⬇ EPUB

Reading 4

A.J.G. We have before us in these meetings the thought of the assembly of Christ against which the hostilities of Satan are directed, and that raises the question of knowing what there is in our localities; for the attack of the enemy is against the truth in its practical reality. Satan raises no objection as to right thoughts we may have, but against the effective expression of these thoughts. In our localities, there is an expression of the truth, and it is there that the enemy’s attack is found. What comes to light in these scriptures is that the assembly is characteristically of Christ. The epistle to the Colossians develops that especially. The assembly is the body of Christ and all that is not of Christ must be refused.

We have considered the parables particularly in chapter 13; we were struck particularly by the thought of the treasure of which the characteristic feature is to be hidden. We must not therefore be discouraged by outward smallness, for the Lord never had in view that the assembly would have a prominent place in the world; He had rather in view that it would be hidden. There is also the important thought of the one pearl having a great price in the Lord’s eyes; the beauty of unity among the saints in every locality, this beauty flowing out from the fact that one Man is before the heart. That is what the Lord would secure and maintain in each locality. All that is yet more emphasised in chapter 16, where we have seen yesterday that Peter confesses the Lord as being the Christ, the Son of the living God. That was the light that was in his soul as having been given him by the Father. The Christ is a very exclusive title implying that every other man is refused. The Son of the living God implies His personal dignity that eclipses that of every other. That equally implies that He is the Object of the Father’s affections and the assembly is united to Christ and set in a place of love because Christ Himself is loved by the Father.

In the passage we have come to read, the Lord begins to teach the disciples as to the moral bearing of the truth, that is to say that He is the Christ, and as we have said, every other man is rejected. The religious leaders of that time would not receive that. It is also not accepted by the religious leaders of our day. So the Lord says that He was about to suffer many things from the religious leaders of the time and He will be put to death and rise the third day. Man must be put aside so that Christ should be all, and the natural heart cannot accept that. One would be reminded that when God sent Samuel to Bethlehem to anoint the man whom God had chosen as king, Samuel says, “if Saul hear it, he will kill me”, that is to say that if Saul saw that he was going to be displaced, that would produce enmity in his heart. This is what the presence of the Lord has produced when He was down here; it was the testimony that every other man had to be removed so that Christ alone should remain, and that His assembly, His body should be formed. That immediately produced the rejection of Christ on the part of those who were prominent and responsible, and the Lord says that this will happen and must be accepted. Peter immediately brings in the principle of corruption: he says, “God be favourable to thee, Lord; this shall in no wise be unto thee”. These are the gates of hades which bring in immediately some feature of opposition, and the Lord exposes it in its true character. Peter expressed kind feelings, but it was only sentimental and not spiritual, and the Lord shows that that emanated from Satan.

A.G. Would you help us as to the need which appears among the saints continually to make a difference between sentimentality that pleases the natural man, and spirituality.

A.J.G. The answer is in what the Lord says to Peter: He says to him, “thy mind is not on the things that are of God, but on the things that are of men”. It is a matter of our thoughts being controlled by the same thoughts as God.

A.G. One discerns the danger of accepting a ministry marked by sentimentality.

A.J.G. Hence the importance of our minds being controlled by the Spirit of God. In 1 Corinthians, it is said that the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God for they are folly to him; but it says first, “we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God”, which shows that the thoughts of the world are entirely different from those of God. This incident sets before us the importance of our minds being continually controlled by the thoughts of God.

P.A.N. Do you think that there is a great danger in the mixture of the truth with human sentiments, which is iniquity?

A.J.G. That is a constant danger. I believe that it will be found if one examines men’s thoughts, that they come from the world in its religious or political character, or social, and that there is not even partial acceptance of the fall of the first man, with the necessity that this man should be completely rejected and that the second Man who is from heaven should be introduced. In order that we should come to that, it is necessary that there should be on the one hand the cross of Christ, and on the other the gift of the Holy Spirit. There is really nothing for God without the truth of the cross and the coming of the Holy Spirit. All that has to be accepted without reserve.

E.J.S. In relation to the oblation, it is said in Leviticus 2: 11: “for no leaven and no honey shall ye burn in any fire-offering to Jehovah … neither shalt thou suffer the salt of the covenant of thy God to be lacking from thine oblation: with all thine offerings thou shalt offer salt”.

A.J.G. It is very important to see that neither leaven nor honey are allowed in the sacrifices. Leaven, as we have already said, is the evil that inflates; the honey would relate to human sweetness and sentimentality, while the salt would refer to the fear of God that must always be found in us and which must be manifest in submission to the truth.

A.R. Is it not remarkable to see that after having failed the first time, Peter goes on in chapter 17 on the mountain in introducing wrong thoughts?

A.J.G. That is indeed very remarkable. These chapters are very interesting, showing us the patient teaching of the Lord for Peter, who is a representative disciple; and therefore representing each of us. That shows how easily we occupy ourselves with the truth for a moment, and then fail when we are tested practically; the secret of the fall coming from our minds not being suitably controlled.

P.P. So it is profoundly sad and humbling to see that Peter is the object of a direct communication on the part of the Father and that he then falls under Satan’s influence.

A.J.G. It is indeed very humbling: that shows how much we must watch. I believe that we would be helped in our various localities if we keep in mind that Christ’s assembly is there, it is there in principle wherever one is governed by the truth, but it is the object of constant attack by Satan. It is therefore necessary to watch constantly and to examine ourselves to see how far our minds are governed by God’s thoughts.

P.A.N. Must we face constantly with the help of the Spirit discrimination between good and evil?

A.J.G. Quite so. So the Lord says, “If any one desires to come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me”. My cross is the way in which the cross of Christ has its bearing on me. People often believe that their cross is some burden special to them that they have to bear, but that is not at all the idea of the cross: my cross is the bearing of the cross of Christ on me, as Paul says, “I am crucified with Christ, and no longer live, I, but Christ lives in me”. That is the language of someone who takes up his cross and who follows Christ. I believe that we will see how all that helps us to come to the root of things. If what I am is maintained in the light of the death of Christ, and if Christ is kept before the heart, then what is of Christ will be expressed in the saints in a locality, being also marked by the same features. There will be under Christ’s eye the beauty of the one pearl, and we will be preserved from the efforts of the enemy who would bring in what is contrary.

P.A.N. Have we a thought of continual salvation at the beginning of our reading: “Jesus began to show”?

A.J.G. Yes, that is so.

P.A.N. Now the Spirit takes the place of the Lord to continue to show us.

A.J.G. Exactly. In this part of the Scriptures, the Lord gives the disciples an impression of the way in which His rejection on man’s part is constantly in view, and that must be accepted; so that it is said in chapter 17: 12, “Thus also the Son of man is about to suffer from them”, and then in verse 22, “The Son of man is about to be delivered up into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and the third day he shall be raised up”. It is the character of the teaching the Lord constantly repeats, but if He speaks of His sufferings on man’s part, He also adds that He will be raised the third day.

L.M. The disciples seem to be saddened by the fact that the Lord is going to suffer, but they seem not to have understood the value of the resurrection.

A.J.G. The resurrection of Christ is so important because it signifies that God is showing forth the Man whom He has brought in and whom He has established for ever beyond Satan’s reach, and that He has left every other man in death. It is so important that we should accept that in our souls so that our natural features should be put aside and that we should be entirely cast upon the Spirit, drawing our character, our impulses, and everything from Him.

In chapter 17, the Lord takes three disciples and leads them up the mountain. He gives them the privilege to be with Him in His own circle. It is something like the privilege which can be enjoyed on the first day of the week, when the Lord is pleased to give us some touch of His presence and a view of His glory. The disciples have been led up a high mountain, that is to say that they are not lifted off the earth, nevertheless they are in a sphere above the level of the earth and there they have a view of the Lord in the glory that is proper to Him. They see two men who can be identified and who are with Him. There is a quite distinct glory of Christ which must be grasped because it says that “his face shone as the sun, and his garments became white as the light”. Christ is One in whom all the light of God shines, and on the other hand, He is One in whom can be grasped the full thought of God as to man. This is why it is said that “his garments became white as the light”. His garments refer to what He was as Man, as He could be taken account of, and they were “white as the light”. There was a perfect correspondence between the whiteness of His garments and the shining of the light.

P.A.N. You have made reference to Lord’s day morning, in reference to this passage. Could one associate it with the passage in 2 Corinthians 3: “transformed according to the same image”?

A.J.G. I think so indeed. I believe that it is very important to see that, on the one hand the full shining of the glory of God is seen in Christ, and on the other, the full response to that in the character of Man, so that what is final is reached. Moses and Elias represent the dispensations that had preceded, in which there had been a partial light from God, but now we are come to what is final, all being fully expressed in a Man. In apprehending the light, we see in Christ One who answers fully to the light and we must be conformed to His image.

Through the work of God, we are already of Him and made fit to be with Him. The disciples were already with Jesus on the mountain and Moses and Elias were there also, God showing that He would have men like Christ and with Christ in His presence.

E.J.S. It speaks here of a “high mountain”, but Peter in his epistle speaks of “the holy mountain”.

A.J.G. The high mountain would indicate that everything is entirely on a level well above what is down here. In chapter 2 of the epistle to the Ephesians, it is said that “God … has raised us up together, and has made us sit down together in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus”. It is not heaven exactly, in the future, these are heavenly privileges which can be entered into now in the power of the Spirit, which corresponds in a sense to the high mountain. But Peter in his epistle, speaks of it as the holy mountain, which shows that he had a great feeling of the holiness of the occasion and of the position.

P.A.N. Do you see a link between the holy mountain, the high mountain, and the upper room?

A.J.G. The principle is the same, except that the high mountain would give the idea of elevation more than the upper room, but it seems to me that we could relate that to what we enjoy on the first day of the week. In the course of the week, in our life of responsibility, in our affairs, we have the position of disciples, the part of disciples, and if we are faithful to Christ and to the teaching of the cross, that implies in principle losing our life down here, but the Lord would then give us a compensation on the first day of the week, with the feeling of being with Him in heavenly privileges and in this elevated position, the experience of privilege being the compensation for the experience of the loss proved down here.

P.P. Why do you think only the three disciples had this privilege of being with the Lord on the mountain, Peter, James and John?

A.J.G. There is an element of sovereignty in that, as I suppose: if we can touch these great truths a little, we have to recognise that there is an element of sovereignty. The saints do not all enjoy these thoughts that we enjoy although they could indeed enjoy them if they took the path indicated in 2 Timothy 2, but there is a certain element of sovereignty.

P.A.N. Would it agree with there being two or three who are enough to be in the blessing of this magnificent perspective of the high mountain?

A.J.G. That is very interesting and we come to that thought in chapter 18, where two or three are gathered together to the Name of Jesus; two or three sufficing to manifest this thought of the truth. All that would encourage us when very often the character of the local position is so small.

A.R. Does the question of the testimony come in also: two or three witnesses, Paul says?

A.J.G. Yes, I think so. All that is realised as response to the thoughts of God and at this time has a certain bearing on the testimony. It is a testimony to the Lord’s support to maintain the truth in the presence of Satan’s opposition; it is something that we have to take to heart, I believe, that before the Lord’s coming there must be a response to every feature of the truth, so that the Lord will not take the saints from this scene as having been defeated, beaten, but rather as having been victorious.

E.J.S. Like Stephen.

A.J.G. Just so.

E.J.S. In Matthew and in Mark, it is Peter, James and John, and in Luke it is Peter, John and James. Why the change?

A.J.G. We have the same thing with Aquila and Priscilla. The Lord would not want us to consider ourselves greater than one another. Peter is always the first because the Lord had given him the first place; it is said in this same gospel, “first Simon, who was called Peter”. But we must also guard against seeking to have a place in view among the brethren. This is why it is James and John, and John and James.

L.P.N. I thought of what is written in chapter 20 of John, verse 19: “When therefore it was evening on that day … the doors shut where the disciples were, through fear of the Jews”. The Pharisees always seek a prominent place, but in the upper room the doors are shut.

A.J.G. The doors were shut through fear of the Jews. The Jew is the religious man in each one of us, but he must be excluded in order to be able to enter into true spiritual privileges.

So the voice that comes from heaven says, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight: hear him”. Peter suggests that there are three different systems: one where Christ would be supreme, another where it would be Moses, and yet another where it would be Elias, but the voice from heaven immediately puts all that aside: “This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight: hear him”. It is the final point that is reached and that excludes everything else. You could never place the privileges of Christianity alongside whatever it may be. It is the height of God’s thoughts to which one is brought and those who are in the assembly have a place with Christ in the position of sons.

P.A.N. Do we have the result of the teaching of this passage in verse 8: “Jesus alone”?

A.J.G. I am sure that is so.

P.V. Could you help us about the fact that “a bright cloud overshadowed them”?

A.J.G. It would seem that it is the immediate presence of God. One has often said that the same word is used to indicate the cloud that took possession of the tabernacle; it is the immediate presence of God; so that it covered them, it obscured nothing.

R.G.W. Why does the voice say, “hear him”?

A.J.G. I believe that it is a word to adjust us because of what Peter had said. Peter had placed Moses and Elias in an equal position with the Lord, while the voice says, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight: hear him”.

E.J.S. We do not have the word, “hear him” at the baptism.

A.J.G. It is a word to adjust us. When Peter gives his own account in the second epistle, he leaves this expression aside, because he also leaves aside what he had said about the three tabernacles; he knew he had expressed something that was not spiritual, and so he leaves this suggestion entirely; not mentioning the tabernacles, he had no need to bring in the words “hear him”. He leaves us with the full spiritual thought of the incident; they had been with Christ in the immediate presence of the Father and he says that they had heard such a voice.

B.O. Why then is it said, “a bright cloud”; Peter speaks of it as “the excellent glory”?

A.J.G. I believe that when Peter writes his second epistle, he is full of the glory of this occasion. He has been introduced with James and John into the greatest privileges which could be accorded to man: the immediate presence of the Father with the Son, hearing such a voice, and even the tone of the voice that expressed such deep delight that the Father found in Christ. It is truly the final point to be reached; this is that in which God can rest in man, found in Jesus; and there are certain men who are with Him, like Christ, not literally at that moment, but they will be led because they will be like Him. What God has wrought in us is entirely of Christ. There is nothing greater that we could have here in this scene. Peter was full of the glory of the scene: he speaks of it being “the excellent glory”.

P.A.N. Is it not desirable that on Lord’s day morning we should enter a little into this scene of excellent glory, which could colour the whole week?

A.J.G. I am sure that is important and in a sense there could be nothing greater than to find one’s part in the greater joy that belongs to the Father, because this voice is addressed to Peter, James and John; this voice of the Father is not addressing Christ, it does not say ‘Thou art my beloved Son’, but it says, “This is my beloved Son”. It is the Father who is speaking to Peter, James and John, leading them in the current of His own satisfaction in the Person of Christ.

L.M. It is truly remarkable to see that Peter asks of the Lord, “If thou wilt”, and the Lord does not give an answer; it is the Father who expressed the full satisfaction that He has in His Son.

A.J.G. That is indeed very remarkable.

E.J.S. Do we see in John, in his gospel, the appreciation on the Father’s part as to the Person of His Son, and how we can enter into this appreciation, while in James we have someone who actually laid down his life for the Lord in the testimony?

A.J.G. You would say that James belongs to the last part of chapter 16; he is truly a martyr, he lost his life for Christ, while John continued in the appreciation of Christ and gave his gospel. I believe that is the reason for which the Lord called James and John “sons of thunder”, because thunder is a testimony that God gives and which men must take account of. God obliges me to pay attention in sending a clap of thunder. James and John represent these two features of the testimony. God obliges men to take account of it. There are many who prefer to die rather than to deny Christ. This is what James did, but on the other hand there are those who have continued in life until the end; this is what John presents. There is no testimony more powerful than the testimony in life and I believe that there are these two testimonies that God takes account of in James and John, naming them Boanerges, sons of thunder. It is not an allusion to what they were naturally, for the Lord never gives a surname to our natural traits; what He surnames is what is spiritual.

L.M. Why does the Lord say to Peter, “Simon, son of Jonas”, John 21: 5?

A.J.G. I believe it is because He was testing him deeply; He puts him to the test to show what was in him. So, He does not call him Peter, but He calls him “Simon, Son of Jonas”, because he had denied Him, so as to lead him to this point where he can say, “Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I am attached to thee”, and the word that is used there to say “thou knowest” is objective knowledge. He is not referring to the knowledge that the Lord had as being God, knowing all things, but he is referring rather to the knowledge that He might have of what He saw in Peter. The Lord led Peter to that point where He could see in him something that is of God.

P.P. It is the same thought in Matthew 16: “Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona, for flesh and blood has not revealed it to thee”.

A.J.G. Save that in that passage, He is not testing Peter, but He desired that Peter should take account of himself in contrast to those alongside him, for example, he is one among many, “Simon Bar-jona”, and yet the Father had given him this marvellous light as to Christ; he should rejoice in that; he was blessed.

A.R. When the apostle Paul speaks of Peter, he calls him “Cephas”, the name that the Lord had given him. What is the thought in that?

A.J.G. He speaks of Peter with respect. Now, at the end of chapter 17, we find Peter who has a new need to be adjusted. He has had this marvellous experience on the mountain and when he is asked this question, he says that his Master would pay the didrachmas. It would seem extraordinary that he could think that the Son of God would have to pay tribute. That shows how easily after having enjoyed the greatest privileges, we can accept men’s thoughts and leave God’s thoughts. But the Lord uses it to give a little more teaching, asking him a question which brings the right answer from Peter, that is to say, if the kings of the earth would receive tribute only from strangers; they would not receive tribute from sons. Then the Lord says, “Then are the sons free”; they are free. But that leads the Lord to give a new touch of grace in bringing in first the same thought that Peter is a son with Christ, because the Lord says to him: “take that and give it to them for me and thee”. It is something similar to what the Lord says in John 20: “my Father and your Father”.

P.A.N. Could one also think of the word, “I am with you all the days, until the completion of the age”?

A.J.G. In that passage, the Lord is with us for our support in the testimony down here. But here in chapter 17, He associates us with Himself, “for me and thee”. This must have been a marvellous experience for Peter, when the Lord tells him to go to the sea, to take a hook, to cast it and take the first fish that comes up, “and when thou hast opened its mouth thou wilt find a stater”, exactly what was required to pay the tribute for the Lord and for Peter. He had to realise that he was in the presence of the Creator Himself. These are the things that are brought out: a fish that can be commanded by the Lord at the right moment with the amount of money that is just necessary. That ought to impress us as to what is brought out now in Christianity, that is to say, that we are associated in grace with the Son of God, this very Person being Himself God.

P.P. Have we also the thought of association with Christ in the testimony?

A.J.G. I believe that comes into it. You would say that the testimony must be clothed with a certain dignity?

P.P. You have quoted John 20; we have our association in the privileges of the assembly and I would ask myself if this goes along with the testimony?

A.J.G. What we enjoy in privilege must also have its result in the testimony. The Lord personally has a testimony down here, having a dignity that is proper to it.

L.M. It is said in the epistle of James that we all often offend, and here Peter fails three times in his way, but he does not seem to be obstinate, which helps in the adjustment.

A.J.G. I believe that the passage is very interesting, showing how the Lord is patient in teaching Peter, and by extension in teaching us all. We must have in our minds that the assembly is the body of Christ, drawing its life and its character from Himself; and as being associated with One who is none less than the Son, we should be exercised to seek to maintain the features of the truth in every locality where we are set.

P.S.C. What would the thought be in “that we may not be an offence to them”?

A.J.G. The Lord took care not to be misunderstood. This tax had in view the support of the temple, and the temple had not yet been publicly set aside, so that the word of the Lord would give us the impression that He would not despise what represented the house of God at that time. That shows us that He was entirely free. The great feature of the position of sons is that they are marked by liberty.

E.J.S. But now the Lord is outside the religious systems; He is knocking at the door.

P.O. Would that have a bearing on Romans 13, where the apostle says, “For on this account ye pay tribute also”?

A.J.G. It is a matter of rendering what is due to those who have rights over us, but the religious world has absolutely none. It is a matter of the liberty of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is here to help us and to move us according to God in every position.

P.P. And the Lord is great enough to face every position that we ourselves meet in the testimony.

A.J.G. Exactly. I believe that it is important to see that the temple at this moment was still recognised by God. But when Stephen rendered his testimony, Jerusalem was by then effectively set aside. We have to take account of all that too. At the beginning of the revival, at the beginning of the last century, there was a certain transitional period in the course of which servants would have recognised the churches and chapels up to a point, but the Lord did not delay to show that that was from then on entirely contrary to the truth and that they could no longer be recognised.

P.P. Would we have an example of that with Paul when he circumcised Timothy on account of the Jews?

A.J.G. That is a very good example. He had taken Timothy and circumcised him because his father was a Greek, so that in entering upon the ministry of Paul, he did not offend the Jews. But on the other hand, when the question was raised in Jerusalem when certain ones wanted the Jewish believers to be circumcised, then Paul took Titus with him who was Greek, and would not that he should be circumcised; and so he maintained the truth.

P.A.N. Have we another example with the eating or not eating of meats sacrificed to idols?

A.J.G. Yes, indeed.

____________________

← Previous 29 of 44 Next →