praying and the result that follows in the next verses shows that the need is met in this particular way [p. 9] of prayer.
JT That is the order of the truth here. The general position requires prayer because we are so exposed, just as the remnant was. We are exposed to the enemies. But here they have recourse to prayer; there they had recourse to the altar. The position has been clearly stated in verse 15, “And in those days Peter, standing up in the midst of the brethren, said, (the crowd of names who were together was about a hundred and twenty,)” — there is a principle in that: a brother says something in relation to a specific matter, to repair a breach, and that brings in the second prayer.
CHH Would the exercises of Epaphras in Colossians 4:12 meet the matter to which the Colossian saints were exposed: “combating earnestly for you in prayers, to the end that ye may stand perfect and complete in all the will of God”?
JT That is what is stated, and I think it corresponds with what we have here. It would lead to Paul’s writing to them. No doubt the epistle was the outcome of this prayer of Epaphras, his urgent request as to what was needed at Colosse that they might stand “perfect and complete in all the will of God”. They were going on fairly well but they were defective, and the, epistle is to repair the breach; so that the second chapter finds the apostle himself in combat for them. So here the prayer is followed by, “In those days Peter, standing up in the midst of the brethren, said, (the crowd of names who were together was about a hundred and twenty,) Brethren, it was necessary that the scripture should have been fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke before, by the mouth of David, concerning Judas, who became guide to those who took Jesus; for he was numbered amongst us, and had received a part in this service. (This man then indeed got a field with the reward of iniquity, and, having fallen down headlong, burst in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out. And it was [p. 10] known to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that that field was called in their own dialect Aceldama; that is, field of blood.) For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his homestead become desolate, and let there be no dweller in it; and, Let another take his overseership. It is necessary therefore, that of the men who have assembled with us all the time in which the Lord Jesus came in and went out among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day in which he was taken up from us, one of these should be a witness with us of his resurrection”. Now the apostle Peter in his address here is bringing in the Lord. What an example Jesus had set in all the time in which He came in and went out, beginning from the baptism of John! What an example the Lord had set in coming in and going out among them! It would enter into this matter. The brother who was to be chosen was to be one of those who are assembly men because he should have full knowledge of the way the Lord had acted; that is the point in Peter’s address. It is a clear setting out of the position, which the word of ministry ought to be. The ministry meeting ought to cover local conditions above all, and to seek to furnish light as to how difficulties are to be met. And so they appointed two men who were in full accord with what had been said.
JS Does Luke introduce prayer to repair the breach Satan made in the twelve?
JT The Lord is the Model, you know. How often did they see Him pray on these occasions in which He came in and went out among them? How did He deal with specific matters? How did He deal with James and John when their mother came to Him and asked for a place for each of them? How did the Lord deal with them? That is the way of getting at the truth. How are we to deal with local matters as they arise? It is “not mine to give”,
[p. 11] He said to James and John(Matthew 20:23). He put them right; He just patiently instructed them about the matter. That place was not His to give. It is bringing out the wonderful economy He is inaugurating. It is the Father’s matter; we must bear that in mind; these are things that belong to the Father. We must not address our prayers to the Lord if they should be addressed to the Father. We address a far greater percentage of our prayers to the Lord than to the Father. The Lord says to the two, That is the Father’s matter. Then the other ten disciples were upset about this; they resented it, and the Lord set them right, too. This is the sort of thing we have to deal with, and the Lord Jesus coming in and going out among them would set the example for them; that is the point, that we may know how to deal with exigencies as they arise.
CN So that Peter’s word of ministry and the appointment of Matthias are again followed by prayer in this section.
JT That is the next thing: “They appointed two, Joseph, who was called Barnabas”, evidently a very worthy man, he has a surname; “and Matthias”, who has no surname. “And they prayed, and said, Thou Lord, knower of the hearts of all, shew which one of these two thou hast chosen, to receive the lot of this service and apostleship, from which Judas transgressing fell to go to his own place. And they gave lots on them, and the lot fell on Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles”. It is a beautiful record in entire keeping with the position, the Holy Spirit having not yet come. The lot is used; it is crude, but it is a crude time; the Holy Spirit has not come yet, but in gracious power they are left to do this themselves. It is what they did and the matter is successful. So it is said he was “numbered” with them, as if he fitted in and was recognised generally as [p. 12] the one.
SMcC The whole atmosphere seems to breathe a suggestion of unjealous feeling. That is an important thing in this great matter.
JT I think it is. James and John brought in jealousy and rivalry. The truth was that it was the Father’s matter. Are we putting the Father’s matters in the right place? Are we putting the Lord into matters that really belong to the Father?
CHH Would 1 Corinthians 12:5,6, where it speaks of the services connected with the Lord and the operations in connection with God, help at all in prayer?
JT It would; 1 Corinthians adjusts this matter of course. “There is one God, the Father, of whom all things, and we for him”, 1 Corinthians 8:6. Obviously that is the first great thought in the economy. Ephesians 4:6 enlarges on that, saying, “One God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in us all”, which would mean that that Person in the Godhead is over the universe and all matters of government and providential matters. He is over all these things. And then, “one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him”, 1 Corinthians 8:6. Clearly the Father comes first; the Lord’s administration is more limited for the moment, until the Father’s time arrives when the world will be judged by Him. “He has set a day in which he is going to judge the habitable earth in righteousness by the man whom he has appointed”, Acts 17:31.
AR Why is it in 1 Corinthians 12:28, that “God has set certain in the assembly: first, apostles”, whereas in Ephesians the Lord has “led captivity captive, and has given gifts to men”? Is one the assembly sphere and the other more general?
JT God is the more prominent idea in Corinthians: “the assembly of God which is in Corinth”, although the Lord has a great place too, because of the question of authority; but the order is, “God,
the Father”, and then the Lord Jesus: “God, the Father, of whom all things, and we for him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things”, 1 Corinthians 8:6.
ANW This was a specific prayer addressed to the Lord Jesus, I suppose, having in mind that He had Himself chosen the eleven.
JT It is a question whether it is or not; or whether it is a question of the continuance of the Old Testament manner of address. In all probability it would be the latter, whilst they would recognise the Lord Jesus by that title of ‘Lord’ when the Holy Spirit came down: “[p. 17] God has made him, this Jesus whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ”, Acts 2:36. I would think it is the Old Testament position, for the lot is still allowed.
JTJr The Lord’s part in this matter being in the confirmation of His appearing to the twelve?
JT Very likely. That is in 1 Corinthians 15, and it runs on to the appearings to Paul and to above five hundred brethren at once; it is a question whether it does not take in this session in Acts as well. He appeared to Cephas and to the twelve and then to above five hundred brethren before the Holy Spirit came. It would confirm the selection of Matthias.
JWD Would you say that as to anything about which you can address the Lord Jesus in prayer, you can, in a greater sense, speak to God as Father about it, whether in spiritual or temporal matters?
JT It is hard to say; you cannot be too specific as to what should be addressed to the Father because you find some things addressed to Both. Still, I think the economy is in mind in this book and Paul enlarges on it. It requires that we give more place to the Father, whereas as far as I see [p. 14] more place is given to the Lord in our prayers and thanksgivings, and songs too.
JWD I mean the place the Lord Jesus has in the economy is relative and specific. God as such is the supreme idea.
JT Quite so: “over all, and through all, and in us all”; that is, the first circle is narrower — “one body and one Spirit, as ye have been also called in one hope of your calling”; clearly that is the narrower thought. Then “one Lord, one faith, one baptism”, another wider circle; then “one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in us all”(Ephesians 4:4 - 6), that is the widest and the universal circle and includes everything the Father has to do with.
CHH In John 16:23 the Lord says, “In that day ye shall demand nothing of me: verily, verily, I say to you. Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give you”. How far does that go?
JT It has to be modified by other things: “And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, this will I do”, John 14:13. It is a question of context and the state the saints are in, whether they address the Father or the Lord.
TW Is it right to say that only as the Father is addressed are all three of the divine Persons involved in relation to prayer? In speaking to the Lord Jesus the Father is not involved. Is that right?
JT I should not say that the Lord Jesus is involved when we are praying to the Father, because the Father is that Person and does not include more than one Person in the Deity. ‘God’ either includes all three Persons, or is the one Person in the Deity who is in the place of God in the economy.
TW I was only thinking of the Spirit’s support here and the Lord Jesus’ intercession on high in [p. 15] speaking to the Father, as seen in the type of the golden altar. Perhaps you can help us more. I was thinking of the meeting for prayer on Monday evening. I had the feeling that the Lord Jesus is supporting our interests there and the Holy Spirit here as we speak to the Father.
JT That is true; we have access through Him by the one Spirit to the Father, but then we may speak to the Lord directly too, and in doing that we are speaking to one Person, and that one Person takes the second place in the economy.
CAM In speaking to the Father, is it an important fact that the Father commits all judgment to the Son? Is that to be taken into account in connection with various matters that have to do with judgment?
JT That one Person, the Father, does not judge any one. If it is a question of judgment He has committed all judgment to the Son, because He is the Son of man. That would mean that it is God’s judgment; throughout the Scriptures God judges, but it is not as Father. He judges, but it is as God. That may imply that He uses the Son in a mediatorial sense in judging. The bearing of that would be more future than present, when all judgment will be in the hands of the Son; even the lake of fire will be in His hands. This is the way judgment will be administered then. It is a question of the Father and the Son there, it is not God and the Son, it is the Father. If you bring in God, that may include the other Persons.
CAM I was wondering whether these matters that have to do with administration, and various things that we instinctively connect with the lordship of Christ would be a guide.
JT If we keep before us the economy as presented in Matthew 28:19, the Lord’s own words are, “Baptising them to the name of the Father,
[p. 16] and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”. If we keep that before us we shall be steadied in what we say as to divine Persons. This matter is carried forward into the epistles and especially into Paul’s epistles where the thought of the Father is distinctively brought out. There He is formally and officially in the place of Deity, in the place of Godhead, “one God, the Father”; the leading thought is God, but in the Father. Secondly it is “one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him”. Now in the second Person, so to speak, it is a mediatorial matter and that involves God in many instances, as in the statement, “by whom also he made the worlds” (Hebrews 1:2). God made the worlds, that involves God, although the Lord Jesus even in the Deity had a mediatorial service there. Mediatorial service does not necessarily require incarnation; “by whom also he made the worlds” was before incarnation. It was God that made the worlds, that is said constantly; still, the actual Person of the Deity that did it was the Son before He came into Manhood, before He became Son.
ANW While God the Father is not said to judge, God will judge this world in righteousness by that Man(Acts 17:31).
JT The judgment will all be carried out by the Son, but still it is God’s doing.
SMcC In verse 24 of chapter 1 they prayed and said, “Thou Lord”; what Person do you understand that to refer to?
JT It is the Old Testament setting, it is Jehovah that is in mind. Yet you cannot be too specific because they knew the Lord had gone up, but how much did they apprehend of His intercession on high, because the Holy Spirit had not yet come down to tell them? The Holy Spirit comes out from with the Father and He will testify. Their knowledge of heaven was very limited, yet Peter says,
“God has made him, this Jesus whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36). But that was after the Spirit came. If you had asked Peter what he had in mind, what could he have said? Was he speaking to Jehovah? He might have used that name. Luke gives it to us as God would have us read it, so that I would not like to say the Lord Jesus was not in his mind, but I would be disposed to think it was an Old Testament setting.
CHH In Acts 4:26 there is another reference to Jehovah, where they quoted Psalm 2. I suppose they used the word ‘Lord’ there in relation to Jehovah.
ANW And in Acts 2:20, 21, “Before the great and gloriously appearing day of the Lord come. And it shall be that whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved”; there it is Jehovah.
JT In chapter 4 it is ‘master’, ‘despot’, alluding to Jehovah. We have to remember that they were just emerging from Old Testament times. We are in a New Testament setting, and we forget that they were emerging out of the old position into the position of Christianity.
JTJr In chapter 4 they allude to “thy holy servant Jesus”(Acts 4:27); that confirms what you say, that God was the object of the prayer.
JT Jesus is called a ‘servant’ there, just so.
HB It does say, “Lord Jesus” in Acts 1:21. Do you think they had some light as to the position? “All the time in which the Lord Jesus came in and went out among us”.
JT Quite so, they knew He was the Lord, they constantly referred to Him as the Lord.
AR Perhaps the idea of the economy as referred to in baptising to the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is extended. The Lord says much to the Father in Matthew, and [p. 18] tells them to enter into their chamber and speak to their Father (Matthew 6:6). He would give them an idea of what was in His mind in regard to the economy.
JT No doubt Matthew keeps that much to the fore; they were the sons of their Father. But now they are acting of themselves as Jews, or Israelites, yet still as taught of Christ. How far they would speak to Him as ascended is the question. I would say that they still carried on the thought of God in Jehovah or in the name by which the Lord spoke to Him as the Father: “Our Father who art in the heavens”. That is how their minds would be set until the Holy Spirit came down. Now we must remember that tidings from heaven for Christians are by the Holy Spirit come down, sent down, too. That shows that He is, so to speak, a Servant of heaven to make known what is in heaven, and one of the prominent things there is what Peter says, that “God has made him, this Jesus ... both Lord and Christ”(Acts 2:36). Before that, in verse 33, he said that “He has poured out this which ye behold and hear”.
Now we have seen how the local position is repaired, and this is a very important matter, to see how local damage is repaired. How are we to carry on if something has happened that impairs the position? What is to be done? Are we to let it go at that? We must seek the Lord to bring in what is missing, so that we can go on locally as representative of what is in heaven, because the number twelve has administration in mind as a representation of what is in heaven.
Ques I was wondering if the Lord Jesus is brought in personally in this way(Acts 1:21) because He had made a personal selection of twelve men. This is His matter in that sense. Satan had made an attack and carried away [p. 19] one.
JT It is His matter, but still, as Paul says, “God has set certain in the assembly”, 1 Corinthians 12:28.
FNW Before He chose them He gave Himself to prayer.
JT Yes, the Lord gave Himself to prayer for a whole night before He selected them. The apostles are not deciding the matter here but are putting it before God. It is on the principle of lot, which is an Old Testament matter. The Holy Spirit has not come down yet, so that the position is pretty much what is was in Old Testament times. This is in a locality where the position has been damaged but where it has been repaired so that we can go on to normal assembly lines; that is what chapter 2 brings out. With the “added” persons it is said that they “persevered in the teaching and fellowship of the apostles, in breaking of bread and prayers”. And then we get a general description of the company. There is something there now for a breach has been repaired. There is something that God can recognise and to which He can add. Prayer has a great place in this, not simply specific prayers but the prayer meeting as part of the position.
JTJr Does a locality need to recognise a failure and repair it before they can go on?
JT That is how it stands. If we are to be representative of God there must be this principle of twelve. Unity is stressed; it is “with one accord” in chapter 1:14, so that there might be a representation of God, one of the greatest things.
JS Is this in order to establish the assembly on an immutable foundation?
JT That is assumed. This second chapter stresses the point, the Spirit come down from heaven would be there so that the assembly down here should respond to the light and grace of heaven. The point in these verses is to show how the “added” ones fall in with what was there; the whole company is now described, that “they persevered in the teaching and fellowship of the apostles, in breaking of bread and prayers. And fear was upon every soul, and many wonders and signs took place through the apostles’ means. And all that believed were together, and had all things common, and sold their possessions and substance, and distributed them to all, according as any one might have need. And every day, being constantly in the temple with one accord, and breaking bread in the house, they received their food with gladness and simplicity of heart, praising God, and having favour with all the people; and the Lord added to the assembly daily those that were to be saved”, Acts 2:42 - 47. That is the assembly position as it is from Pentecost to the present time. Paul’s ministry has added to that, but this is the great general position. One of the features is the department of prayer; it is a regular fixture, a regular institution attached to this position — prayer.
RWS Has a point of need been reached in the testimony requiring intensification of our week-ends, Saturday meetings and the Lord’s day, and then the prayer meeting on Monday and the ministry meeting on Tuesday?
JT I think that is the outline. We were noticing recently that while we are in the end of broken times there is something discernible of the original structure. I think we saw that in Ezra the old men were concerned about the original structure of Solomon’s house; they were weeping about it because it had gone. The others were rejoicing in the foundations of the new structure. The new would be smaller perhaps, although it has peculiar dimensions, but it is not just what Solomon’s structure was. I think that is the thing to keep in mind, the weeping and rejoicing mingled(Ezra 3:12,13). They are not contradictory of [p. 21] each other, each has its place. The new structure would carry some clear idea of the old structure and that is what Philadelphia means; you can see the outline of the old structure in what the Lord says of Philadelphia.
AR I think I can see more clearly the value of what was done in the days of Ezra, the twelve men that were selected to go up to Jerusalem to build the house. Before you have the building you must have the repairing of the administrative idea.
JT Yes; I think the Spirit of God keeps a clear outline of what there had been. Ezra does not give you the twelve names, but in Nehemiah you get the twelve names of those with whom the others came up. The idea of twelve is carried through, we ought to look for that in a locality. It is not a literal matter, not twelve men in any locality, but the principle of unity in love; thus the Lord is free to use whom He will and we shall not be in each other’s way; therefore there is a representation of God.
CHH Would that be seen in Acts 13:3? Would that be anticipating this or is it the extension of this, selecting those to serve? They prayed and laid their hands on certain ones who should serve.
JT That is right. We shall see an instance of it later in the choosing of the deacons, and in the form in which Paul and Barnabas set out the general thought. The administrative principle is carried through.
AR The last scripture you read is the idea of continuing what has been organised.
JT That is what it is, an organisation in a holy sense. You cannot have an organism according to God without love, not only love in each of us, but love amongst us. Love has authority. Love prohibits certain things, if in us, and amongst us; it is not only in one brother but love is amongst us; so the sisters,
[p. 22] too, will say about any decision, That is right. Love never fails. The idea of twelve is the manipulation of love; love operates easily through that number. The sisters come into it, too; they make inquiry and support what is right if love is amongst us, not only in the brothers but in the sisters too, love in the meeting. It is “love amongst yourselves”,(John 13:35), the thing is there.
CN Would it be right to say the repairing of the breach in the light of the whole assembly would correspond to the idea of the twelve?
JT That is the thought. You never lose sight of the idea of twelve running through this book: the laying on of hands in prayer, Jerusalem sending down the apostles to Samaria and Barnabas to Antioch are all on this basis. The Lord is said to have appeared to the twelve and then to all the apostles, the twelve being the manipulative side of the matter, the manipulation of love, and the apostles being authoritative individually. The Lord would confirm us in both these features.
ANW Persevering in prayers in chapter 2 would be somewhat different from chapter 1, continuing in prayer?
JT I think so; they persevered in the breaking of bread and prayers, meaning there would be opposition. These men were interfering with the seat of Moses, threatening to upset the whole matter. The devil is right against that, so the word ‘persevered’ is there.
ANW The idea of prayer is in the plural in chapter 2; each prayer is distinctive, specific, separate.
JT It is a question of what is set up publicly; instead of Jerusalem, instead of the temple, a state of things is set up which suitably preceded the teaching of the apostles. Those added committed themselves [p. 23] to the breaking of bread and prayers; that is the public position of Christianity as over against Judaism.
SMcC So that the teaching and fellowship of the apostles are like banks and channels in which the prayers move. Our prayers are governed by the light that is in the teaching and what is connected with the authority of the apostles.
JT Yes, like the banks of a river; all the brethren are going on within certain bounds. The teaching of the apostles is over against the teaching of the high priests; that is really what is here; it is the complete setting aside of the whole system. In the meantime the brethren are going on patiently and going to the temple; a new system has been introduced and one of the outstanding features is prayer, and the temple was where prayer was wont to be made. But the next chapter is the ‘hour’ of it, when “Peter and John went up together into the temple at the hour of prayer, which is the ninth hour”.
CHH Would the principle of repair be seen in 1 Kings 18:30? It says Elijah “repaired the altar of Jehovah which was broken down. And Elijah took twelve stones” and prayed and got an answer.
JT Very good.
CT Would ‘teaching’ coming first suggest that we should be intelligent in our prayers?
JT Yes, you should get the doctrine first. Doctrine is like the banks of a river within which love operates.
AR The Lord says “Hades’ gates shall not prevail against”(Matthew 16:18) the assembly, showing the impregnability of it; and the feature of prayer is preservative of it. They prayed for the deliverance of Peter.
JT We shall see how this matter of prayer opens up. They were unbelieving prayers when Peter was in prison; the brethren did not quite believe they would be answered, but still they carried on. What [p. 24] comes into this position is patience in their going still to the temple, because God was very patient with the Jews. We ought to be patient now with the profession, not to be too radical, but hold to the truth patiently, considerately, not cause people to turn away from it unnecessarily. The disciples went to the temple because God was still going on with it, still bearing with Israel, and spared ones were being taken care of in this new system, as much as to say to the Jews, This is better than what you now have. What care was extended to believers (many christians, not yet called Christians) amongst the disciples! In the assembly the care was much greater than that extended through the Jewish system. Three thousand people were converted at once and added to something very profitable; the Jewish system never afforded such care to individuals. So that it says, “Fear was upon every soul, and many wonders and signs took place through the apostles’ means. And all that believed were together, and had all things common”. There was great liberality and great love amongst them. The temple did not afford anything like this! For instance, the Lord had said, “This poor widow has cast in more than all”, Mark 12:43. This fact is stated in the gospels; the Lord stood over against the treasury and saw this widow. Presently the temple was to be thrown down; that system was not great enough for her offering, but this system is great enough, so it says that “all that believed were together, and had all things common, and sold their possessions and substance, and distributed them to all, according as anyone might have need”. There had never been a system like this before nor ever will be again, the system introduced in Christianity marked by the sacrifice that love would make for its objects. The temple could not afford anything like this! That is how God is moving on to bring out something that is greater than anything around us. “And every day, being constantly in the temple with one accord, and breaking bread in the house, they received their food with gladness and simplicity of heart, praising God, and having favour with all the people”. We should note their discrimination as to the breaking of bread in the house, because it expressly belongs to the new system. “And the Lord added to the assembly daily those that were to be saved”. The Jewish system did not afford anything like this.
SP Is the breaking of bread necessary for the nourishment of their affections in this new system?
JT That is the idea. They do not break bread in the court of the temple or in Solomon’s porch, it is in their houses, showing they had discriminating knowledge as to what should be done. Going into the temple shows the longsuffering of God, but the peculiar thing that belongs to Christianity must be treasured in its own place.
JS Would you say their houses would be clean places to break bread?
JT Well, their houses would be houses of converted people.
SMcC That word of yours as to patience is much needed today because God seems to be in a peculiar way putting us in touch with His work which has perhaps been hindered in development through wrong teaching and other things. You feel that we need that specially today.
JT It is an important thing to get that side in mind, not to be too drastic with people. You want to deliver such as should be saved. There are many of the Lord’s people and you must not be too drastic with them.
JS Do you regard chapters 1 and 2 as transitional?
JT Yes, Judaism was still there.