THE SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST (2)
[p. 24] THE SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST (2)
Luke 22:14,15; Luke 22:39-53; Luke 24:26; Acts 1:3
JT Matthew and Mark treat of the sufferings of Christ in a deeper and fuller way than Luke and John; the former are more foundational, the bearing of them not only involving this dispensation, but the coming one, whereas, it would appear that Luke and John have more in mind the bearing of the sufferings of Christ on the saints in this dispensation, and particularly on the assembly as such. So Luke records the Lord sitting down to partake of the last passover, and saying, “With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer”. In Acts 1, he says that the Lord presented Himself living to the disciples after He suffered. Then Paul, whom Luke would have in mind especially, is said to be shown how much he should suffer for Christ’s name; (Acts 9:16). So that Paul from the outset of his service exhibited the idea of suffering; portraying the sufferings of Christ. He speaks about filling up that which is behind of the sufferings of Christ for His body’s sake; (Colossians 1:24).
It will be observed that what is before us, lies between the periods designated as before and after His sufferings. He said, “before I suffer”, at the supper table; and then, Acts 1 says, “he presented himself living, after he had suffered”.
ANW Does that imply that there was no suffering for the Lord up to that point?
JT Not in the sense in which He spoke. He suffered earlier, of course, but from other causes.
AP In Luke 9:22, the Lord said, “The Son of man must suffer many things”. Does that relate to the period earlier than that of which you are speaking?
JT It looks on to what would happen at Jerusalem [p. 25] although, of course, all His sufferings from that time would be included. I think He alluded specially to the cross when He spoke at the supper table. He suffered from the outset, but especially from the time of His anointing. He was attacked by the devil in the wilderness, and by his instrumentalities later on; but He had the cross in His mind when He spoke of His suffering at the supper table; and the Spirit of God, through Luke, had those thoughts in His mind also. When Luke says, “after he suffered”, in Acts 1, he also refers to the cross.
AFM You stated that the character of the Lord’s sufferings as recorded in Luke and John was not so deep as when treated of in Matthew and Mark. Would you mind saying a little more about that?
JT Matthew and Mark alone speak of God forsaking Him, which alludes to the root of the sin question and is foundational for the whole moral universe; but this matter of His suffering as presented in Luke and John bears particularly on the assembly as His body. In Luke, He showed unto them His hands and His feet. That is the witness of His love in His suffering service.
CAM In that way, perhaps, it would be right to think of this gospel as having a specially sympathetic setting — this expression, “before I suffer”, for instance. There are sufferings in Matthew and Mark that are beyond us to enter into. But the expression here in Luke seems to count upon intelligent sympathy.
JT So in Luke it is recorded that they slept on account of grief; they were grieved about what was occurring, and Luke alone tells us about the angel ministering to Him. I believe he has in mind that the assembly comes into all this. It is not beyond us. As Paul said, “I fill up that which is behind of the tribulations of Christ in my flesh, for [p. 26] his body, which is the assembly; of which I became minister”, (Colossians 1:24,25).
AFM You mean that the assembly becomes qualified, as affectionately pondering Christ’s sufferings, to be here in suffering also?
JT Yes; the assembly is formed in these sufferings. Paul had it in mind. The Lord said, “I will shew to him how much he must suffer for my name”, (Acts 9:16); he could therefore enter sympathetically into what was expected, on the Lord’s part, from the assembly. What the Lord looks for in us, is the fellowship of His sufferings, of which Paul speaks in Philippians 3:10.
CAM I suppose we should be able to give an intelligent answer to the question the Lord asks in chapter 24:26, “Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things?”
JT Yes. “It became him”, that is, God, “... in bringing many sons to glory, to make perfect the leader of their salvation through sufferings”, (Hebrews 2:10). He is the Leader of our salvation. He has led in that way and we are to be in it. I think Luke’s gospel would make that plain. Paul says, “and yet shew I unto you a way of more surpassing excellence”, (1 Corinthians 12:31). That is the way of love, but it must be also the way of suffering in this world.
AFM So that leadership would have two characteristics — that of suffering and of praise, according to Hebrews 2, would you say?
JT Yes. The sufferings enhance the praise. It speaks of it immediately in Hebrews 2:12 — “in the midst of the assembly will I sing thy praises”. The assembly’s praise is attuned to Christ’s praises through suffering.
WGT Speaking of the fellowship of His sufferings; would the sufferings in Luke go beyond Gethsemane, and include the cross, or do they simply go as far as [p. 27] Gethsemane?
JT Luke does not mention Gethsemane at all, which is important to notice. Gethsemane, I believe, involves excessive pressure, and belongs to Matthew and Mark, which are marked by this. Luke says, “And going forth he went according to his custom to the mount of Olives, and the disciples also followed him”. It is the mount of Olives; that is, the sufferings are not presented in such intensity; they are, in a way, within our range. The Lord had said to two of them, “Ye shall drink indeed my cup”, (Matthew 20:23). They shall indeed do it. I believe Matthew 20 would show that it can be done, but no one but Christ could endure the forsaking of God. There are sufferings that are available to us, and I believe Luke presents these. So that we have the angel’s support in the sufferings here.
JS Are the sufferings in Luke identified more with the testimony here?
JT The severity of them is not stressed in Luke, having in view their bearing on the assembly and the Lord’s position when He instituted the Supper. When He assembled with them after He arose, they are also mentioned, for the disciples saw Him before and after He suffered. Peter speaks about being a witness of them — “who am their fellow-elder and witness of the sufferings of the Christ”, (1 Peter 5:1). It is an important matter that he could give an account of the sufferings of Christ. Paul was a partaker of them in a fuller way possibly than any.
ANW “If indeed we suffer with him, that we may also be glorified with him” (Romans 8:17), has the glory in mind.
JT Suffering with Him makes us morally suited to be glorified.
FHL You were just referring to the ministering angel. Is there a suggestion that the angel’s support came to Him following the statement, “not my will, but thine be done”?
JT [p. 28] Just so; you can understand the moral suitability of that. We can look for divine support under those circumstances. As Paul said, “For an angel of the God whose I am and whom I serve stood by me this night”, (Acts 27:23).
AFM We have the power of darkness mentioned here: “but this is your hour and the power of darkness”. Would that be Satan’s power?
JT Yes; it was all there.
AFM Is not the position of the disciples on the mount of Olives educational for the assembly? They are not in two companies here, but in one.
JT The Lord does not separate them. In Matthew and Mark, He leaves some in a certain part of the garden and takes others further on. I have no doubt that those gospels are foundational and bear on the future dispensation as well as on the present, and so take in all. Luke would give us just one company — the assembly — bringing it in as sharing in the sufferings of Christ: for morally, it must be so. To be His body, there must be suffering; and so Paul, representing that idea, says, “I bear in my body the brands of the Lord Jesus”, (Galatians 6:17); that is, the marks of His suffering.
CAM That is very remarkable and would seem to leave a special place for the sufferings of Paul. Would you say, in that way, his sufferings were descriptive of the sufferings of the assembly?
JT I think he represented what was in the mind of the Lord as to the assembly. He says that he was minister of it; so that what otherwise would come out, by and by, in the day of display, in writing to the Corinthians he is compelled to disclose, because of their state. What an extraordinary amount of suffering he passed through!
He says, “in labours exceedingly abundant, in stripes to excess, in prisons exceedingly abundant, in deaths oft. From the Jews five times have I received [p. 29] forty stripes, save one. Thrice have I been scourged, once I have been stoned, three times I have suffered shipwreck, a night and day I passed in the deep: in journeyings often, in perils of rivers, in perils of robbers, in perils from my own race, in perils from the nations, in perils in the city, in perils in the desert, in perils on the sea, in perils among false brethren; in labour and toil, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness. Besides those things that are without, the crowd of cares pressing on me daily, the burden of all the assemblies”, (2 Corinthians 11:23 - 28).
We know from other accounts that he did not list them all here. Much of his sufferings occurred later, for 2 Corinthians was written long before his arrest and imprisonment at Jerusalem.
ANW The term “joint heirs” in Romans 8:17 is rather striking: “And if children, heirs also: heirs of God, and Christ’s joint heirs; if indeed we suffer with him, that we may also be glorified with him”.
JT Yes, you feel the suitability of that. If we are to reign, there is some mark of distinction in us in the way of suffering; so that Paul says, “for I bear in my body the brands of the Lord Jesus”, (Galatians 6:17). One could see those brands at any time, showing that he was marked off as representative of the assembly.
JS The assembly’s position in glory will have been reached through suffering.
JT It is suitable that we should go that way. It became God in bringing many sons to glory to make their Leader perfect through suffering.
AR Is that why the Lord said, “it is I myself. Handle me and see”, (chapter 24:39); then He showed them His hands and His feet, as indicating the suffering through which He went.
JT Quite. He says here, “But ye are they [p. 39] [p. 30] who have persevered with me in my temptations”, (chapter 22:28). He then appoints to them places of honour, as sharers with Him in His kingdom. Thus Luke gives us the side of suffering into which we can enter. Instead of the idea of pressure, as in Matthew and Mark, it says in verse 39, “And going forth he went according to his custom to the mount of Olives, and the disciples also followed him”. He was leading them, not in a new way, but in a proved one, which was “according to his custom”; whereas, in Matthew 26, He went to a place called Gethsemane, and stipulated that some should remain in a certain position, taking others further on. Here, as at the place, He said to them, “Pray that ye enter not into temptation” — prayer is always our resource. In Matthew and Mark the Lord mentions His own purpose to pray first, and enjoins them later to watch and pray.
CAM The word attuned that you used is forceful, for the mount of Olives as associated with suffering, would show that heavenly music is produced in this way.
JT That is what we should see, that it is not beyond us; for the Lord has taken a way which He had gone before. He goes to the mount of Olives, which was according to His custom; it refers to heavenly associations. If you go that way, this is the position you come to. You are not taken into the pressure at once. As is said in the Old Testament, “that God did not lead them the way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near”, (Exodus 13:17). It was divine consideration for Israel that would not lead them into war at once.
WFK Luke’s presentation is that the assembly is to share the sufferings of Christ; he also mentions the angel ministering to the Lord. The angels are ministering on behalf of the saints at the [p. 31] present time, so that they are helped and encouraged through the various characters of suffering.
JT Yes, you may count on them. Paul in the shipwreck, at a most critical time, is ministered to by one of them; and so in Revelation when the great multitude are seen who come out of the great tribulation, it is said that all the angels were there — showing their sympathetic interest in those who had suffered.
AP It says, the Lord being in conflict, “prayed more intently”; with whom was the conflict?
JT It was with the devil; he was endeavouring to turn the Lord aside from the will of God.
AP Is this the second effort of the devil?
JT Yes; after the first attack he had “departed from him for a season” (Luke 4:13), but he came back. “For the ruler of the world comes, and in me he has nothing”, (John 14:30). The devil had sought to tempt Him, and here made this onslaught, but he failed, for “in me”, said the Lord, “he has nothing”.
AR It would appear that the angel came to Him before the conflict.
JT Yes; the angel appeared to Him from heaven, strengthening Him, after He said, “not my will, but thine be done”.
WGT An angel appears to Him here; whereas, when He was taken by the soldiers He speaks of the angels not being necessary, though a legion of them could have been sent.
JT That is Matthew’s presentation of it. He said He could have called upon His Father for more than twelve legions of angels; (chapter 26:53). John has the divine side in view; and when He said to the band in the garden, “I am he”, “they went away backward and fell to the ground”, (John 18:6). It was a question of Deity there. You do not bring in angelic support in John where the side of His deity [p. 32] is presented. Luke presents the human side which lets us in.
FHL Would you say what the power was that caused Paul to rise up, after he had been left for dead, at Lystra?
JT We know that the Spirit of God indwelt him, and that he rose up and went into the city. It was in the power of life that he did this. We are not told by what power this extraordinary thing was done. It was by the power of God.
AP Would you make a distinction in angelic service? Michael, for instance, would be on military lines; Gabriel, on teaching lines.
JT Yes. Gabriel’s service would be more priestly, but generally angels, as Hebrews 1:14 says, are “ministering spirits, sent out for service on account of those who shall inherit salvation”. They do what is needful. Take the case of Elijah, for instance: the angel speaks to him about the extent of the journey before him, that it was “too great”; his service had been to provide food for him, to bake the cake on hot stones, to awake him and invite him to eat. The angels will do anything the servant of God needs, or that the saints of God need when in suffering; they are always active on their behalf.
AP Would you say that an angel may have very great power, for Scripture says, “And I saw an angel descending from the heaven, having the key of the abyss, and a great chain in his hand”, (Revelation 20:1)? That would not be a priestly angel?
JT No; that would be a military one; 185,000 Assyrians were slain by one at one time; their power is seen as unlimited. But it is more in relation to external or physical conditions; besides, the Spirit of God is in the saints, and it seems that it was through Him that Paul rose up after the stoning at Lystra. Though apparently he was dead, he rose up himself and entered into the city.
WB-[p. 33] w What is the meaning of the mount of Olives here? Is it the Spirit coming in in the way of power?
JT I think that is the suggestion, that the Lord is leading us apart according to Luke, not in the way of the land of the Philistines, lest we should see war at once; we are thus brought into heavenly associations. The Lord had been accustomed at night to go to the mount of Olives, not for conflict, but evidently as a spiritual retreat. During the day He taught in the temple; by night, going out He remained abroad on the mountain called the mount of Olives. He did not go there to be tempted of the devil; He went there, we may say, to be with His Father. If He leads us thus, He prepares us for suffering, so that we can go that way and not turn back.
WB-w Prayer is mentioned five times in this section. Does that not help us through suffering?
JT Prayer is the great thing. “Is any ... afflicted? let him pray”. (James 5:13), “Men ought always to pray, and not faint”. (Luke 18:1) Luke makes more of it than any of the evangelists. It is the great resource we have.
I think it is very beautiful for the saints to see that if the Lord is leading us in suffering, He leads us by way of heaven, as it were. The mount of Olives, having been His own retreat, indicates this. You come down from heaven, in principle, to suffer. His departure which He was about to accomplish at Jerusalem was the theme of conversation on the mount of Transfiguration. From that mount He came down to suffer.
WFK It says, “he learned obedience from the things which he suffered”, (Hebrews 5:8). Do we learn it that way?
JT I am sure we learn through suffering.
HE In this connection I was thinking of John. “I John, your brother and fellow-partaker in the [p. 34] tribulation and kingdom and patience, in Jesus, was in the island called Patmos”, (Revelation 1:9). He became in the Spirit.
JT He was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day. That is a fine start. He fell at the Lord’s feet as dead, but He laid His right hand upon him, saying, “Fear not; I am the first and the last, and the living one”. He enters the position in the book of Revelation in that way.
AP The words, “with desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer”; then the occasion of the Supper coming in, would it affect us in the same way?
JT Yes; you may anticipate suffering, but what are you before it? Here the Lord is with His own before His suffering. He is not overpowered, but is occupied with others, not with Himself at all. He says, “With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer”. We must consider Him thus before He suffers and see that just as He is occupied, so He will go through in this spirit; He is thus an example to us.
GMacP Does Luke present Him as a model of suffering? and does the position on the mount of Olives here suggest the assembly as having the Spirit and being called into conflict and suffering?
JT Yes. He eats the passover with them. The passover entails sufferings; He was the Lamb about to be sacrificed; but we are to see what He is before suffering. Then in Acts we see Him after He suffers. The assembly begins its education in suffering as having Him thus in the midst.
FHL He was not overcome by the suffering when He prayed, “Father, forgive them”, (chapter 23:34).
JT There was complete superiority to the suffering. It is in that way we learn how to go through things, seeing what He was before and what [p. 35] He was after the cross. The mount of Olives for us implies power for all this. On the cross He says, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do”. That is the point to be noted. The saints in the testimony are to maintain this spirit of forgiveness in persecution, like Stephen; instead of vindictiveness, they exhibit the same spirit of forgiveness. No one can go through suffering in this way save by the mount of Olives. The altar of copper was anointed seven times, showing that in going through sufferings, you have power to be superior to them.
AR Would you say that Stephen stands out as a model in that way? His face shone as the face of an angel.
JT He is a beautiful example in suffering. Peter and Paul are also examples of all that we have been saying. Stephen was entirely above the pressure; he is like his Master in saying, “Lord, lay not this sin to their charge”, (Acts 7:60).
WGT In Matthew, the coming to the mount of Olives, seems to be immediately after the Supper; in Luke, there seems to be more on the line of exhortation before going to the mount of Olives.
JT Exactly; “they went out to the mount of Olives”, is said in Matthew and Mark, as if this movement was immediately after the Supper, but the sufferings are not connected with Olivet in these gospels. It is in Matthew and Mark that we get Gethsemane presented in all its pressure. Luke is the gospel we need to come to, in order to follow the Lord. He says elsewhere to Peter, “where I go thou canst not follow me now, but thou shalt follow me after”, (John 13:36).
Rem The position of kneeling is omitted in Matthew and Mark, but it is stated in Luke; it fits in with Stephen, who also knelt down.
JT Yes; you see in him a beautiful example [p. 36] of the reflection of Christ, who is to be reflected in the saints as of the assembly. Then Paul says, “in deaths oft”, (2 Corinthians 11:23). He says to the Galatians, “I bear in my body the brands of the Lord Jesus”, (chapter 6:17). There was permanent evidence of his sufferings.
WB-w It is touching to see that Stephen was evidently not knocked down by the stones. He knelt down and cried, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit”, (Acts 7:59).
JT It displays his superiority. You can understand that the angels were supporting him physically, as they had ministered to his Master.
Instruction as to the Lord’s sufferings goes back in the history of the disciples. In Mark, He taught them about His sufferings. So at the last passover, they could see Him as in anticipation of His suffering; I believe the thing to learn is how to suffer. We must understand in view of this, how He was before His sufferings, how He went into them, and then how He went through them. Peter was a witness of all this, and hence the testimony was rightly carried on.
JTJr Peter speaks of Christ as a Model. We are to follow in His steps; (1 Peter 2:21). Would that include what the Lord was before and after the Supper?
JT Exactly; if one were at the passover when the Lord’s supper was instituted, and heard the Lord say, “before I suffer”, and were at all sensitive, such an one would look to Him and learn what His demeanour was at that time, and how He was affected in speaking of it. In our great Example we learn the way to enter into, and how to face, anticipated suffering.
AP Does the fact that Judas was there at table indicate that we should be ready to anticipate suffering; the betrayer was there?
JT Exactly; that Satan should be so near ([p. 37] because Satan had entered into him) must have been dreadful to the Lord in His spirit, yet He was perfectly calm in spite of this. He says, “the hand of him that delivers me up is with me on the table” (chapter 22:21); it would be that member of Judas’s body that suggests doing; he had power to act against the Lord.
RAL John the baptist had said, “Behold the Lamb of God”, etc.; (John 1:29). Would not that suggest suffering?
JT Yes; the Lamb denotes the Sufferer — “he was led as a lamb to the slaughter”, (Isaiah 53:7). That meaning of it is carried through the Old Testament, and Isaiah 53 emphasises it.
APT The Lord says, “this passover”. What you say about that?
JT It was the last and greatest of all the passovers, for He was the Lamb, as already said; and the passover always involved suffering. The lamb was slain and roasted with fire; typically, it indicated extreme suffering; and that is what entered into this last passover.
WB-w Would the right understanding of the passover help us in suffering?
JT No doubt the whole scene is educative. What was in the Lord’s mind when He said, “before I suffer”? He intended to impress the thought of His suffering upon the minds of the disciples. He did not use the word casually — it was specially for them.
AP Is Exodus 12:8 parallel with this? “Roast with fire, and unleavened bread; with bitter herbs shall they eat it”.
JT Quite; all that entered into the passover would be there, without anything lacking.
WGT “This Passover” alludes to Himself.
WB-w In Egypt, on the passover night, a great many lambs must have suffered.
[p. 38] JT So that instead of all the firstborn of Israel suffering, the lambs suffered.
CAM The fact that the Lord raises the question in Luke 24, “Ought not the Christ to have suffered?” seems to be a test to our souls as to how much we have understood this.
JT I think so. The Old Testament leads you up to it, as marking out the Messiah. The Christ must be the Sufferer, and they should have known this. “Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into his glory?” shows that the sufferings are immediately linked with the glory.
ANW Luke, referring as he does to the suffering in his writings, would show that he gained by the ministry of it.
AFM Is there a parallel between the “brands of the Lord Jesus” in Paul and the wounds in the Lord’s hands and feet, because in this gospel, the side is not mentioned?
JT I think so; amongst the sufferings of Paul, he mentions “journeyings often”, (2 Corinthians 11:26). I believe Luke presents the journey the Lord took, by the prominence given to His feet. In chapter 7, His feet were anointed by the woman. That is to call attention to the journeyings; in chapter 10 we have the Lord as “a certain Samaritan journeying”. These journeyings are amongst the sufferings.
CAM Peter speaks of “His steps”, (1 Peter 2:21).
JT Just so; that is a word for all who serve the Lord, because we shrink from very long journeys. It is right in a way to measure things, and in measuring them, to know what they involve; yet to take them in spite of their cost. Long journeys must be taken. As the apostle says, “I, from Jerusalem, and in a circuit round to Illyricum, have fully preached the glad tidings of the Christ”, (Romans 15:19).
Ques Does the Lord give the disciples credit in that connection, when He says, “But ye are they who have persevered with me in my temptations”, (chapter 22:28)?
JT That is right; they kept on with Him. There were certain women who followed Him from Galilee; that is a long journey, too.
Ques What has been said makes much of the mount of Olives. Would it convey the thought of oil or be figurative of the power of the Spirit?
JT It is more the power of the Spirit linking us with heaven. He went according to His custom to the mount of Olives; it was the known place of His relations with the Father into which we are to be brought. Gethsemane, the place of pressure, is mentioned only in Matthew and Mark, as already said. What is to be seen in order to get this position clear, is that whatever the pressure may be, the Lord takes the lead for us. He says in verse 46, “Why sleep ye? rise up and pray that ye enter not into temptation”. He does not say, “Sleep on”, as in Matthew and Mark. Then it says, “As he was yet speaking, behold, a crowd, and he that was called Judas”; and then verse 49 says, “they who were around him, seeing what was going to follow, said to him, Lord, shall we smite with the sword?” Now this “seeing what was going to follow”, is for us; you see the thing before; but what are you going to do? How are you going to act? We have to learn that in such conditions the Lord takes the lead for us.
JS That is, in conflict?
JT Yes, in open conflict now.
ARS They are awake now; and can see what is going to follow.
JT Yes; you may say, in view of certain occurrences, I see we are in for trouble. Well, what are you going to do? The first question raised is, “shall we smite with the sword?” No, that will not do; for it is not according to the dispensation. That is what was done in the Reformation: some of [p. 40] them smote with the sword and perished by it. Here we read that “a certain one from among them smote the bondman of the high priest and took off his right ear”. He could not have done a more serious thing than to take off a man’s right ear when it is a time for speaking and hearing. What is to be done now? “Jesus answering said, Suffer thus far; and having touched his ear, he healed him”. The Lord is leading in this great conflict.
JS Showing by His own acts the spirit of the dispensation.
JT Yes; instead of cutting off a man’s ear, He heals it when cut off, so that he may hear.
AR He corrects His disciples, and then He would correct those who had come to take Him; the chief priests and captains of the temple and elders.
JT That is the next thing. We should first notice those who were around Him: their position is that of the saints now; but being around Him, we may discredit Him. Shall we smite with the sword, they inquire; Peter does not wait for the Lord’s answer. He smites, and the Lord has to undo what Peter did. Jesus then addressed the chief priests, captains of the temple, and elders. Could Peter and the others have challenged these religious heads? No. What could they say to them? “And Jesus said to the chief priests and captains of the temple and elders, who were come against him, Have ye come out as against a robber with swords and sticks?” They might have easily retorted, One of your own has just used the sword. We see that Peter’s rash act compromised the Lord’s position. The Lord did not intend to defend Himself with swords and sticks, compare John 18:36. Peter’s act had compromised the position. Thus it is for us to follow the Lord’s example in conflict.
ARS Why does the Spirit of God keep Peter’s [p. 41] name in the background here? It says, “a certain one from among them”.
JT I suppose it is to throw the onus on all that were there — “one from among them”. That sword has no place in the mount of Olives; the “sword of the Spirit” is the only necessary weapon in the conflict, coupled with “the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ”.
AP It says, “shall we smite?”
JT Yes; they were all in it.
AR The first speaking is to rebuke the disciples; and the second speaking, to rebuke those that came to take Him.
JT The Lord is making the position clear; He puts it to them as to why they came out with swords and sticks as against a robber, and points out that He had been day by day in the temple. He is exposing them in showing that they had to wait for some treacherous occasion in order to take Him.
WGT “Let him sell his garment and buy a sword” (verse 36), would be another idea.
JT Verses 36 and 37 show their new position: He was to be taken away from them and they were for the moment to depend on themselves. We have to understand that expression, “buy a sword”, spiritually. The Lord quotes from Zechariah in Mark 14:27: “I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered abroad”; this indicates His position as the Sufferer. The disciples said, “here are two swords”. Jesus said, “It is enough”. They did not catch His thought, one sword is enough — it is “the sword of the Spirit”.
JS Why did He use the term “robber”? Would it imply that they were robbing God?
JT Well, it was as if they came out against a lawless man or criminal; whereas, He alludes to His conduct among them; He never robbed anybody. He further says, “I was day by day with you in the temple”. They never saw anything in Him to indicate lawlessness. The intent of His challenge was to expose them.
Ques Jesus, being the Lord, would not need any human help, would He?
JT Peter compromised the position. I believe it is an allusion to the Reformation here, prophetically. They compromised the position by the use of the sword, and the saints suffered for three hundred years on account of it; that is, until light as to the true position of the assembly militant, and the character of its weapons, was recovered.
AP Earlier the position was carnal, as the weapons were carnal.
JT Yes; the Reformers appealed to the “powers that be” for help. Some took the sword and died by it, but the great need was to make room for the Spirit. It took nearly three hundred years for the saints to recognise the Spirit. In the great favour of God He made room for the Spirit, and now it is for the saints to maintain subjection to this position.
CAM The use of the sword in the Reformation was a serious obstacle to progress. The Lord no doubt came in with healing, and the saints became spiritual. He is able to reach His end in spite of such unfortunate things.
JT I think the Quakers were used later to make way for the gospel; they also tried to make room for the Spirit, but in a very defective way. It is somewhat unseemly to criticise the Reformers, but if they had gone the whole way in standing for the truth, room would have been given for the Spirit; and we should have had the recovery of the truth of the assembly long before it appeared a hundred years ago.
AFM What in particular did the Quakers do?
JT I believe, under God, they made the way for the open-air preaching without licence [p. 43] from the Crown. Others followed more or less devotedly, making way for the gospel to be preached “by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven”, (1 Peter 1:12). That is the principle governing gospel preaching, and we should never lose sight of that fact.
WB-w A good general in the conflict repairs the breach in his army and moves on. The Lord Jesus in like manner met the situation here.
JT Yes, and Peter even going so far as denying the Lord, is presently recovered. Protestantism has been marked by the substitution of the natural for the spiritual, but recovery has taken place. The Lord looked at Peter at the right moment, that is, as the cock crew, and Peter, remembering His word, went out and wept bitterly.
Luke presents what is priestly. The Lord healed the high priests’ bondman, and later looked at Peter, and Peter repented. These are priestly acts. When the Lord was crucified, He said, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do”, (chapter 23:34). His prayer for His murderers manifested the spirit that was to mark the dispensation of the gospel; the spirit in which you are superior to opposition and suffering. The thief was converted, as having heard that prayer.
CN Would “Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith Jehovah of hosts”, (Zechariah 4:6,) enter into this dispensation?
JT Quite so; that is the thing to come to; however much we may have to suffer, we are not to be under the power of it, but superior to it; the Spirit thus enables us to maintain the dignity of the position.
AP So that the two witnesses in Revelation 11 are in keeping with the mount of Olives, in the presence of possibly the greatest kind of suffering?
JT In the passage just quoted from Zechariah the two sons of oil are mentioned. That is what [p. 44] Revelation 11 alludes to, confirming what was said — “Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit”, that is, by the power of the Spirit of God sent from heaven, the gospel is to be preached.
AFM So that the going forth of the gospel is dependent upon vessels whom the Holy Spirit is pleased to use, as they suffer; then the subjects of the gospel form the assembly, which as under Christ, renders praise to God.
JT The result of suffering by the saints is that there is service in the assembly Godward. The sufferings of Christ are mentioned in Hebrews 2:10; it says, “it became him ... (God) ... to make perfect the leader of their salvation through sufferings”. Sufferings refer to the effect of what sin has done. The Leader must take the way of suffering in order to lead the many sons to glory, but the sons suffer also. So it says, “he that sanctifies and those sanctified are all of one”, (Hebrews 2:11). The assembly is thus the vessel of praise as of suffering.
WFK Why does Paul speak in 1 Corinthians 11:23 of suffering before he introduces the Supper? He says, “in the night in which he was delivered up”.
JT It enters into what we have remarked — “the Lord Jesus, in the night in which he was delivered up, took bread”; it connects with what we have been saying about Judas, who delivered Him up. The Lord was occupied with the assembly, in spite of what He suffered through the treachery of Judas. He “took bread, and having given thanks, broke it, and said, This is my body, which is for you”,(verse 24).
RDG Has the reference to the temple in verse 53 of our chapter some special significance? At Nazareth they lead Him to the brow of the hill to cast Him down. He does not refer to that here, but to the fact that He was day by day in the temple.
JT I think the point here is that the Lord is [p. 45] adjusting everything, and by the adjustment His enemies are exposed. The whole position is glorified. These enemies are not honest, nor courageous; if they were true to their convictions, they would have arrested Him in the temple. Why did they wait for this wretched betrayal of Judas, if He had been guilty of wickedness? Why not arrest Him before this time? The Lord is exposing the whole position, and that is always important.