A MAN, A HOUSEHOLDER

^[p. 273] A MAN, A HOUSEHOLDER

Matthew 20: 1 - 16; Matthew 21: 33 - 42; Matthew 13: 51, 52

JT This word ‘householder’ appears several times elsewhere besides these scriptures read. It is sometimes rendered as master of a house; but in these scriptures we have it rendered as a householder, and adding interest to this is the word ‘man’ appearing before the word ‘householder’. So that it brings in the human side of sympathy. The first, that is chapter 20, alludes to God as active directly in the house, typically hiring labourers for His vineyard; and the second would be the same, only that instead of being active in it He has let the vineyard out to husbandmen and leaves the country. The third is just a disciple, but he is a householder; a man, a householder, alluding to disciples who are attentive to what is taught and conserve what they learn, so that they have treasure. Christians are said to be of the household of God, directly. We have the highest thought of it in Ephesians, but what is before us now is responsibility on our part, first as regards working in the house, or in the vineyard of God, and what we are to learn as to the principles governing our service, that God is over His house sovereignly, and does according to His own will. He is not governed by those who labour.

ANW In two of the scriptures the matter stands related to the kingdom of the heavens. Would you say a word about that?

JT That is the first one, and then we have it in chapter 13. The kingdom of the heavens is clearly a wider thought than householding, but still it is linked to a householder. That is, the dispensation of God as applied to christianity is a household idea in 1 Timothy. His administrative services are in relation ^[p. 274] to His house. They are said to be in faith; “God’s dispensation, which is in faith”, 1 Timothy 1: 4; the word ‘dispensation’ involves the household.

AMcN Is the vineyard somewhat like the house, the place of fruitfulness?

JT The parabolic word involves the general administrative services of a man who is lord or master of the institution. It is not only what is done inside the house, but in the land adjoining it, or the gardens or the farm, or whatever it be. The Proverbs require that we are to prepare our field without and afterwards build our house. The house governs, as the central position, the central institution, but the whole is regarded as coming under the idea of the householder, because the vineyard here clearly is involved in it.

AR He would be a family man.

JT That is the general thought. Such as the vineyard or whatever else there may be would be subsidiary to the family institution. The king himself, we are told, lives of the field. So that the field is subsidiary and yet it comes under the administration of the householder, and especially the vineyard. It says that he “went out with the early morn to hire workmen for his vineyard”.

AR What was behind even the employment of persons to do work would be love.

JT The household carries that thought. What is in the master of the house, the householder in relation to his family, would necessarily affect all. Although we see that when the servants question his doings, there are no family thoughts. He just says to the questioners, or to one of them, “My friend, I do not wrong thee. Didst thou not agree with me for a denarius? Take what is thine and go”. He elects himself out of the matter; whereas a servant, sometimes, according to other scriptures, becomes a son. If he falls in with the mind of the householder,

^[p. 275] he comes in for the affections, but where he questions and criticises as the Jews did (for the Jew is in mind, doubtless), he is repudiated. That is, he is just a labourer and gets his wages and has to go.

TEH Would Jacob be a man that came under the influence of a proper householder? Isaac said that the smell of him was as the smell of a field, as if he had gained the good of the field and was prepared to build a house.

JT That is good. When he came in Isaac smelled the smell of the field. He was part of the house, as it were, but when he came into Laban’s institution it was all a question of wages, and it did not work out so well. His wages were changed ten times. He did not really become part of the house.

WFK Is the vineyard a place where there is fruit for God, where God expects fruit?

JT That is the idea of it, and very pungent sort of fruit, because it is a vineyard, involving stimulation. That is an important suggestion as pertaining to a household.

AR In regard to your reference to the first man that came, the master of the house says to him, “Is thine eye evil because I am good?”. The word is either ‘envious’ or ‘jealous’ according to the note. It was really an exposure of the first men, and the householder was marked by doing good.

JT It is a very exposing position that is in mind. The position is workmanship, and it is a long day. It is evidently a twelve-hour day, a good long day. So that there is time for bringing out what the motives of the workers were, whether they are in keeping with the institution. That is to say, if we are labouring in the Lord’s vineyard today, what are our motives? whether we are in accord with Him, because He begins the matter. He went out in the early morn. He was there and evidently intended to bring out the inwards of the workers. How far were they in accord ^[p. 276] with Him? Clearly it is a testing parable, and refers to the motives that underlie our services; whether we can commit ourselves to Him, or if we are not hired, to wait, and stand where the hiring is possible, not to be out of the way of it, or say, We may as well go home; there is nothing for us to do. They stood there and came in for the best thoughts.

RWS Is to be passed by possibly and state that they have not been hired, as if they were not worth hiring, a good state to be in as over against the first hiring?

JT I think it would show that they were different in spirit from the early ones. The early ones were evidently experienced in this sort of thing. They would make a bargain. The eleventh-hour men made no bargain, nor did they go home. They did not assume there was no work to be done; there might be. So they waited, “Because no man has hired us”. Why was that? Evidently it was the place of hiring; it was the place for it, and they stayed there until the last moment with the hope of being hired, showing they were not lazy.

CAM Do you not think the apostle Paul, in speaking to Timothy and otherwise referring to his being brought into the service, and his unworthiness, would show he was one of these last-hour men? Would it be right to say that?

JT You said Paul was an eleventh-hour man?

CAM I was asking whether he would come under that category relative to what was being said about their reference to their unworthiness, or the spirit which they showed.

JT I suppose he would. He entrusted himself entirely to the householder. The householder says to them, “Why stand ye here all the day idle? They say to him, Because no man has hired us”. They were there all the day; they did not come in ^[p. 277] lazily. They were there all the day, but no one had hired them. It would look as if they were not such workers as were in demand in that market, but they stood there hoping that work would come. There are several hours mentioned: “And having gone out about the third hour, he saw others standing in the market-place idle; and to them he said, Go also ye into the vineyard, and whatsoever may be just I will give you. And they went their way, Again, having gone out about the sixth and ninth hour, he did likewise”. He did not ask them why they were not hired; but when he comes to the eleventh hour it says, “But about the eleventh hour, having gone out, he found others standing, and says to them, Why stand ye here all the day idle?”. Why did he ask them that question? Why did he not ask it before? Does he know his men? Is he going to bring out something? Is it that God, in these last days, would bring out something — what the make-up is of those who are last-day men, whether they can trust God, or whether they are only working for a consideration, whether they must have a wage?

ANW The statement is made at the close of this passage, “Thus shall the last be first, and the first last”.

JT These are the last. I think the labourers are what is in mind, the public labourers who know the market and who work according to the market, according to hire; whereas the last are the kind that really know God. They are not on the hireling list. They are the only ones that are enquired of as to why they are there, as if the parable would bring out something, and the master knew that something was there. So that it is a question of whether we come into that, this last, eleventh-hour labouring principle; whether God is going to bring out something, because we are all prone to belong to the first and the third and the sixth and the ninth, but especially the first.

^[p. 278] The others, except the first-hour men, are all ready to go in and take on the work at the bid of the householder, but this last set are enquired of, Why are you standing idle? They have to admit something; that they are not quite in demand in the market; and why is that?

CAM Is it not right to connect that with the fact that the Lord is saying something special about the assembly matters at the end? In a sense, the bringing in of the mystery was a sort of special thing after the service had been inaugurated.

JT They are under reproach; they are not quite the kind of men that are desired in the market, and the question is, Why is that? The others are evidently desirable. The first ones can afford to ask a wage. “And having agreed with the workmen for a denarius the day, he sent them into his vineyard. And having gone out about the third hour, he saw others standing in the market-place idle; and to them he said, Go also ye into the vineyard, and whatsoever may be just I will give you. And they went their way. Again, having gone out about the sixth and ninth hour, he did likewise”. So far so clear. The first ones were the only ones that made a bargain. Is the Spirit of God raising a question as to bargain-making in the workmen’s market? And that there are others who are ready to do the bidding of the householder without any bargain. And then there are those that have to answer why it is that they are there so long. And is it not that persons liable to reproach are in the market? And why are they under reproach?

TW Verse 6 begins with a ‘but’.

JT The others are ‘and’; “And having gone out about the third hour” (verse 3); and then again, “And they went their way” (verse 4). It is the conjunction ‘and’, but in verse 6 we come up against something special. That is suggestive, and we want ^[p. 279] to understand why this special inquiry is there. What is the secret of this? What is to be brought out?

RWS Would it appear that this group does not get any promise of a just compensation? I notice in verse 7 “[and whatsoever may be just ye shall receive]” is put in brackets. Is there some doubt as to whether it is really there?

JT Possibly that is questionable. “Go also ye into the vineyard, and whatsoever may be just I will give you”. There is no question about that. But in this last set there is something peculiar. Why are you here? They have to confess they are not in demand, and there must be some good reason for that. The hirers are not pleased with them. They are there and no one is hiring them, but the master says, “Go also ye into the vineyard”, and if this bracketed part is not in the original, it makes it all the more simple, that it is simply doing the bidding of the householder and saying no more; leaving it all that way. There is entire submission to the householder in what he directs, without any thought of a remuneration at all.

WFK Can you give these different hours a dispensational setting?

JT Oh, yes. It refers to official workmen; that is, persons who have that kind of attitude, who would call themselves workers of this kind and demand a wage. They are skilled men in their own account and they demand a wage. The others are not that. They do not demand a wage, but they commit themselves to the householder. But the final set are under reproach, because it certainly is a humbling thing to stand the whole day in the market-place and get no work. Why is it?

WFK Would the eleventh-hour be our day? The last day?

JT Very likely, only the question is whether we are eleventh-hour men; whether, after all, we do ^[p. 280] not secretly have in our hearts that we will get some remuneration, and that it is worth while going into the ministry.

FNW Would Paul be typically an eleventh-hour man in the account of his conversion? All he says is, “What shall I do, Lord?”. And he was told to go into the city. That was his prime object after his conversion, would you say?

JT He had the thought of doing something, and the Lord did not tell him what to do, but He sent him into the city. The question is whether the voice of this parable is heard in the little services we are rendering; that is, whether we are under reproach before we get anything to do. If I am not invited out to preach or teach, or if I am, have I in mind remuneration? For we are apt to feel ourselves under obligation as invited; and if we have opportunity we will invite, too. But the danger is that underlying all that is the principle of a wage, of some gain; whereas these workers are entirely at the bid of the householder and leave it all with him, saying nothing, as it were, but going into the vineyard; and now, see what develops. There is exposure all around.

JS Is this parable introduced to check clericalism?

JT I do not feel like bringing that in, because we have not got any of those here today. What is, however, important, is what may underlie our services; the invitations that are accorded, and whether the same spirit is not with us as was with the first-hour men, the regular line men, you might say; skilled men, who were openly known to be worth something. In this last class there is something wrong from the ordinary standpoint, and the little work we are doing is not done on the principle of the ordinary standpoint at all. And that, of course, is the clerical standpoint. But we do not need to go into that. It is a question now of how far the idea of remuneration may enter into ^[p. 281] our services.

AAT What represents this remuneration today? In that day it was money.

JT Money may enter into it today, too; one’s fare paid, and that sort of thing. It is just a question of getting the truth. Even money may enter into it. But these men have no thought at all of that. They just do what the householder says. “But when the evening was come, the lord of the vineyard says to his steward. Call the workmen and pay them their wages, beginning from the last even to the first”.

AAT It is remarkable. It says, “These last have worked one hour, and thou hast made them equal to us, who have borne the burden of the day and the heat”. Would there be some suggestion that they were looked down upon?

JT The householder was making them equal, but in the minds of the workers they were not equal.

AS What is the thought of paying the last first?

JT It says, “And when they who came to work about the eleventh hour came, they received each a denarius. And when the first came”. That enters into the whole parable, because it finishes with this; the last first, and the first last; “for many are called ones, but few chosen ones”. That is another point that is striking — the chosen ones.

ANW In the range of building and having builders in mind, Peter, in speaking of the blessed Lord Himself, says, “Cast away indeed as worthless by men, but with God chosen, precious”, 1 Peter 2: 4. I wondered whether that was not somewhat parallel to the bearing of this scripture.

JT That is a question of the stone’s value.

ANW I only thought of the disallowance side in contradistinction to the chosen and precious in God’s sight.

JT I was just going to remark in the second parable in chapter 21, the Lord brings in: “Have ye never read in the scriptures. The stone which they ^[p. 282] that builded rejected, this has become the cornerstone”. It is a question there of material, but the principle is the same. The real labourers according to God are of great value in chapter 20, and the real stone and material is of little or no value in chapter 21. Man’s appraisal is not God’s appraisal. That is really what comes out in both parables, first as to workmanship and then as to material.

TEH Would it be right to say that the man who was found in Casiphia was an eleventh-hour man? His name is Sherebiah in Ezra. He was a man of understanding prepared to go into the service.

JT The one they found at the place Casiphia? Yes. But still they had to seek him out. The Levites were scarce; they did not come into the movement. But here these men are in the market all day, and what is this parable for? Is it a parable of exposure, first as to the householder, what his way is, what his outlook is? Then as to the first-hour labourers, they are men known to be worth their hire, worth wages, but then there are men who are not appointed at all. It looks as if the day is going to run out and they will not get anything to do, but they get the first place when payment comes. They are entirely at the bidding of the householder, and something develops, namely that the first is last and the last is first, and many are called, but few are chosen. So it looks as if the parable is to govern us or enter into our outlook and make-up in this period of labour, that we are not on the line of wages.

JTJr In view of what you have said, would it be well to take a look at some who are not hired at the present time? There may be some who are not hired that are fully capable of carrying on the service.

JT That is the point. There is nothing said about their ability. There is nothing said about their doing more work by the minute than the others. It is a question of the will of the master of the house.

^[p. 283] And why this process? Is he bringing out something? The spirit of these men is involved. He is bringing out into the field of labour what corresponds with His eternal thoughts. We are not ordinary people. We are not governed by principles around us. God is bringing out people that are governed by His thoughts, His eternal thoughts, His choosing thoughts. That is an immense thing, because that brings you up to the top, what goes into eternity. It is a question of divine choice, and the very thing you are doing brings that into evidence.

CAM This matter of whether we should be doing more necessitates a sort of inquiry in your soul, because, after all, they had to be patient. That was, perhaps, to their credit. It was not that they were exactly lazy; and then what really got them moving was the master’s voice.

JT We may say, Well, the field of labour only runs into the kingdom and we will get our reward there; but the field of labour, according to this parable, is to bring out the eternal thoughts of God, and that is the issue finally. Because the question is against Him, what He was doing. That the men were not good, skilled labourers, that they did not do much, is not the point. What the objectors say is, “These last have worked one hour, and thou hast made them equal to us, who have borne the burden of the day and the heat”. They are complaining about the master. And it says, “But he answering said to one of them” — that is, is he a leader? Is he the leading man in this set? He said to one of them, notice: “My friend, I do not wrong thee. Didst thou not agree with me for a denarius? Take what is thine and go. But it is my will to give to this last even as to thee: is it not lawful for me to do what I will in my own affairs? Is thine eye evil because I am good?”. That is clear enough, that God is exposing somebody and He is justifying Himself;

^[p. 284] and the result is that it is a question of eternal thoughts, selective thoughts. So that we are coming up to the top; the real persons are coming up to the top, those that are going into eternity according to divine thoughts. The field of labour is bringing out the reality of the persons, whether they are in accord with the mind of God or not. To those who are not in accord with His mind, He says, Go; and, Your eye is evil.

CAM It would look as if the qualification would be a knowledge of what the Lord is saying in ministry at the present time.

JT That is what it is. The field of labour is occasioning an opportunity for God to bring out something. Are the labourers in accord with His own mind? The Lord Jesus says, “Behold, I come, ... to do thy good pleasure, my God”, Psalm 40: 7, 8. That is the full divine thought in this matter, and these eleventh-hour men are just in divine hands, and it is not a question of bringing out what is in them so much, as it is that God knows; the master knows. He says, “Is it not lawful for me to do what I will in my own affairs?”. This is my matter.

AR It works out in brothers being, say, fifty years in fellowship, and younger ones seven or eight years. I may assume that because I am older I have a greater status that those who are younger.

JT All that enters into this. It is a question of whether I am in accord with the divine mind. God is bringing out this selective principle. The persons who are coming up to the top are not the ones who have been in favour all these years of labour, extending back for centuries. We would not be hired; we would not be allowed to preach, these eleventh-hour men, in earlier days. That is what God is bringing out. We have no status in the labour-market, but we have a status in the field of God. That is the ^[p. 285] point the master of the house makes. That is my affair, he says.

GH What about the prophet saying, “Here am I, send me”, Isaiah 6: 8? There would be a thought of readiness and willingness to serve.

JT That is it. God says there, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?”.

FSC Moses had respect for the recompense of the reward and chose the reproach of Christ rather than the treasures of Egypt, and went and sat down by a well.

JT Just so. He had respect to the recompense of the reward.

FSC Does not the reproach of Christ answer to that?

JT I think so. They are entirely in the hands of the master of the house. He tells them to go into the vineyard. Why are you standing here? And they say, Because no man has hired us. He says, Go ye also into the vineyard. That is all. You may leave out the bracketed part. That is all there is, and, therefore, the whole matter now is in the hands of the master of the house, and he is going to use it to bring out his own thoughts, and to confound those who are governed by their own thoughts; that is christianity. Clericalism is not His thought, and the end is going to bring out that He will prevail. It runs into the eternal counsels of God, that many are called but few are chosen.

RWS Does it afford God a perfect answer in a public way, in some sense at least, over against trade unionism where the servant rules? Has God in some way got an answer to that in a labourer who is completely subject to his master?

JT That is good, because there is so much of that coming up; trade unions are invading the divine realm. The divine realm is indicated here; and the brethren conforming to these rules, submitting themselves ^[p. 286] to them are running counter to what we have here. It is a question of God and the spirit that is in keeping with the field of God’s workmanship.

AR The sin of Korah, Dathan and Abiram is really this. They assumed they had the same status as Aaron in the service, but there was only one rod that budded. God says, I will prove whom I have chosen.

JT That is the same idea. God will have His way in His own realm.

TEH Under the Lord’s gracious hand, the persons who have charge of the gospel in asking a brother to serve in the service are not looking for recompense. You would be prepared to leave it under the guidance of the Lord.

JT Not even looking for a balance in another invitation, for he may have an inviting power, too.

AMcN I was wondering whether the last-hour men would be waiting hopelessly or patiently.

JT I would say patiently. It would bring out the whole position, that they were in keeping with the divine field of labour. It is all in God’s hands, and the sequel shows they come out first, according to the principle to be brought out, namely, “Thus shall the last be first, and the first last; for many are called ones, but few chosen ones”. That is what is in the mind of God to bring out. And I thought in regard to chapter 21 we have another side to the position, that is, the vineyard being left to certain. The householder, it says, “planted a vineyard, and made a fence round it, and dug a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and left the country”, Matthew 21: 33. That is another position. The vineyard is fully furnished, but it is let out to husbandmen. That is, these are men who would farm, or look after such work, but they are doing it on their own. It is left to them to do. “But when ^[p. 287] the time of fruit drew near, he sent his bondmen to the husbandmen to receive his fruits. And the husbandmen took his bondmen, and beat one, killed another, and stoned another”. It is now the side of responsibility. Our brother has been remarking about those who look after the gospel, which is a sort of service that has to be looked over every now and again, so that it should be understood that it is not an office, but the question now is, what is God getting out of it? Because the time comes when He looks for fruit. It says, “But when the time of fruit drew near, he sent his bondmen to the husbandmen to receive his fruits”.

CAM If I understand you rightly, in both cases the defect was in the recognition of God as God. In the first case it brings in disappointment if God is not recognised in His rights. In this case it deprives God of a yield.

JT That is right. He sends His bondmen to receive His fruits. That is, it is a question of the Lord being absent and having committed responsibility to some, and what are the results? Our brother brought up the question of those who look after the gospel. What is coming out of it for God, and any other services that are, as it were, left to us? In due course the Lord looks for the results, for the fruits.

GHP In 1 Thessalonians 5: 12 it says, “But we beg you, brethren, to know those who labour among you, and take the lead among you in the Lord, and admonish you, and to regard them exceedingly in love on account of their work”. Would that help?

JT That does enter into it as to how much we honour those who labour, but our parable is what the Lord gets out of the vineyard as let out to certain persons called husbandmen; not bondmen, but husbandmen. They are skilled men, too. The bondmen are sent to them. The bondmen are entirely under the Lord’s control, but the husbandmen are ^[p. 288] like men that you might make an arrangement with to look after your farm. They would get so much, and you. But you want your part of it. And that is the thought here. The Lord wants His fruits; it is what He looks for.

AR What He is getting out of a local meeting, do you mean?

JT It is the responsibility that attaches to us from this point of view; working in the garden of the Lord. He looks for results, and He holds accountable those who are in the position of charge.

AS Would this bring out whether we desire fruit for the householder, or fruit from the householder, as bringing forth fruit for Him or ourselves?

JT It is a question of what was in the mind of the husbandmen. What is being brought out in these parables is what is underlying our activities, what is in the mind of these husbandmen. They are murderers, and, of course, we are not contemplating anything like that as regards ourselves, but still the question is what our motives are. The Lord has left and we are under charge. The parable of the talents is another side of this, but here it is a vineyard and persons who are called husbandmen, which is a term governing skill in farming or the like, are in charge. The Lord has left so that their hand is free. What will they do when the Lord is not looking on them? When we are entirely free in what we are doing, what are our motives? Are they such as will keep us right even if we are not conscious that the Lord’s eye is over us?

JTJr Would the idea of the fence and the winepress and the tower suggest the principles that should govern the local meeting? There would not be any deviation in what is done in the meeting from what was set out by the Lord.

JT You mean what is done is according to what He has set out?

JTJr It says, “And made a fence round it, and dug a winepress in it, and built a tower”. These are like thoughts that would govern us in the working out of what is local.

JT It is just that these husbandmen would know the value of the fence and the winepress and the tower. These things would greatly help in making the matter pay. What we have in mind is simply what the master gets out of it, his fruits. What are they? It says, “And the husbandmen took his bondmen, and beat one, killed another, and stoned another”. That brings out the terrible condition that underlay this service that was undertaken. We are not contemplating anything like that at all. The question is whether I am tested by any service that I am taking on in the vineyard when the Lord’s eye is not supposedly on me. It is a question of my integrity. Am I loyal to His interests?

TW You spoke about the ten days in prayer; how they carried on then. Would that have any connection with this?

JT How they carried on in those ten days would bring out their loyalty. The Lord could easily have sent the Spirit as He went up; we may be sure of that. But the ten days were to bring out what they were. Our meetings require a great deal of attention. The wall is the fellowship. The winepress is a sort of thing needful to bring out the fruits; and the tower, too, has its own use; but then there are other things. How much is left at loose ends? How much eldership is effective in our gatherings? How much care? It is the work of the deacons, such as the vineyard requires. How much is carried out in integrity of heart? Because it is there; because it has to be done; because the position requires that it should be done. Still, the idea of husbandman enters into this; a skilled farmer; a man that knows how to work a farm. But the point is what to do when the ^[p. 290] owner of the vineyard is not there. He has taken it on as a matter of duty, and no doubt, recompense, but that is not the point. The point is integrity of heart, and what comes out? What comes out is murder.

CAM Do you not think we should be encouraged in this way — the fact that there is a recompense for God’s Son in these last days, and that God has helped as to the truth of sonship, in regard of Christ’s position, that there is an integrity? He may have had to wait a long time, but there is an integrity.

JT I think we can see how all this works out in these last days. There is no recompense for the Son in these husbandmen, so that if there is any recompense for Him, it is in the opposite of this. No doubt the sonship of Christ having come out so strikingly helps to have recompense for Him. We are not saying, Come, let us kill Him! It is the very opposite of that.

ANW Both these scriptures bring before us the assertion of God’s rights, do they not? That is evidently what we need.

JT I think it is integrity of heart in care meetings. “With whom hast thou left those few sheep in the wilderness?” 1 Samuel 17: 28. Eliab spoke in a disdainful way to David, but in truth David had taken care of the sheep. It says he left them with a keeper. And, moreover, he says, I am under a charge. There is a cause for my presence here. If I am absent from my place of responsibility, I ought to be able to show a good cause for it; otherwise I am neglecting my home duties. That would promote weakness instead of strength.

Ques Does 1 Peter 5 fit in with what you say: “Shepherd the flock of God which is among you, exercising oversight, not by necessity, but willingly; not for base gain, but readily; not as lording it over ^[p. 291] your possessions, but being models for the flock”, 1 Peter 5: 2, 3?

JT He spoke to the elders. That is to say, eldership and deaconship are as essential to the service and the promotion of the work of God as evangelical ability or teaching ability. Eldership is not gift, nor is deaconship gift. It is a question of certain qualifications for care, and the care is essential to the prosperity of the work of God. If there are none such, no elders and no deacons, there is exposure to the wolf. No one is in charge, so to speak. That is the idea. There is not integrity of heart in the local position, and, therefore, exposure.

GVD The question to Cain was, “Where is Abel thy brother?” Genesis 4: 9. Was he sinning on the line of shepherding?

JT That is right, “I know not: am I my brother’s keeper?”, he says, intimating he is not. Whereas we have the idea of aspiring to the office of an elder, or the office of a deacon, even deaconesses, too. That is a matter of aspiration. Well, as far as I can see, no one is aspiring to that at all. Ability to preach is good, and God gives it, but that is not the thing needed for the vineyard now. The greatest need really is care.

GH Stewardship underlies all this, does it not?

JT Quite so.

Rem If I understand, you are suggesting that the Corinthian and the Ephesian side give us the gifts that may be used in the assembly. This other line is a line taken on. It is not designated at all.

JT The apostles Paul and Barnabas chose themselves elders in each assembly. They did it themselves. They took it on themselves, because God had given them moral weight for that, to select certain persons in each gathering, to constitute them elders, elders in each assembly. That meant, the apostle says, that if that service was not there, they would ^[p. 292] be exposed to the wolf; hence he calls the Ephesian elders to him and directs them to shepherd the flock, to take care of the flock. They are not treated as evangelists; they might be, of course. An elder might teach. We are told one might be able to teach, but the care of the flock is one of the most essential necessities. That is a matter of aspiration, and the next thing is to qualify according to 1 Timothy.

JS Would you say something about rendering their fruits in their season? How do elders do that in a public way?

JT It is a question of taking care of the vineyard and promoting the growth of the crop. An elder would watch for the souls of the saints, how they get on. And it is in the growth of the saints that the Lord gets His fruit.

FNW Would Romans 16 show that if we follow that epistle we will arrive at this integrity of heart? Would it work in us inwardly?

JT Very touching, indeed.

AAT What is the service of a deaconess?

JT Oh, the same as a deacon, only in a less prominent way; looking after the temporal needs of the saints, visiting them. Visiting is one of the greatest things; looking after them in their houses.

JTJr If the net breaks, you want to be on hand to try and mend it. If an outbreak of some kind happens in a town, there is a certain department to look after it. If there is a breakdown of electricity it is a question of repairing whatever it is to keep the thing going. We need to watch that in our local settings, do we not?

JT A brother may be delinquent in attending the meetings, growing cold; that is an illustration of what is meant. He should be sought out and restored.

RWS The care that God uses would encourage us to have care, too. I wondered whether the Lord’s ^[p. 293] word to Paul at Corinth, that He had much people in the place, and Paul’s labours there would confirm that, that God had Corinth in view for a long time, and that applies to each assembly. God had us in mind for a long time. He has had each local assembly in mind, and is looking to get something out of them.

JT All really springs from what God is; the care He expends. As in the parable of the Samaritan, it says, “Take care of him”, Luke 10: 35.

Rem The Lord seems to give us this lead Himself in chapter 24 of Luke; there were people who were not coming to the meetings, and had their backs on the meeting, and He is going after them.

JT That is a good example. They came back the same hour.

AAT If a brother is getting cold in his affections, or neglecting the meetings, and one or two spoke to him and he did not seem to answer to the exercise, do you think it is right to have a prayer meeting just to pray for him, a special prayer meeting?

JT If there is agreement at the bottom of it; “If two of you shall agree on the earth concerning any matter, whatsoever it may be that they shall ask, it shall come to them from my Father who is in the heavens”, Matthew 18: 19.

AAT You would not just confine it to two or three?

JT It is a question of whether it is a special case; if the persons really know it and are concerned about it, “If two of you shall agree”; agreement is underlying the act of special prayer. You are entirely of one mind about it.

AR In chapter 21 these men are working, and there is fruit resulting, but are they diverting it? Instead of giving it to God, they are diverting it to themselves. According to the narrative, there must have been ^[p. 294] results.

JT They were murderous, too. It is extreme. No doubt the Jewish system is in mind. You can see how it extends down, because the Lord has left us. In one sense He is in heaven, and we are here. And elders and deacons and persons who care with genuine feeling are the ones that are needed, persons who care with integrity how the saints get on. And then as to the other instance in chapter 13, it is again a man, a householder, who is disciplined into the kingdom of the heavens. He has treasure. It is not as wide a thought, but it deals with more precious features. There is a treasure or treasures. There is a scribe. He would be, I suppose, one who values the things that are brought to his attention by the Spirit of God. He is an active man, but he is disciplined into the kingdom of the heavens. That is, he is moving through the discipline, through the teaching that he is coming under; he is moving in that direction. The preposition shows that he is moving in that direction. He is a noted man; a man that has something, not simply integrity of heart, as we had it, or in accord with the counsels of God, but he has something positive of his own on account of being disciplined into the kingdom of the heavens. He is like a householder who brings out his treasure things new and old. That is not simply that he has them, but he brings them out. He is a noted man; he is a valuable man. He is a man that has great things, valuable things, and he takes care of them; but he brings them out.

AS Would Abraham under the oaks of Mamre be an example of this? He ran to meet the men, and prepared refreshment.

JT Very good. He had the real things that were needed. You like to have the thought in your mind as to persons of distinction in this sense, not now as labourers, but as persons disciplined. For that is the idea, I suppose, or discipled. The word ‘discipled’ ^[p. 295] involves teaching and instruction, involving discipline, but it says, “discipled to the kingdom of the heavens”. He is moving in that direction, or his education affects him in that way. And then he “is like a man that is a householder who brings out of his treasure things new and old”. He brings them out. He has them and brings them out.

TEH Would the man in John 9 be a person like that? He received by the way of discipline the knowledge of Jesus. Then he speaks of Him as Lord and worships Him as the Son of God, as if he finally arrived at the thing through discipline.

JT That is it. You can see from the very beginning that he is moving in one direction, and every crisis in the experience leads him further. He is further on every time you look at him. He is moving in one direction.

AR You said at the beginning of the meeting that the householder would be God Himself. Now you are really applying it to the saints as taking on features of God Himself.

JT It is a question of the person discipled. The Lord had been giving them long lessons. In this chapter there are seven parables running throughout. That is a full curriculum finished. Now it is a question of who is coming out of it able to pass muster and get his degree, so to speak. The disciples agree that they have understood what He was saying — He says, “Have ye understood all these things? They say to him, Yea, Lord”. Then as moving in that direction, as the preposition shows, in due course we will have treasure. He is a householder with treasure, and he brings it out. Not only is it there, but he brings it out; and when it is in his hands you understand it, and he can show you what it means.

GH He gains through soul exercise. Is that right?

JT Things are ^[p. 296] rightly valued.

ANW The scribe would indicate he is an accurate recorder.

JT I think so. To anybody coming into contact with him this man would be able to give an answer on things. There is nothing loose about him.

WFK Would it be that at every meeting he brings out something fresh and new?

JT That is the idea. When the opportunity is there he brings things out. If you visited him, or in the assembly, he brings things out.

ES Is he able to keep the balance in bringing out things new and old?

JT It is very interesting, that not only has he got the things, but he shows you what they are. This is new, he would say. That is as old as Enoch. Well, many would not know that.

Rem It would be like speaking from the Old Testament and the New Testament.

JT Take the saying of Enoch. We do not get it until we come to Jude. Jude must have heard it. Why did other people not bring that out? But he had it. Where did he get it? He watched something the Lord said maybe, and brought this thing out when it was needed to bring it out.

JC I was wondering if the Object of service would be the same as the source. We receive and then we give it out. We get the treasure from Him; we move in relation to the Lord.

JT Just so.

Ques Would the new things be new light God has given us?

JT Not that exactly. They are new in the sense that they have just been learned. It would be New Testament truth and Old Testament truth. You are able to distinguish. This belongs to Abraham’s time. The Lord Jesus said something we never heard before: “Your father Abraham exulted in that he ^[p. 297] should see my day, and he saw and rejoiced”, John 8: 56. Where did that come from?

Rem We have treasure at the beginning of the gospel. It says, “And having opened their treasures, they offered to him gifts, gold, and frankincense, and myrrh”, Matthew 2: 11.

JT That was treasure suited to the moment. Showing they intended to worship the Lord; they did not come empty-handed. They brought things out of their treasure.

JS Was Matthew not an instructed scribe? He could bring plenty out of the Old Testament.

JT His gospel is full of that. If you look into the quotations in his gospel you will find a peculiar touch to it.

JS “That that might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord, through the prophet ...”, Matthew 1: 22.

AS His mother kept all these things and pondered them in her heart. Would that be the thought?

JT That is it. She was a treasury. The treasury is the heart and the treasure is kept in it. “Keep, by the Holy Spirit which dwells in us, the good deposit entrusted”, 2 Timothy 1: 14.