THE SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST (4)
[p. 67] THE SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST (4)
Acts 4:1 - 3; Acts 12:1 - 17; Acts 7:54 - 60; Acts 8:1 - 3
JT The sufferings of Christ as worked out in the first days of the assembly’s history, in relation to the twelve apostles, would, I thought, be instructive for our consideration at this time. What is seen in this respect in the Acts may be profitably connected with the heavenly city in Revelation 21, where the twelve foundations of the wall were adorned with every precious stone. Paul alludes to such sufferings as the sufferings of Christ; he says, “even as the sufferings of the Christ abound towards us”, (2 Corinthians 1:5); they may therefore be regarded as characteristic.
We may look at the sufferings of the apostles from the beginning of Acts, extending on to chapter 12. Later we may have opportunity to consider the sufferings begun in Stephen, who introduces the heavenly thought as seen in the expression of his countenance. It drew forth the most bitter opposition; for when he said that he saw the heavens opened and Jesus standing at the right hand of God, they stopped their ears! Saul, who was present at Stephen’s martyrdom, took the lead in the persecution, ravaging the assembly; so that the assembly itself is formally seen as suffering in the most excruciating way. Saul went into the saints’ houses one after another and dragged them before tribunals. The attack is now on the assembly.
Another thing that is instructive is the kind of persons that were employed by the devil in these persecutions. Firstly, we have the Sadducees, who were fitted for such opposition as was designed to set aside, if possible, the truth of resurrection; for as a sect they did not believe in the resurrection. Satan thus secures instrumentalities suitable for his purposes. {68} [p. 68] Then in chapter 12 we have in Herod a second feature of the persecution; he represents the political side of it — a man having no conscience. Such persecute, not because they hate the saints, but in order to serve their own ends. Then, thirdly, those who attacked Stephen; they are more general in character. They are of the synagogue, and are inclusive of many from distant lands. It is a purely religious opposition and becomes notorious in its able champion — that very religious man, Saul. He was an out-and-out religious man, and in his zeal he carried on a bitter persecution against the assembly as such — to exterminate, if possible, that which was dearest to the heart of Christ. If the persecution, under these three heads, is kept in mind we may be helped in the subject before us.
FI Do I understand by your reference to the precious stones in the foundations, that they represent the sufferings of Christ in the apostles?
JT Yes. That which Revelation 21:9, etc., contemplates is the Pentecostal assembly; the names of the twelve apostles are on the twelve foundations; the twelve are called the apostles of the Lamb — the suffering One. Paul is not in view here. It appears that there is some link between the precious stones, viewed symbolically, and suffering. Precious stones are, no doubt, the product of heat, pressure, and other such influences.
JS I suppose the Acts would show us just what pressure and suffering the apostles were subjected to so as to form the foundation, and thus become spiritually able to support that which rests upon it?
JT Yes. In their great sufferings, they were formed and refined, and made in every way capable of withstanding pressure.
CAM It says that their names are on the foundations. Would “names” here suggest some renown?
JT I suppose each of them represents something distinctive. Whilst, of the twelve, Peter and John shine most in the Acts, all, speaking generally, are in view, and each of them had his particular distinction. Peter, James, and John received special names from Christ, but no doubt a similar honour marked all the apostles, each representing some phase of Christ worked out in apostolic service.
ANW Why is it the foundation of the wall?
JT I suppose it corresponds with what goes through the time of Christ’s rejection; the wall denoting fellowship and protection; so that what was of God was protected against all evil power.
AFM Do you think in the chapters we have read, the apostles proved the qualifications for suffering which they had acquired as with the Lord?
JT Yes, they had seen how He suffered. Peter said he was a witness of the sufferings of Christ. We learn things by witnessing them. The Lord said they had continued with Him in His temptations He was Leader in sufferings as in all else.
JS Would you say the defensive features of the testimony are seen in the wall?
JT Yes, the power to stand collectively against the greatest opposition. The early converts continued in the apostles’ fellowship. There was protection for what was of God there.
ANW Will you explain further what you mean by regarding the assembly in Revelation as the Pentecostal assembly?
JT I use that expression to distinguish it from Paul’s assembly — the assembly that he speaks of, the foundation of which he laid amongst the Gentiles. The foundations of the Pentecostal assembly were laid in Jerusalem; Satan hated it and attacked it, as seen in Acts 8. The linking of the twelve apostles [p. 70] of the Lamb with the city is significant because the Lamb is the sufferer.
AFM What part would you say Paul would have that is foundational in the city in Revelation 21? In Ephesians 2:20 we read: “being built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the cornerstone”.
JT No doubt he is included there, for the assembly in Ephesians contemplates his work indeed, he gives character to it. But Revelation 21 presents the assembly founded by the twelve apostles and the early part of the Acts shows how they suffered. Paul’s work would be seen in what is inward, what is for God and for Christ. Revelation does not present this aspect of the assembly. Here it comes down from God out of heaven. Paul had placed it there, as it were.
FHL Does Stephen fit in anywhere with what you are saying?
JT I think not; he is more one of the people, one of the saints developing — purchasing to himself a good degree, and is persecuted because of what he is personally. Those of the synagogue could not resist the wisdom and the spirit with which he spoke as they contended with him. Then his face was as the face of an angel to all who sat in the council. But when he speaks about Christ in heaven, they stop their ears. He represents, therefore, what is available to any of us. No one can hope to be apostolic today, but Stephen is a beautiful example for any saint — what one may acquire for oneself by faithfulness — a good degree; and that leads on to the persecution of the assembly, as we see in chapter 8. Nothing is said about the official side; that is dealt with in these other scriptures. It is the generality of the saints as the assembly in Jerusalem that Satan is aiming at here. I think it is helpful to differentiate in that way; firstly, suffering being endured by the [p. 71] apostles of the Lamb and then by those developed by the Spirit. These may appear at any time in the history of the assembly, as devotedness, intelligence, and faithfulness in any one will bring in suffering. “And all indeed who desire to live piously in Christ Jesus will be persecuted”, (2 Timothy 3:12).
FHL In Philippians, does not the apostle refer to suffering as a gift?
JT Yes; “to you has been given, as regards Christ, ... the suffering for him”, (Philippians 1:29).
AP Would not Paul’s side be seen in the earlier part of chapter 21, as connected with what is eternal?
JT You cannot leave him out; the fact that he is not mentioned does not mean that he is not there. It is only a question of seeing the link with what is primarily introduced by the twelve apostles; that is, it is a perfect thing in itself. It might be said, Why should there be a Paul, or a Barnabas? Did the others fail? The Lord would not have that said, so He shows that the testimony of the twelve is perfect. It is what was presented in testimony at Jerusalem. Like its Head it suffered and like Him it goes to heaven and comes out all-glorious. It is the Lamb’s wife.
CAM Perhaps the idea of the foundation helps in that there was a vast deal of initial work and suffering in connection with the city, was there not?
JT Yes; there was also the interior work of which we read nothing in Revelation as to who did it. From the epistles we can understand it was Paul’s work; then the twelve gates respectively were “of one pearl”; these would be Paul’s work also.
FI With regard to Stephen, does the extent of his sufferings correspond with the state that was in him as being filled with the Spirit?
JT Quite so; it is a question of paying tribute to what a man attains to as full of faith and the Holy Spirit, and therefore it is available to any one [p. 72] of us.
FI That would depend on ourselves. Some of us may think we do not have much suffering, is that because we do not come under the hand of the Spirit?
JT Just so; I think it is a tribute to the Spirit’s making way for later things. The Lord said to the twelve that they should bear witness of Him as having been with Him from the beginning; also that the Holy Spirit would come forth from the Father and that He would bear testimony of Him too. That witness to Him would be in such persons as Stephen, Philip, and Paul. It is the Spirit’s side of the service; but the Lord would show in relation to the early assembly that the twelve were perfect in their work as seen in the foundation of the city.
JS What have you in mind when you say the Lord would protect His early workmen, such as are seen in the twelve?
JT We might assume that such men as Stephen, Philip, and Paul had to be brought in because the others were remiss. It may appear so in a certain way, but I do not think the Lord would allow us to so speak of them. We have to go by their work, as seen in the twelve foundations, each has a precious stone and each stone has an apostle’s name; the twelve are there.
JS Would the formation of precious stones be the result of intense heat?
JT It would seem so from what is known from their formation. I apprehend they are the product of some internal pressure, involving heat and other powerful influences. Of course, there are pearls. That is another matter; these form the gates. Precious stones, because of their formation and quality, afford God a language which, as part of His vocabulary, is intended for our instruction.
AR In the gates, the twelve pearls were alike; but in the twelve foundations, each stone is different.
JT I think it supports what we were saying, that [p. 73] each of the apostles had his own suffering; as giving character to his own experience, with a view to his divinely designed place. They may have suffered together, but each had his own peculiar experience.
CAM There is a remarkable thing about these stones, that while they are formed in the earth, their distinctive glories are only known after they are brought into the light.
JT Just so; that helps too; the light brings out the beauties. The fact that they are in the breastplate and in the heavenly city confirms what we are saying.
APT Would Matthias be included in the foundations?
JT Yes; there were twelve apostles, and he was one of them.
RWS Is it to their credit that they remained in Jerusalem and were not scattered, in connection with Stephen’s persecution?
JT I should think so; they may have been governed by metropolitan motives, which hindered later; but at any rate they stood their ground; the attack was at Jerusalem. Had they left definitely, the special testimony at Jerusalem might have ended, and this would be according to the righteous judgment of God because of the death of Stephen and the terrible persecution that ensued; but the great long-suffering of God is seen in the continuance of the testimony there.
JS Does chapter 12 show us that Satan would make bold to attack the twelve through Herod?
JT Well, the apostles are now identified with the assembly. “At that time Herod the king laid his hands on some of those of the assembly to do them hurt”. They are identified with the assembly and he would do them hurt; it says that he “slew James, the brother of John, with the sword”. Herod represents the political element,
[p. 74] which has played such a part in the persecution of the assembly. Here he pleased the Jews; just as a political leader will do to gain favour with the people. This policy is largely seen in persecution recorded in the history of the assembly. I believe this section points not only to what was imminent then, but is prophetic as showing how the principle of suffering has come down, involving the limitation of the ministry.
James represents the ministry; but Peter does especially, and I think what we see in his release from prison is the release of the ministry in and subsequent to the Reformation. Peter, I think, has a great place prophetically in the history of the assembly, representing not what is official, but being the leading apostle — “first ... Peter” — what would represent the ministry. Satan would destroy or control it.
AP Do you think Peter’s imprisonment was governmental on account of the state of the people?
JT The assembly was waning. That has to be noticed — they prayed for Peter’s release, but then when it came they were not prepared for it. It was a humbling thing; but it affords a prophetic view of the history of the ministry in the assembly.
AFM Going back to the end of chapter 4, I would like to ask what is the character of suffering which the apostles endured in that chapter?
JT The aim of the Sadducees there was not so much against the apostles as such, but because of their teaching the people. The Sadducees hated the idea of the resurrection, and of course, the resurrection is fundamental; without Christ risen we have no foundation. This is what Peter and the apostles taught and preached, and the Sadducees would get rid of that at all costs. This first attack is to get rid of the resurrection and the consequent suffering for [p. 75] the witnesses of it. We shall come into suffering if we hold to another Man; Christ, in resurrection.
WGT Do the Sadducees represent modernistic teaching?
JT Yes, they were materialists — they did not believe in the resurrection, angel, or spirit. We have to meet that today.
JS They leave out the power of God entirely.
AP Would you say that the intensity of suffering is measured by the importance of the testimony; and the resurrection was a very important part of the truth to be maintained?
JT We should have no foundation or wall without it. What is before us now is the testimony of the twelve and the suffering it entailed. Their testimony was foundational. That is quite obvious, and what they particularly stressed was the resurrection, that is the triumph of God; the evidence of His power.
AP A great lie of Satan had preceded this testimony, in the end of Matthew.
JT Quite so; which shows how important a matter this is. The apostle Peter stated in Acts 5 that they were witnesses of Christ’s resurrection and exaltation.
RWS The Sadducees did not believe in what they could not see. Because they could not see the resurrection with the naked eye, or an angel, or a spirit, they would not believe.
JT Whereas Christians are blessed as those that have not seen, yet have believed. That is how we reach the foundation, and it is a most important thing with us today to have our feet on solid ground and be there as suffering for it.
ARS Why is Satan allowed to break the ranks by killing James?
JT We must assume that the time was fixed, and his testimony was finished. I think we can learn from the Lord’s remarks to Peter that the apostles had each a fixed period to remain here. Later the Lord says, “Behold, the devil is about to cast of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days”, (Revelation 2:10). No doubt James’s testimony was over. The Lord would not have allowed him to be killed otherwise; but He needed Peter further. The Lord determines everything; He lets loose the enemy as He sees it necessary.
ANW Herod was just a tool in Satan’s hand for the moment.
WB-w Then as to John, do we get a prophetic view also — in him we have the suffering in patience?
JT Yes. The Lord had said, “but if I will that he abide until I come”, (John 21:23). He is our “brother and fellow-partaker in the tribulation and kingdom and patience, in Jesus”, (Revelation 1:9).
AFM Both James and John drank of the Lord’s cup.
JT That confirms what we are saying. The Lord had promised James and John that they should drink His cup — “Ye shall drink indeed my cup”, (Matthew 20:23). So James drinks it here.
WGT It would seem that Herod had it in mind to give a spectacular death to Peter.
JT He intended to buy the Jews’ favour with him. That is characteristic of a politician. He does things to gain favour with the people. Note, he purposed to bring Peter out to the people after the passover; that is, he would respect their religious scruples.
RDG Did not Pilate do the same thing in the case of the Lord Jesus, and Felix in the case of Paul? Pilate released Barabbas, and Felix kept Paul bound for Festus.
JT All to please the Jews. The Spirit thus exposes the politician.
AFM Do not Pilate and Herod reap a very [p. 77] sad harvest? In the case of Herod we see that when God is pleased to bring in judgment, He does it in a most humiliating way.
JS It is helpful to see the character of any opposition and the suffering accompanying it.
JT I thought we might get help from it because you can gauge what you are suffering for. Herod was an Edomite; he was a false brother, a politician. We have not far to go to find that type of opposition.
JS He was a religious man, using the State to curb the testimony. The Jew would really be seen as a tool in the hand of political power.
JT That is what has marked the history of the assembly; its history included what is recorded here of Peter. Any thoughtful Christian will inquire, Why have we so much detail about Peter? Herod “slew James, the brother of John, with the sword”. That is a brief statement of the death of a great apostle. The Spirit of God has not seen fit to give us any details. We have no details of the death of the other apostles; and, of course, Peter is not slain here, but we have great detail as to this imprisonment. Why should that be? Why should we have details right down to the name of the maid that listened at the door as he knocked, and many other apparently minor things? It is a question of the ministry. Peter is viewed as one of the assembly — because that is the setting. He is not simply an apostle, but one of the assembly. He is included in the assembly, and therefore it alludes to what is history now; how the ministry, although bound for a while, is released, and in the releasing, the minister is not fully conscious. He does not know what is happening.
JS Why do you say ministry and not minister?
JT Because Peter represents that. He is the leading man in the ministry.
CAM I think that is very interesting. When [p. 78] we read the history of the assembly, we might be almost overcome with the amount of suffering endured, but we see here that God must have gained much in it all.
ANW I think what you say throws light on the words, “unceasing prayer was made by the assembly to God concerning him”.
AFM The brethren in the house of Mary were not up to the answer that the Lord had given.
JT Showing that the decline of the assembly is in mind. After apostolic times it was most rapid, but the ministry is never lost sight of by God; it was in His mind, although seen here prophetically, as confined and sleeping — not that one would say anything to reflect on Peter personally, but I think that one reason for his suffering here is for our instruction in the history of the assembly. You might say that Peter, sleeping in the prison, shows he was superior to the suffering, and it does, but I think it serves also to bring out the state of the ministry. He was unconscious; whereas Paul and Silas were wide awake at midnight in the prison at Philippi, singing praises to God!
AFM The obstacles to Peter’s release were miraculously removed; what would you say about that?
JT I think that it illustrates the history of the assembly; the intervention is angelic. You will notice what is said: “having delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep, purposing after the passover to bring him out to the people. Peter therefore was kept in the prison ... And lo, an angel of the Lord came there, and a light shone in the prison”. Where the ministry was bound up, whether by Romanism, Lutheranism or Anglicanism, light shone in.
JS Chains, guards, and soldiers!
JT How shall the prisoner be extricated? “Lo, an angel of the Lord came there, and a light shone in the prison”. What I think is very touching is that the angel smote Peter on the side. Who can fail to see that there is some allusion in this action to the suffering love of Christ, whose side was smitten for us? In connection with this the light shines; it is the testimony of suffering love. It has taken centuries to work all this out, but we are getting the benefit of it now! Note the period in which all this occurred — “the days of unleavened bread”; the time when a faithless and hence divinely abandoned religion was celebrating its feasts.
JS Acts 16 would be more normal than this?
JT There it is characteristic suffering by active ministers of Christ. Peter was not suffering excessively; of course he was suffering, as bound with two chains, but he was able to go to sleep. Those at Philippi were awake, and able to sing praises to God. They went through the most excruciating sufferings, but they turned the prison into a temple of praise.
AFM The word to Peter was, “Rise up quickly”. Would that suggest the urgency of the moment?
JT The mind of God was that his release should be immediate. The prison was gloomy, and Peter’s presence did not cause any light, for he was asleep.
CAM The deliverance in Acts 16 was another evidence of the power of God — He intervened by an earthquake.
JT Quite; but the aim there was not only to deliver the servants, but to get the jailor through the gospel. It represents the normal and literal side of the sufferings of Christ’s servants; very extreme, of course, in this case. But the jailor was converted. The facts of this imprisonment and release are strikingly different. There is no light in the prison; not indeed, that Peter would not have prayed before he went to sleep, but all that is left out. It says he [p. 80] was sleeping between two soldiers and the light shines in the prison from, or accompanying, the angel. Active ministry, although suffering, has different features, as in Paul’s imprisonment throughout.
AP I do not understand what is conveyed by light coming in through the angel.
JT It is God coming in sovereignly, but in the sense of distance; not that they had no ministry in the middle ages, but the ministry was shackled. It is God coming in Himself, and all that happened as far as Peter was concerned, was a dream. That is not ministry. We are not to minister as dreaming, we are to be awake, and in our sound mind; all this therefore, I think, applies to what is prophetic. It is not to discredit Peter, but he has to suffer in this sense so that the saints might get instruction as to this feature of assembly history.
HE You find here that light shone in; whereas, with the jailor, he called for lights.
JT His use of the plural shows how strongly the thought of light had entered his mind. Nobody calls for lights in this prison. It comes of itself, as the angel comes in from God.
WFK What about the prayers of the assembly being answered?
JT Well, unceasing prayer was made; God heard their prayers and answered them, as He answered Zacharias’s, but they did not expect the answer. That is a sorrowful thing; but it introduces Rhoda, who is an overcomer. She has “an ear to hear”.
FI I was wondering whether prophetic ministry is the result. It had been under the influence of what was political.
JT That is right. Immediately after apostolic days, the ruling power began to take charge of things; for instance, Constantine presided in church [p. 81] councils. Well, what could you expect of the ministers?
FI And the release side came in under the providential dealings of God, as we see here.
JT All would be lost if God did not come in sovereignly, the angel and the light shining in.
ARS Was it the prayers of the saints that moved heaven to send the angel down?
JT No doubt; that is the way it is mentioned, but, of course, God would act of Himself too.
ARS Then in the Reformation, if they had used prayer instead of calling in secular power, there would have been a different result.
JT Yes. I think the fact that the assembly prayed shows we are to view it from a prophetic side. Throughout the history of the assembly there were prayers somewhere. I believe there were devoted people right through that prayed to God.
AFM In this instance, if the saints expected an answer to their prayers, they brought it down to the idea of Peter’s angel.
JT Yes; they did not really believe God would answer their prayers, for his angel is not Peter, but his representative.
ABP I wondered if the way the light of justification by faith came to Luther, would be an indication of the providential dealings of God?
JT He got light directly from God. When Luther visited Rome, as he was superstitiously ascending “Pilate’s staircase”, he heard a voice, crying, “The just shall live by faith”. This dispelled his superstition. God speaks to us today. We cannot tell how He may have worked in men of ability throughout the middle ages. Doubtless there were devoted persons who prayed but were weak in their prayers; but God heard them and [p. 82] answered them far beyond their expectation. The Reformation must have been far beyond the expectation of godly people in those days.
JS There is something concrete in Mary’s house.
JT Yes; they are actually engaged in prayer, in the house of one who, no doubt, was a godly woman, the mother of Mark. It is well to keep the prophetic side in mind, so that we do not discredit these people; they have to suffer in a way so that we might have this prophetic teaching.
FHL The Lord said to Peter in the garden, “dost thou sleep?” just before He was to be delivered up.
JT And on the mount of Transfiguration he slept, too. I do not think it is mentioned to discredit him here exactly, but for prophetic reasons; really, in one sense, it was an indication of his superiority to the suffering.
AP Would you say there are three periods here: the time he slept, the time he walked before he came to himself, and then the period after he became conscious and reached the house of Mary?
JT Yes. In sleep the ministers are not conscious of their bondage. Then when God intervenes and they actually move, they are not in a normal state; Peter did not know that what was happening was real. I believe that under these circumstances the ministers did not arrive for a long time at the sound mind of which the apostle speaks, “For God has not given us a spirit of cowardice, but of power, and of love, and of wise discretion”, (2 Timothy 1:7). That implies spiritual intelligence and proper balance. Well, this abnormal state continued until Peter got outside, and he got to the “one street”. The angel left him, and Peter is certain that the Lord has taken him out of the hand of Herod. I think there is something in that “one street”: there is some [p. 83] thought of unity in that; it links up with the heavenly city.
AFM He now becomes really conscious.
JT That is what you see. “And going forth he followed him and did not know that what was happening by means of the angel was real, but supposed he saw a vision. And having passed through a first and second guard, they came to the iron gate”. How would he get through? “Which opened to them of itself”; that would be some unseen power acting. It opened of itself, “which leads into the city” — I believe we ought to notice that, too. Why should that be mentioned? A gate leading into a city is a very common thing. It is mentioned for a prophetic purpose, that the ministry is being led into the city. The city has its own meaning in the book of Acts. Then we read, “and going forth they went down one street, and immediately the angel left him, And Peter, being come to himself, said ..”. That is a fine position reached. The angel has left; the minister is now in one street of the city. He is standing on his own feet now, and he said, “Now I know certainly that the Lord has sent forth his angel and has taken me out of the hand of Herod and all the expectation of the people of the Jews. And having become clearly conscious in himself, he came to the house of Mary, the mother of John who was surnamed Mark, where many were gathered together and praying”. He had come to the prayer meeting. This seems to me to be a clear prophetic outline of the history of the assembly with regard to those who should minister the truth.
CAM What have you in mind about this city?
JT The city is the place of light, order, and rule. In the recognition of it ministry is carried on. The release of ministry synchronises with the recognition of Christ as Head of the assembly; He has given the [p. 84] gifts which are for the work of the ministry, for the edification of His body; (Ephesians 4:10 - 12).
JEH Would you link this on with the street called Straight?
JT Yes.
AR You would not have any administration in the city if you did not have Peter — what he represents as having the keys of the kingdom of heaven.
AP There is one street in the heavenly city, too. Is that your thought?
JT Yes; I think it means mutuality and unity. It is unity of the Spirit in the uniting bond of peace. One street in the heavenly city would mean the mutuality of dignity; that there are no streets for the rich and poor respectively.
AP We are all able to walk together.
WGT The clerical idea would destroy the thought of unity.
JT It would. All this is significant as showing the setting of ministry; and that the minister as released knows what to do. The next thing is, Who will listen to it, who will know the voice of the true minister? Rhoda knew Peter’s voice.
AFM Do you think in this chapter, the ministry of Peter merges with Paul’s? You spoke of the one street, connecting it with the city and the Head in heaven. That would illustrate what occurred a hundred years ago.
JT I think so; the one street sets aside the distinction so long maintained between the clergy and laity, and brings all on to the same level of mutual dignity. Mutuality can be carried down to the degraded level of socialism, but mutual dignity is implied in the one street of gold in the heavenly city.
FI He says that he is taken out of the expectation of the Jews. I was thinking with regard to what you were saying as to the clerical system: the ministry has been delivered from that. Peter can [p. 85] see the expectations of the Jews as being frustrated, and himself delivered from Herod.
JT Peter understands the whole position now, and he knows where to go. As remarked, the next thing is, Who will discern his voice? Will one in such circumstances be recognised as a minister of Christ? The apostle had to labour hard to maintain his ground at Corinth, yet he said he was a minister of Christ.
APf Would that not be seen in Peter’s continued knocking?
JT Yes, the true servant continues knocking. The Lord continues knocking, “Behold, I stand at the door and am knocking”, (Revelation 3:20). There is a maid here who “recognised the voice of Peter”, and maintained it, although they said she was mad. They ridicule her and she has to suffer. A tender-feeling person like this would be very conscious of such ridicule.
JS Would this show the Lord beginning another generation?
JT I suppose so. We see how she supersedes all that were there; she is the leading person, as being certain that Peter was at the door when the others were unbelieving.
AFM Would that apply to the Spirit’s voice to each of the assemblies? — “He that has an ear, let him hear”. The one who has an ear is an overcomer.
JT Yes; that is what I thought. She has an ear to hear; and is an overcomer. She represents those who hear what the Spirit says to the assemblies.
RAL She did not open the door.
JT You must not open the door until you have listened. John says, “If any one come to you and bring not this doctrine, do not receive him into the house”, (2 John 10).
APT Rhoda considered for all in the [p. 86] house.
She went and told them before she even looked at Peter.
JT She did not keep the thing to herself. What is emphasised is that she recognised the voice of Peter and that it caused her joy.
ARS Why is the opening of the door left to the saints that were in the house? You would have thought that the overcomer would open the door.
JT You must bring in those who are in responsibility; she did not own the house. It says, “And when he had knocked at the door of the entry, a maid came to listen, by name Rhoda”. I do not suppose she would open the door under ordinary circumstances. You want to know to whom you are opening. “And having recognised the voice of Peter, through joy did not open the entry, but running in, reported that Peter was standing before the entry. And they said to her, Thou art mad. But she maintained that it was so. And they said, It is his angel. But Peter continued knocking; and having opened, they saw him and were astonished”. They did not open because of her report only, but also because of the continued knocking.
ARS Peter’s continued knocking had an effect upon them.
JS Are you still viewing this prophetically as the Lord dealing with the hearts of His people through the ministry?
JT Yes. “Behold, I stand at the door and am knocking”.
CAM It would surely be safe to say that the ministry given in these last days is vastly beyond the thoughts of those who prayed throughout the earlier history of the assembly.
JT Quite. Besides oral ministry, there is great gain in circulating what God gives, and speaking of it at every opportunity. The knocking by the Lord is mediate and is largely through [p. 87] such service.
JTJr We get signs in this book — something that marks the person. Peter makes a sign to them and tells them to be silent. Is that to bring about a like state of soul?
JT A sign always signifies something; here subjection is required. It was a downward motion of the hand. Paul also made a similar sign with his hand; (Acts 13:16).
ANW What is the position of James and the brethren?
JT I think James is the responsible one; his place in Jerusalem is very marked, as representing responsibility. He was capable of having power by himself, he stresses what one man can do. He tells us what Elijah did, and therefore it is a question of distinct men of that type who had such individuality about them. He acquires power on moral lines. I believe he wrote the striking epistle of James, and gave the decision at Jerusalem in Acts 15. You can never omit the idea of special responsibility amongst the saints. While the mutual thought is always present, there should be the responsible side accompanied by moral weight.