THE SERVICE OF CHRIST TO HIS PEOPLE AS IN ASSEMBLY
[p. 494] THE SERVICE OF CHRIST TO HIS PEOPLE AS IN ASSEMBLY
Luke 24: 36 - 43; Acts 1: 1 - 5
JT It is in my mind that we should speak together about the Lord’s service when we are in assembly. There is His service to us individually, of course, but it may not be so clear that we need His service as together in assembly. As the Lord comes in He acts according to what exists, so that each meeting is not the same as those preceding it. What happens depends upon the state of the meeting. Another thing is that the assembly’s formation and continuation upon earth is according to what the Lord did in it at the outset, and what He does; so that there is a representation of Him in it. Thus in John’s account of the Lord’s appearing, coming into the midst, there is no adjustment mentioned. In Luke’s there is, it is needed too and effected. Whereas in Luke’s account in the Acts, what happens is normal, it is the Lord impressing Himself upon them, as it says, “having by the Holy Spirit charged the apostles whom he had chosen, he was taken up; to whom also he presented himself living, after he had suffered, with many proofs; being seen by them during forty days, and speaking of the things which concern the kingdom of God; and, being assembled with them ...” It is the Lord impressing Himself upon them, and the Spirit was the power by which things were done. These are the general thoughts that are in my mind, and if they are apprehended perhaps we shall make more room for the Lord in relation to His supper, to act according to what He sees is needed.
HFN Would you say a little more about what you have in mind as to the contrast between the individual service the Lord renders us, and the service rendered in assembly?
JT [p. 495] Well, each one is conscious, I am sure, of the need of help from the Lord in view of assembling. You see in the letter to Corinth how much is said before the actual assembling of the saints is reached. Each needs a fresh touch, I think, and therefore, in view of the assembly, it is wise to have to say to the Lord, as we have opportunity, and especially in regard of our houses, our relations in our houses, so that our minds are free in assembling together. That is a matter, of course, of the Lord’s official service — “always living to intercede for them” (Hebrews 7: 25), and “we have a patron with the Father”(1 John 2: 1), and the Spirit also is here to help us. So that we are not in assembly in an incongruous state or attitude, we are there suitably; we come in suitably and take our places suitably. It is said of the Lord Himself that “when the hour was come, he placed himself at table, and the twelve apostles with him” (Luke 22: 14). His deportment would be exemplary. Then, as sitting together, we need help, and particularly as He comes in. What I have been remarking is preliminary, but as He comes in, as He is discerned there, what scope is He given? His coming in tests us. As we have observed, according to Luke 24, what preceded His coming to them was quite in order; they were speaking about the Lord, how He had appeared to Simon, and how He was made known to the two at Emmaus in the breaking of bread, but His coming in caused derangement and perturbation; a condition that was unfit for Him, and yet He was there.
LM Have you in mind that the chapter shows how the Lord served personally in relation to the two going to Emmaus, preparatory to the assembly?
JT That helps to show the difference between the help we may receive from Him individually, and how He serves us in the assembly.
HFN Would you open up the character of the Lord’s service in relation to [p. 496] the assembly?
JT Well, I think many have the thought that His headship comes into view at once, but that would depend upon conditions. It is not headship that you get in these verses, for adjustment was needed by the company.
NKMcL What do you connect the service with? Is it in relation to setting them free Godward in Luke 24, in relation to the covenant particularly?
JT That is involved, but we have to be sure as to Himself. Can we discern the Lord? They did not know it was the Lord, they supposed that they beheld a spirit. That illustrates what I had in mind — the confusion there may be with us. When they came together at Corinth, apparently, there was room for spirits, bad spirits, and they had to be discerned. The Lord in this sense is not a spirit; He is a Spirit in another sense. “The Lord is the Spirit” (2 Corinthians 3: 17). But He is a Man; so that He has to instruct them as to Himself; we have to be instructed as to how we discern the Lord and how we apprehend Him in assembly. Then when He is apprehended, we being in accord with Him, He will proceed as the Minister of the sanctuary. When He has His place in our minds, He is free to proceed, but if He is misapprehended, obviously He has to stop to adjust us.
AMH Do you think that not discerning the Lord with us is not discerning the touches He has given in thanksgiving? Would it take the form of not recognising some touches in thanksgiving in which features of Himself are brought before us?
JT That is it; it is in the “breaking of bread”. He is discerned in what He did at the outset. So that both in regard of the bread and the cup it is said “in remembrance of me”, (1 Corinthians 11: 24, 25). It is in what He did. It is not a spirit we see, but we apprehend Him as being made known in the breaking of bread. He is to be apprehended in that way in assembly. That will not hold eternally, it is while we are down here — a question [p. 497] now of His acquiring a place in our minds. We will see Him literally there, but not now. The assembly is inaugurated and constituted and continued by what He did; it is not a man-made thing, it is really out of Christ. “This do”, He says, both in regard of the bread and of the cup, and He is made known in that. So that it is not a spirit, but what He did with His hands and in giving thanks. He took the loaf and having given thanks, broke it, and He took the cup and blessed it.
CL Would the breaking of bread suppose that they had a previous knowledge of the Lord in so doing?
JT That is what I was thinking. It is Christ that began it, the assembly was inaugurated and is continued by what He did and said. He says, “My assembly”. How is He to be apprehended in it? Not as a spirit, for He carefully points out that “a spirit has not flesh and bones as ye see me having”.
ECM Why does the Lord specially draw attention to His hands and His feet?
JT It is Luke’s thought, it suggests service, it is a question of Him serving, that is, He is to be understood in the assembly as serving. He is free to move wider than that, in the sense that His feet carried Him here in grace; but the idea is that He should be apprehended as serving in the assembly. John mentions the side instead of the feet, because he is not stressing the service side of His position as Luke is. Luke includes the priestly side as well, for it is priestly service, compassionate service. It is doubtful whether any of us could be in the assembly without it.
EFS Do we need that service every time we are in assembly? We cannot be in the assembly without His service.
JT Quite. Hence it is a new matter every time. So the state of the meeting comes into evidence, it cannot be ignored. The Lord will not ignore it, nor will He pass by any incongruous condition; He is ready to serve, and will effect needed adjustment.
AJB [p. 498] Would the presentation of the hands and feet be expressed in a hymn or thanksgiving?
JT Certainly; He comes to us in what is done mediately. When you think of the hands, the Lord took the loaf and the cup. It is His own side, His own activity, and it is to be apprehended in that way. But then much more comes into mind, many things attaching to Him in that position. He is Mediator of the covenant, and He stands in relation to the assembly as His own. His relations to the assembly have to be recognised too, and what He would do in the way of support. “His left hand is under my head, And his right hand doth embrace me” (Song of Songs 2: 6).
Rem It is quite possible to be saying right things and yet not apprehend the movements of the Lord in assembly.
JT I am sure that is so. We are, perhaps, too theoretic in our service, without taking account of the actual state of any given meeting.
HFN Is your thought that the sense of grace in the Lord’s service would enhance the position and dignity of the assembly to us?
JT Yes; and He would intimate that He wishes to have things in a certain way; it is a question of what is suitable. He maintains His own rights in the assembly, and His own standard; He gives us to understand how things are.
Ques Is this preparatory service in view of a response to Himself, and His further service in view of a response to God?
JT Quite so. There must be a response to Christ in the assembly, that cannot be passed over, though I am afraid it is passed over. Then what God is to the assembly, covenant-wise. So that there must be some room for Christ as Mediator of the covenant.
Ques Do I understand you to infer that the character of the Lord’s service when He comes in is determined by [p. 499] the condition of the meeting?
JT Yes. The condition of the meeting comes before Him. As to His entrance into Martha’s house, for instance, it says, she “received him into her house”. That was good, but then, conditions were not right, they were very uncomfortable, so far as she was concerned they were very uncomfortable, and it may be that those leading in a meeting, those responsible more particularly, are not just right, and He has to set them right.
Ques Would it be assuming too much to say that the Lord would commence as Head immediately if the conditions were right?
JT No doubt; He is to be discerned as present. Conditions have to be such as headship requires, that is the assembly characteristically. He is Head of His body the assembly.
HFN You allude to the Lord’s service, first in relation to adjustment, then as Mediator of the new covenant, then as Minister of the sanctuary, then as Head. Would you indicate the line on which the assembly comes into these spiritual features?
JT The Lord needs the assembly for headship, not simply so many persons nominally breaking bread. He needs the assembly characteristically, that we should be set together in affection for one another. If that be not there, He moves that it should be there, that our relations, our attitude to one another, should be right. That is really priestly service. He is compassionate upon the ignorant and the erring, so to speak, to get us into right relations with one another. Then there is His office as Mediator of the new covenant: He effects the covenant, He makes it effective. Then there is His relation with the assembly as such, on His own account, not only to lead her, but for reciprocal affections. The Song of Songs helps greatly on this line, that is, the relations between Christ and the assembly, when the assembly is there, when He has it, in a characteristic sense. Then He is Minister of the sanctuary, that is a wide thought. He has to do with the sanctuary, that is [p. 500] not simply the assembly viewed locally, but the saints viewed as sanctified, their holy attitude and relation, linking on with “heavenly places”. He is Minister of the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched, that is, it is pitched according to His mind; it is the saints in relation to one another. He is Minister of that and takes on the whole service, and the service primarily is Godward. “Let my son go, that he may serve me”. That is the basic thought in the mind of God, but all this intervenes in order that that thought should be reached.
HFN Perhaps we have been in too great a haste to move, and have not been prepared to wait in relation to the Lord’s gracious service to the assembly. Is it your thought that we should have more affectionate intelligence as to the Lord’s service before we move on to the Father’s realm?
JT Those of us who might be ready to enter into the full thought of service will not lose by waiting. Mary had to wait, but she was there, she was sitting at the Lord’s feet; she was not losing anything that was said to Martha. But if conditions in Martha’s house were to be right, Martha had to be put right in relation to her sister.
LM As Mediator of the new covenant, is He to be viewed on God’s side ministering it to us?
JT It is rather on our side toward God; He is Minister of the sanctuary, that is, He is there. The whole range of the sanctuary comes into view. It requires Him, we are not equal to that without Him. It requires Him to be there; it is a question now of the sanctuary and of what proceeds there.
Ques Do you think that the service of Moses in the book of Deuteronomy corresponds in any sense with the service of the Lord as you are presenting it? I was thinking of the closing words of the great mediator; he serves the saints up to the border of the inheritance. Then as in the land, the Israelite was to [p. 501] bring his basket of first-fruits to Jehovah (Deuteronomy 26: 1 - 5).
JT Of course Moses represents Christ as Apostle, but the principle of leading to a point is seen in him, as referred to. The priesthood entered into that, as representing needed help and sympathy. As in the inheritance the worshipper comes with his basket to the priest, and the priest takes it and sets it down before the altar of Jehovah. All depends on the priest. I mean that the position is dependent upon the Lord in all these functions, and we shall not lose in any of them, but shall be gaining as gathering up wealth all the time, as waiting upon Him. We are dependent upon the Lord, His features being discerned in the midst, how He moves and how the sanctuary comes into view and the service of God takes form. So that it is not of this creation, we have to learn to be spiritual and see what is in mind, what eternal things mean, what heavenly things mean.
CL Is that why the Lord is seen in Luke leading them out? He did not go without them, He led them.
JT Quite so. “He led them out as far as Bethany”, showing that He limits the movement to that place — already known as marked by response to Him. It is not the heavenly side, however, not the place of the full thought of the service of God. But in the corresponding point in assembly service there is a change and we then proceed in the liberty of sons.
In what we have been saying, we are seeking to keep before us the saints viewed as in assembly, and how the Lord serves, how essential His service is to us in it. What features there are of His service — the need of priestly service, having compassion on us; it would help us to disallow in our minds any incongruous thing, and regard each other in affection, thus answering to His thought in the body. It is a most testing thing, whether we sit down together, so that He has us in such wise as suits His thought. He stresses the thought of love — that we might have love. Moreover, He said as a general principle to Peter, “Unless I wash thee, thou hast not part with me” (John 13: 8). It is not simply ‘Unless thou art washed’, but “Unless I wash thee”. He must have His part in it. Then what His relation is to the assembly; you might say marital relations, what she is to Him, and what He would look for in the way of response to Himself, because all that enters peculiarly into the Supper: “This is my body, which is for you”. He is also Mediator of the new covenant, so that we might enjoy the love of God in these circumstances, and that God might have His part too with us as His people. Well, all that involves great enrichment for us; it involves enlargement as it proceeds. It is cumulative, too, so that there is something there for God; and the idea of the assembly opens up to us, and its heavenly relations. The Lord is equal to that service, for it is said that “we have such a one high priest who has sat down on the right hand of the throne of the greatness in the heavens; minister of the holy places and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord has pitched, and not man” (Hebrews 8: 1, 2).
That is an immense thought. We are to see what thus proceeds and how we are brought into it, having part in the heavenly service.
Ques What is suggested in the broiled fish and the honeycomb?
JT It is a question of what they had. Verse 41 says, “While they yet did not believe for joy, and were wondering, he said to them, Have ye anything here to eat? And they gave him part of a broiled fish and of a honeycomb; and he took it and ate before them”. Now He would take up what they had; they gave Him a part of a broiled fish and of a honeycomb — part of it; He would have part in what they had. They were now with Him on easy terms, speaking reverently. “Part of” would allude to others besides the Lord participating, and the honeycomb is certainly a mutual thought; but all that is because they did not yet believe, and to [p. 503] show how real His presence is in spite of conditions; all the time He is adjusting the conditions.
Ques Does that emphasise the grace of the service?
JT It does, how He comes down to us in order to lead us into what He has before Him. He says, ‘What have you here?’ as if to say, ‘I will make the most of it’. It says, “while they yet did not believe for joy, and were wondering, he said ... Have ye anything here to eat?” They were believing partly, but now joy was hindering them — a remarkable state of things!
Ques Was all that to make them believe that the Lord was there bodily, it was not a spirit?
JT Yes. “It is I myself”. The Lord wishes us to know that it is Himself. He comes down to where we are, and if there is anything that He can appropriate, He will take it on. Of course, now He comes in a spiritual way — not corporeally.
Ques Was it not a joy to the Lord that they had something for Him? It was after He had shown them His hands and His feet, that is to say, what He had done for them.
JT No doubt, but notice it is “while they yet did not believe for joy”. They were still in a mixed state, they had mixed feelings. He is seeking to get them into accord with His own mind, and surely He is entitled to have things His own way in His own assembly. It is blessed to get to His side of things.
CL Properly the assembly is His side of things, and He would have us have part with Him in it.
JT Quite so.
Rem I suppose these things did not spring up exactly as the saints were there? They must have brought them.
JT Quite; it is, “Have ye anything here ... ?” not simply ‘Have ye anything?’ It points to the local company, what they have. It may be said that in every meeting in fellowship there is something for the Lord,
[p. 504] although there may be a good deal He does not care for; and He would make the most of it.
Rem What I meant was that we must not expect things to spring up in the meeting; we have to bring something.
JT This fish and honeycomb had to be acquired beforehand, you mean; it would thus be something that you have. I do not say that the thing would not spring up; in spiritual matters it is remarkable if you are alert what does spring up in your mind as you proceed, but it would be there already, in principle at least.
HWR How would joy hinder your believing?
JT It is joy and wonderment combined, they were not balanced. What you observe is, things were going well until the Lord came in. It was the Lord’s coming in that upset things, and that is a sorrowful state of things, but it is what happened here. If He comes in, why does it not promote all that is right? Instead of that a perturbed state came about, but the fault was theirs. They were gathering together and saying, “The Lord is indeed risen and has appeared to Simon. And they related what had happened on the way, and how he was made known to them in the breaking of bread. And as they were saying these things, he himself stood in their midst”. It looks as if He was pleased with what they were saying. They were saying what was right, they were really talking of the two leading thoughts that pervade the assembly, that is, grace, expressed in the Lord appearing to Simon, and the breaking of bread. They maintain the dispensation. Now if they were in keeping with what they were saying, the Lord’s coming in would have confirmed them in it instead of disconcerting them.
AN Would you say that the conditions among the saints to which He would come were to be the fruit of His own service to them earlier? I was thinking of the two disciples at Emmaus: He was [p. 505] there to promote conditions that would be contributory to that.
JT Yes, and they came back to Jerusalem; they were contributory to Jerusalem by their returning, they came back with ability to say things that were really to enter into the constitution of the assembly. His appearing to Simon, His exposition of Scripture to the two, and His breaking bread at Emmaus — all bore on assembly conditions.
AN I was thinking of what you remarked at the beginning, that the Lord’s service to us individually precedes what we have collectively.
JT It does, and it produces what is contributory to the wealth of the assembly, because what they were saying involves the truth that runs down and maintains freshness in the assembly. “He was made known to them in the breaking of bread”. That maintains a freshness which is not found at all in general current christianity; there is no freshness there. Whereas what they were saying was the effect of His gracious dealings with them at Emmaus, and was contributory to the whole service down here, showing how far-reaching an individual contribution may be. We should have this in view when we “come together in assembly”.
AN I wondered if that would be illustrated in Hebrews 8: 3, “Whence it is needful that this one also should have something which he may offer”. That is service Godward, but in order that there might be conditions, He administers a new covenant for the promotion of those affections which He would use. “But now he has got a more excellent ministry, by so much as he is mediator of a better covenant” (Hebrews 8: 6).
JT That is right. Hebrews 8, Hebrews 9 and Hebrews 10:1-18 deal with the new covenant, so as to enrich us to “approach” (Hebrews 10: 22).
NKMcL How would this joy and wonderment, coupled with unbelief, express itself in our [p. 506] meetings?
JT Well, perhaps in undue speaking, restlessness. The state was really perturbation — they did not believe for joy and wonderment. Some might think they were in a very happy state, but they were unbalanced; there was a want of faith, they did not believe. What was needed was faith and understanding suited for the great occasion; the Lord is really there; it is Himself.
Ques Do you think that is where our lack is? We are not sure when He comes in.
JT I think there is want of faith as to what is suited to assembly conditions. There would be less restlessness, there would be more quietude and subduedness, making room for what He may have in mind.
CL The Lord speaks of His sufferings, too. That would bring in sobriety.
JT Yes. He had spoken of His sufferings to the two, so that it should have been in their minds. But a state of faith was lacking. The dispensation of God is in faith, faith suited to the position, not merely faith for my salvation.
HFN Would you say a word in regard to the passage read in Acts? Is this all paving the way for that?
JT Yes. I think the passage in Acts has in mind what is to be developed in that book. The endings of the gospels really do not make room for Paul’s doctrine as much as the beginning of the Acts does. We have the Lord coming into the midst in the end of the gospels, that is, in Luke and John, but in Acts 1 the writer begins with the “things which Jesus began both to do and to teach, until that day in which, having by the Holy Spirit charged the apostles whom he had chosen, he was taken up; to whom also he presented himself living, after he had suffered, with many proofs”. That alludes to what we have in the endings of the gospels. Then it goes on, “being seen by them during forty days, and speaking of the things which concern the kingdom of God” — not now adjusting [p. 507] them. He was speaking about the things concerning the kingdom of God. Then it says in verse 4, “being assembled with them, commanded them ...” You do not get that in the endings of the gospels. It is now the assembly definitely, and how He presents Himself to it, so that the assembly should be impressed, and the things spoken of there are understood, the things concerning the kingdom of God.
AN Why should it be “the things which concern the kingdom of God”, and not the assembly?
JT I think it is a general thought. “The things which concern the kingdom of God” is what had been inaugurated in that sense, the kingdom viewed in its moral bearing. The ministry of the twelve scarcely went beyond that. Later the saints are seen “assembled to break bread” (Acts 20: 7), that is in relation to Paul’s ministry. I think the assembly in relation to the breaking of bread awaited Paul, but the general teaching of the twelve is the kingdom of God. It waited for Paul to bring out the great thought of the Lord’s heart, that is, the assembly as the vessel of service.
HFN How would that link on with what you referred to this morning in regard of John, the Lord laying His right hand upon him and then 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” (Revelation 1: 17, 18)? Would that link on with this scripture?
JT I think it does. It is a question of life. Here the Lord presents Himself living; there, He lays His right hand upon John to revive him, telling His bondman that He was the living One. In Revelation it is the presentation of Himself in a judicial way, meeting breakdown. But where there is a true soul He lays His right hand upon us and makes Himself known as the One who became dead and lives for ever. I think we need that touch now in view of the breakdown. Then it goes on to say that the Lord charged the apostles by the Holy Spirit. That is the principle [p. 508] introduced at once: and the constitution of the assembly and all that goes on there is by the Spirit; even the Lord’s coming in now is by the Spirit. He comes in Himself, the Spirit is the medium — He comes in in that way. The presence of the Holy Spirit is absolutely essential to the constitution and service of the assembly.
WMB Is the change of the Lord’s position to be discerned by the Holy Spirit?
JT I think so; all is contingent on the Spirit, as I apprehend; all His service is in that way, but it is Himself. It is beyond us to define how it can be. Jehovah came in in Old Testament times evidently by angelic means, but now it is Spirit-wise. The assembly is the “habitation of God in the Spirit”, but then it is God who is there. And so the Lord Himself comes to us, and thus the Supper has a peculiar place, because it brings in the humanity of our Lord — what He did as a Man. He is called to mind in that way, it is Himself. All is on our side too by the Spirit. It is properly by the Spirit we have part in the assembly.
LM “He presented himself living ... with many proofs”. Does He continue to give these many proofs?
JT In a way, I think, He does. Then the forty days — “being seen by them during forty days” — being the full period of impressing, of instructing them with the idea of spirituality. That is where the great difficulty lies, the want of spirituality; not the want of facts and doctrine, but the want of spirituality, and that is why Acts gives us the forty days, as much as to say, there is ample instruction by example in what He did as to what spirituality signifies. These forty days are intended to teach us spirituality. There is in them the fact that the Lord may change His form: “he was manifested in another form” (Mark 16: 12).
AJB What is the thought of “the promise of the Father”? Why that character?
JT [p. 509] That is the Spirit. It is a question of the dispensation; it is God in that relation. The dispensation is stamped by the Father.
Ques Would you say that the thought of the kingdom would provide a moral and spiritual foundation for the Spirit of God in our coming together?
JT It is a moral thought — God is here in rule. There is that brought in in a moral way to subdue us and make us fit for the divine purpose. It is suggested in the beaten work, of silver or gold; God would make some use of us. We do not get the thought of the assembly in relation to the breaking of bread until we come to Paul. The assembly was formed as the Spirit came down, of course, but it is seen fully as related to the service of God in Paul’s ministry. Peter had the keys of the kingdom of heaven; Paul had the ministry of the assembly, the mystery.
Ques Would the ministry of the twelve be connected with the assembly as the seat of heavenly government?
JT Yes. The heavenly city in Revelation is seen in relation to heavenly government, and is connected with the twelve. We are dealing now with the inner thought — that is Paul.
Ques The Minister of the sanctuary would appear to be connected with the throne and the majesty on high; would that not flow out from the ministry of the twelve?
JT Christ’s place “on the right hand of the greatness on high” (Hebrews 1:3) is mentioned to show His greatness as Priest; and of course His ministry went on from the time that He went up on high; but Paul brought out the full thought of “the sanctuary”. I have no doubt that Paul wrote the epistle to the Hebrews. Paul’s ministry completed the word of God (Colossians 1:25), and in it you get the assembly as the body of Christ and the vessel of the service of God. The completeness of the divine thoughts generally awaited Paul’s ministries. Peter in his first epistle touches Paul’s teaching and in his second epistle formally supports it.
WR What are we to learn from the thought of the Lord appearing in another form?
JT You cannot compass Him, you have to be always on the alert for Him and what He may do, and how He may appear. It is Christ, the Person, we have to do with, not only in the kingdom, but in the assembly — what He is there. I mean to say, you see Him as He is there, that is the great thought, you see Him in the sanctuary. “In another form” is only said in Mark, and it alludes to service in relation to failure among the saints, a solemn thing, for the Lord will appear as circumstances require, as we see in Revelation 1.
Rem Seeing Him forty days would give the thought of educating us.
JT Yes. It is to inaugurate a great spiritual state of things. In the millennium they will not have such instruction, they will not have Christ in that way. These instructions are in view of the assembly, and the spiritual state of things now.