GOD HAS BEEN MANIFESTED IN FLESH

John 1: 32–34; 2 Peter 1: 16–21; Acts 2: 32–36; Romans 16: 25–27

NJH We considered this morning the fact that God has come into our circumstances, exemplified in “the mystery of piety”—“God has been manifested in flesh”, 1 Timothy 3: 16. We looked at the Sent One, who had the glory of the Father before Him. He sought that—that was His life. It is quite a remarkable life to contemplate that it was characteristic with Him to seek the glory of His Father. He says, “Father, glorify thy name”, John 12: 28. Now we should consider Christ Himself, and what the Father’s thoughts were of Christ. We have read as to what was given to John the baptist to distinguish. In the other gospels His anointing is in view of His service, but not so in John 1. I think this reference in John 1 is where the Father’s love for Christ came out. He is distinguished, and is going to carry everything through. He is the great Accomplisher for God. I thought it would be good to see how we get these glimpses of the Father’s appreciation of Christ, as the One that is going to complete everything.

We read in 2 Peter “he received from God the Father honour and glory”. And then there is a voice—“such a voice”. It was the Father’s voice to Christ. I know, of course, the reference there to ‘uttering’ is linked with the Spirit’s uttering in relation to the prophetic word. But you can understand the Father and the Spirit being One in this matter of making much of Christ. He is crowned with glory and honour in Hebrews, but here He receives it—“For he received from God the Father honour and glory, such a voice being uttered to him by the excellent glory—This is my beloved Son”. In this dispensation we are brought into the closeness of divine communications, recognising the Father’s voice, and recognising the Spirit’s voice. You get both here in Peter. The idea of ‘uttering’, you might say, is coming from the inwards of God. Where it speaks in Corinthians as to searching the depths of God (1 Corinthians 2: 10), it is actually the deep thoughts of God that have been revealed by the Spirit. So we have the Father’s voice and in principle the Spirit’s voice in 2 Peter. That is another thing to take account of; we as creatures, being privileged to recognise the voice of divine Persons, we might say, singularly—the Father’s voice and the Spirit’s voice.

In the Acts of the Apostles you have in chapter 2 the Lord as ascended, glorious ascension of Christ, having been raised “by the glory of the Father” (Romans 6: 4) out of death, and now He is exalted. It says, “Having therefore been exalted by the right hand of God, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this which ye behold and hear”. In these ten days Christ received this promise of the Spirit. It is remarkable. We know from chapter 1 of John how great He is, that He could baptise with the Holy Spirit. No mere man could do that. He must be a divine Person Himself. He has been made “both Lord and Christ”, and I was challenged in mine own heart as to ‘How did I come into Christianity?’ My mind went to this reference which Paul gives in chapter 1 of Romans and in chapter 16, the “obedience of faith”. That is how you come into Christianity, and that should become characteristic of us. I wonder if we might follow that through in making much of Christ.

JS It is a great privilege to come into some knowledge of the Father’s appreciation of Christ.

NJH Yes, and that is characteristic. Eternally we will see and experience the Father’s feelings about Christ. It is settled there. Things are changeable here in the world, but it is settled there as to Christ

JS So that we come to the knowledge of Christ, through our needs and exercises and so on in our lives, but it is a far greater thing to get some sense of how much the Father really appreciates Him, and be given by the Spirit to enter into something of that.

NJH Yes, that is good because there is a certain link between the Spirit coming upon Christ and the Spirit coming down on the saints at Pentecost. We know it is vastly different because the conditions are different. There were mixed conditions in the beginning of Acts, so the Spirit had required that matter of protection, as the fire involves protecting the Spirit’s Person. So when He comes there is a difference, but there is a link because we share of the same Spirit. With Christ the Spirit came upon Him in absolute complacency.

GBG In Mark’s gospel the Lord beheld the heavens opened. In Matthew’s gospel they were opened to Him, and opened in relation to moral features. Here John says, “I beheld the Spirit”. And it is not especially in relation to what is moral, is it? It is relating to the Person. So this is for others, like ourselves, is that right?

NJH I think it is clearly opened up for us. How can the world appreciate Christ? They cast Him out. The builders viewed Him, they rejected Him, to them He was “worthless”, 1 Peter 2: 7. But John the baptist, although not of this dispensation, was prepared for this. He was personally prepared by God. John says, “but he who sent me to baptise with water, he (emphatic) said to me”. So he was prepared by God for this witness.

RDP It says, “There was a man sent from God” (John 1: 6), that is how John is introduced, and then, “he said to me”. It is a remarkable thing that there should be that communication to John in relation to what was distinctive as to Christ.

NJH Yes, I think he was prepared for it because, you will remember on the mount Moses and Elias appeared but they did not enter into the cloud. Only those of Christ’s own, you might say of the assembly, were introduced into the cloud and heard the Father’s voice. But I think John is actually prepared for this.

RDP It is quite a remarkable reference, is it not? The emphatic “he”, in “he said to me”.

NJH You see that is where things have been lost. Many are making so much of baptism by water because they think that introduces persons into the church, but that is unfounded. It is unscriptural. It is by virtue of the Spirit we are baptised into one body. Water baptism removes things, but with the baptism of the Spirit it is introducing a new order of things.

RDP It is an interesting chapter because you have the One who takes away the sin of the world. That is one of the great things that attaches to Christ, and in the same chapter He baptises with the Holy Spirit. One is removal and one is inclusion, is it not?

NJH Yes, you are brought into this. And therefore He says “Come and see” (John 1: 39). You can see these persons want to know where this order of man stays, where He lives, where He abides.

DBR Do you think in a certain sense it is the pinnacle of John’s service? I think it was a wonderful honour that God gave John that he should bear this witness. I think it is really the pinnacle.

NJH Yes it is, because John’s gospel does not touch on John the baptist’s failures, the others do. According to them he loses faith. He thinks another is coming, but here it is, “He must increase, but I must decrease”, John 3: 30. It is really a pinnacle in John’s experience.

DBR It is relating really to One, he is drawing attention to One who cannot fail. I think we need that assurance in these days, that everything is in this blessed Person. John is bearing witness to that, “this is the Son of God”.

NJH Yes, that is a needed word. This Person cannot fail. And, you know, some young hearts may say to themselves ‘How am I going to get through?’ Well, this Person that you are attached to, if you have a living link by the Spirit, cannot fail. I like that. We need our faith strengthened. There is a lot attempting to shake us, but at the end of Hebrews 12 is that one thing, you cannot shake God, and you cannot shake this blessed Person, Christ. If you are linked with that you are in an unshakable position. What God does stands. I think what you said is very helpful, that is what is needed.

DBR Caleb, I think, grasped the opportunity. It is said of Caleb that he “stilled the people before Moses”, Numbers 13: 30. It is a time of stilling one another, do you think?

NJH That is right. Bringing in “good words, comforting words” (Zechariah 1: 13), it says.

RC I thought of the Spirit abiding upon Him. That brings out the absolute perfection of the manhood of the Lord Jesus. The Spirit totally identified Himself with that blessed Man.

NJH You may get the ‘grieving’ or the ‘quenching’ with us. That we have to say depends sometimes on our state, and that humbles us. The quicker we get right about it the better, our meetings would be better. But here—He abides upon Him. I think it is One to fasten our thoughts on.

PM The coming of the Spirit upon the Lord Jesus was not the cause of His enjoying sonship, was it, as it is with us?

NJH Yes, that is good. It did not change Him. He had conscious sonship all along, but it is an example to us that if we are going to take up anything we require the anointing. On our side we require it. The other gospels touch on service and the anointed lips are needed. But with this Person, the Spirit “abode upon him”, it was a settled position.

JAG Aaron was anointed without blood. It typifies the perfection and liberty and freedom enjoyed that the Spirit has with him.

NJH It must have been delightful, the Spirit coming down on Christ, the Father entering into that, His words coming, “my beloved Son”, entering into the whole matter. And then provision is made for those that were secured through the redemptive work of Christ. Obedience was there. You receive the Spirit on the principle of obedience, and there was quality of state there for the promise of the Father to come on them.

JAG This is a pattern for all believers—the anointing here and the Father’s approval, because He draws us to Christ.

NJH “No one can come to me except the Father who has sent me draw him”, John 6: 44. You see the persons of the Godhead working, and it is by the Father drawing to Christ. It shows that there is a beautiful blend of operations. But here, I think there is something singular about this. I know we receive the Spirit because the Father loves us; if we ask for it, and the state of obedience is there, then the Father loves to give the Spirit. In fact it is one of the greatest thoughts in the Father’s mind, to give the Spirit.

JW The Spirit was here in Christ in a total way. He was the only One who had the Spirit in a total way. He is distinguished in Christ.

NJH The Holy Spirit coming on Christ in a bodily form means the total presence of the Spirit coming on Christ.

JSp What do you say about the thought of the fulness of the Godhead dwelling in Him bodily? Would that come into this? There are three Persons in unity and serving in regard to getting a full answer for divine love. But I just wondered about the thought of the fulness coming into it.

NJH In the first reference in Colossians 1: 19 J. N. Darby’s footnote says the words ‘(of the Godhead)’ have been added to give the sense. The deity was there. It was God’s side and was beyond the creature to take account of. In Colossians 2: 9 the word ‘bodily’ comes so we can apprehend it by the Spirit. The three Persons are clearly there. They were working in total oneness and unity. You could never think otherwise. There is absolute oneness of action. It is one will as we have often said. Three ‘willings’ but one will, and that takes place here.

JS I was wondering about Colossians 1, which is referring to Him in His condition down here, it says, “the fulness of the Godhead was pleased to dwell” (Colossians 1: 19). Do you think that God was pleased to show how the Persons of the Trinity were involved, you might say, in divine pleasure?

NJH Exactly. The reference in Colossians 2 is, “For in him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily” (Colossians 2: 9). That is where He is, and He is there where we can take it in. His pleasure is in it and there is the expression of His pleasure here, in distinguishing Christ.

RT Philip says, “Lord, shew us the Father and it suffices us”, John 14: 8. He says, “He that has seen me has seen the Father” (John 14: 9), and He says with great feeling, “Am I so long a time with you, and thou hast not known me” (John 14: 9). Well I thought the revelation required someone to express it, did it not? And here is the Person who expressed it in its fulness.

NJH That is exactly it. It was more than representation, it was revelation. You see if you look up the matter of truth you will find that it does not say that God is the truth. Christ is the truth, and the Spirit is the truth because They are expressing what is of God. “He that has seen me has seen the Father”. The Father was in Christ. Things are so close, they have come so close to us.

RT It even says, “the works themselves which I do, bear witness ... that the Father has sent me”, John 5: 36. The Father’s works were expressed in this glorious Man.

NJH So that is why it is ‘God manifested in flesh’. So here it says, “he it is who baptises with the Holy Spirit”, and John says, “And I have seen and borne witness that this is the Son of God”. He had to recognise who that Person was. It was not a mere man here. A mere man cannot baptise with the Holy Spirit.

RDP What is involved in the baptism of the Holy Spirit?

NJH Well, it is quite a full matter. There have been persons thinking that it is similar to baptism of water. But it is a different thing completely. I do not even know how real believers have fallen for that. They get re-baptised to get into the church. It just does not apply. If you are baptised into the body you are in the body. You are in the body as having the Spirit and He is a divine Person. The Lord is divine and He baptises and the Spirit baptises, and it is a divine matter. We become the objects of divine pleasure. Such persons have been brought into one body, a holy vessel which will be for the eternal satisfaction of God. It is a great principle that the body goes through.

RDP It is a remarkable expression, “he it is who baptises with the Holy Spirit”. The Lord in John 4 says, “thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water” (John 4: 10), as if this great matter involves the Lord directly, personally.

NJH Yes, elsewhere it says, “he shall baptise you with the Holy Spirit and fire”, Matthew 3: 11. So He is actually removing

what was displeasurable to God. So the baptism of the Spirit brings persons in keeping with the holiness of God.

DBR There is only one descent of the Spirit. That would be at Pentecost, and then you and I are brought into the fulness of that. Is that how it works, do you think?

NJH Yes, you are brought into what already exists. As you say, there is one descent of the Spirit, then there is how we are baptised into one body. That is an active divine thing to bring us into the enjoyment of our place in the body, is it not? DBR Yes, that is because the Spirit is here.

NJH Oh yes, clearly.

GBG The baptism of John was negative, was it not? But here, “he it is who baptises with the Holy Spirit”, is positive. It is the Spirit that gives positive appreciation of Christ. What we are saying is right and involves being in the body, but it is a positive thing that would help us to appreciate the truth.

NJH It does and links us with Christ where He is. You would have to have the Spirit to have a link with Christ where He is.

JS This baptism, by the Lord, did not take place until He was glorified. That is in Acts 2 but He was glorified before this took place.

NJH But when John says, “but he who sent me to baptise with water, he said to me”, it shows how important the baptism of the Spirit was to the Father. So He pours out that promise when He is above.

PM When the apostle speaks of the baptism of the Spirit in 1 Corinthians 12, it is preceded by “so also is the Christ” (1 Corinthians 12: 12). Is that important?

NJH You mean the anointed vessel?

PM I was just thinking there was that here, and is that here, upon the earth, which is morally in keeping with what there is in Christ where he is, “so also is the Christ”. And he says, “For also in the power of one Spirit we have all been baptised into one body” (1 Corinthians 12: 13).

NJH So the Spirit’s operations are vital for the maintenance of the pleasure of God here. And that required that persons would be in the body, placed in the body, which is a wonderful truth. It is the mystery and that exists, and I think it is a wonderful thing to lay hold of. It involves immense privilege, brethren, that such a One had the ability to bring in this great thought of God, so that we have received the Spirit, and by the Spirit we have been brought into the body.

JCG The reference to the baptism of the Spirit, for the young people to understand that, was the receiving of the Spirit. We need to distinguish that, do we not? If a person believes, God seals His work. He seals His work with the Spirit. But the reception of the Spirit is really the baptism of the Spirit, is it not, receiving it in a conscious way?

NJH Yes, it would be. You see we were baptised, and Christian households were baptised, it was household baptism, and somebody else had to do it. Some other person baptised you by water. But here there is a responsible element in it. You have to provide responsible conditions for the Spirit, to have the Spirit. It is God’s eternal desire that there would come a day when believers would receive the Holy Spirit. And it is so great with the Father. It is such a pent-up blessing that He uses this time, as we have in John 1, to establish the Person who is able to do it. Now the Son was able to do it. Christ was able to baptise with the Holy Spirit.

JAG On the other side we have all been given to drink of one Spirit. Is this sovereign, and then on our side there is responsibility to appropriate?

NJH It is for satisfaction. You drink of it. You are a satisfied person and that is an important thing because this satisfaction comes into the heart. You do not need to go elsewhere for satisfaction, your satisfaction is in the Spirit, which is important. But I still think we have to remember that while you say it is sovereign, we must provide a state for it. It is not automatic, but there was obviously a state of obedience in Acts 2 when the Spirit came on them. They maybe had not asked for the Spirit, but there was a state there where the promise of the Father could be poured out on these persons.

JAG Do you think then that the state is what causes us to love to drink of the one Spirit?

NJH It is nearly one thing, baptised by one Spirit and drinking of one Spirit. It is very close but it is kept living in our souls. When we come to the Supper, in a certain sense we are in the enjoyment of that, are we not?

JAG You cannot drink of the one Spirit if you do not have the Spirit.

NJH Exactly.

JDG With the remission of sins it is the Lord’s delight to give the Spirit. It is His delight to do that.

NJH That is right. He has the basis for it.

JDG It is not that He does not want to give the Spirit.

NJH It is His pent up affections to give it. He might be wanting to give some persons in this room today the Spirit; it is real and His heart’s desire is that they may receive the Holy Spirit. I am not saying that you do not have the forgiveness of sins, but maybe you do not really enjoy the forgiveness of sins. The truth is not attractive to you. Christ Himself and His glory does not mean a lot to you, if you do not have the Holy Spirit. It meant a lot to John. It changed John the baptist, this Light, even though he is not part of our dispensation.

DBR So something has been established by the coming of the Holy Spirit that has never broken down. I think it is important to grasp that. And we are brought into it—I think it really involves the fulness of Christianity—and that has not changed. So we are kindly brought into it. There must be a moral basis that brings me into it sensibly and intelligently, so that we are brought into something that has never failed.

NJH In 1 Timothy it refers to the house of God. That exists. The assembly is the pillar and base of the truth. There is that which is unbreakable and it is down here.

APG I was just going to refer to Acts 10. The Holy Spirit fell upon those who were hearing the word. That involves divine pleasure, does it not?

NJH That is linked with Luke 15. So it is the pleasure of God to give the Holy Spirit. And it was the Holy Spirit as already here. He descended once and He is here. But we have to come into it, and I think what has been said is good that there is a sure foundation. There is something existing that cannot break down and we need to get through to it.

Ques. Does the baptism of the Spirit have a unifying effect? It really enhances our collective appreciation of Christ and of the Father’s appreciation of Christ, does it?

NJH Yes, without it you would miss out on so much. You would not know what enjoyment was collectively. You would not know the service of God collectively. You could not enquire in the temple without it. It would just be reciting what you know. There would not be enquiry and getting light from God as to any matter.

Rem. It just seems an essential truth to grasp if we are to approach the truth in a unified way.

NJH How pleasurable that must be to God when He sees saints together, persons from all different areas coming together, and submitting themselves to one another in the fear of Christ. That involves Christ and the saints. Christ is produced in the saints. You are there in the fear of Christ. These are collective thoughts. So much variety opens up to you once you lay hold of the effect of the baptism of the Spirit, a whole world opens up to you. Otherwise you would not have any link with it.

JCG It would be seen in Acts 19 when Paul came to the believers in Ephesus. They seemed to have progressed only a certain distance, but he says, “Did ye receive the Holy Spirit when ye had believed?” (Acts 19: 2), and a great fulness comes to light in consequence of that, does it not? But I was thinking too that it is possible that persons may not make enough progress to come into a living character of the Holy Spirit in our hearts.

NJH It has been said, they had heard a defective ministry, in that it was only the baptism of John. That is all they had. They had not progressed beyond that. John had progressed beyond it. He had recognised that the Person that was coming could baptise with the Holy Spirit. So he personally, although he did not have part in the assembly, and was not in that family, he was further on than even the Ephesian disciples. But they said they had not heard. And yet the one that ministered the Spirit was there (Galatians 3: 5). Why did they not recognise by the presence of the apostle Paul that the Spirit had come? The manifestation of the Spirit was there. That was not making too much of man because fire had dealt with what was wrong in Paul’s history probably like no other believer. The fire had dealt with all his history. He was there and he was ministering the Spirit. That is what was said to the Galatians. So the Ephesian believers should have recognised it, but to proceed on, they received the Spirit. These disciples became elders. That is how we progress in the truth. We get a step and we need the Spirit for the step, and then things start to open up. Then you have the faithful. The saints are faithful in Ephesus. The company is developing, they are starting to show results in the company by the baptism of the Spirit.

RGr I was just going to ask a question regarding the way the Lord speaks about the Spirit at the end of Luke. He calls it “the promise of my Father” (Luke 24: 49), and He links that directly with power. Do you think that would bear on what you are saying? You have been suggesting that the Father is very much involved in this matter and His feelings are, but do you think there is some suggestion that the Father would quickly lay hands on what was of Christ here, after Christ had gone up?

NJH That is good. We will just go to Acts 2. It says there, “Having therefore been exalted by the right hand of God, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this which ye behold and hear”. It is the Father that had promised the Spirit. God’s purpose was that we should receive the Spirit. So the promise of the Spirit is the Father’s promise. Christ received the Spirit to pour Him forth.

DCB It is remarkable to see that, you can say the transaction between the Father and the Son, in giving that promise.

NJH We were speaking this morning about the Son’s love for the Father. He was the Sent One, and His total characteristic committal was to the Father. Here the committal of the Father comes out in this promise which He gives to Christ. And that is a blessed thing. I often think about “the glory which thou hast given me I have given them”, John 17: 22. He gave sonship to Christ. He inherited it as coming into manhood. Christ enjoyed sonship, and He gave sonship to us. I think that is a divine order. He gave sonship to us because He enjoyed it Himself. And here the Father could reliably depend on this blessed, exalted Man, that He could give Him the Spirit as the promise, to pour out on His own. I think it is the love of the Father coming through that.

DCB The thought is that we can receive the Spirit and say, ‘The Father has been interested in me’. And the Son has been interested in me too. Their affection, divine affection is freely shown in the giving of the Spirit.

NJH Yes, that is right because the Spirit is viewed also as sent. So the Father is the dominant thought, because the Father retains the place of Deity, and everything is on behalf of the Father; He is giving the promise, the Holy Spirit to Christ exalted, so that He might pour out. Even the pouring out suggests liberality in the heart of God because He loves us so much that He would give us the Holy Spirit.

JWr Does the verse in John’s gospel, “The Father loves the Son, and hast given all things to be in his hand” (John 3: 35), bear on this? The Father has seen that the Son is honoured, giving Him the gift of the Spirit so that He can shed it forth to bring us through.

NJH Yes, that is beautiful! What an administration! No wonder it says “God has made him, this Jesus whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ”. The thing is going to be made effective in persons. That unifies, brings them all together. And there is nothing like it when you think about it. How we are brought together and the bonds we have in the truth. It is just amazing. ‘Bonds in the truth’ means that we are in keeping with the Holy Spirit. He is the Spirit of truth.

JS You have something in mind in stressing this thought of “both Lord and Christ”? That is a dual thought.

NJH It led me to think of Romans 16, how do we come into Christianity? I am not speaking about the forgiveness of sins at this point, or about the reception of the Spirit, but it is on the principle of obedience. He is Lord. And I say, ‘Well, am I in keeping with that?’, if I was introduced on the obedience of faith, to lay hold of God’s word, is that still marking me? I am speaking simply. I think we are going to get down to rock bottom, because we often speak to the young people, and rightly so, but remember, young people, generally when the apostles speak to the young, they speak to the old at the same time. The apostles all write that way so we are not putting you by yourself, but it is important to have right starts. And a right start is the obedience of faith, among all the nations. It is the obedience of faith and I think that is why the lordship of Christ is stressed here. Is that just?

GBG If I am subject to Christ as Lord, does it not make way for the Spirit we have received? The Spirit is free in a person who is subject.

NJH It is on the principle of obedience or in request. But the obedience is there. If the state is there, instead of disobeying you get into a state, really in principle, unto the obedience of Jesus Christ (1 Peter 1: 2).

GBG The Spirit is more free with a person who commits his life to the Lord, like say in Romans 12. The Spirit has liberty with that person.

NJH Yes, because for more hours in the week we are in the ‘in Lord’ position than we are under His headship. I just feel there is a need at the moment for the obedience of faith and to recognise His lordship, then we will know the effectiveness of the Man that can accomplish everything as the Christ.

JCG Paul says in Romans 6, “but have obeyed from the heart the form of teaching into which ye were instructed” (Romans 6: 17), so that if we are obedient in relation to the kingdom principles, we will be ready for instruction. We will not rebel against it. And then we will see who the Christ is, will we?

NJH That is good. He is going to effect everything for God. Wonderful Person!

QAP In John 13 there is a suggestion that the disciples would put the teaching first, but the Lord Jesus changes the order and says, “If I therefore, the Lord and the Teacher” (John 13: 14) and I am just wondering if that would help. Does lordship really come first before the teaching?

NJH Yes, of course He was among them, and what a tender teacher He was. He answered all their problems, all their difficulties. They came to Christ and He was like a father to them. He told them everything sincerely. The Lord and Christ is needed for the time we are in. We are still in the area where lawlessness is. It is a world of lawlessness, and the seed of lawlessness is in all our hearts. I am not saying it fructifies. By the Spirit, we put to death the deeds of the body. It is not to live there. Through divine grace, there is the obedience of faith and we become teachable.

RHB I was just wondering if you would say something about being filled with the Spirit. Paul speaks about that.

NJH Well it is quite an extraordinary statement. Stephen was full of the Holy Spirit. It means there is no room for anything else. It says, “and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (Acts 6: 5), and then it refers to Stephen again in verse 8, “full of grace and power”. In verse 3 “Look out therefore, brethren, from among yourselves seven men, well reported of, full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom. That was in a menial matter covering the widows of the Hellenists. And what grace they received. They were full of the Holy Spirit, they were well reported of, but the murmuring ceased. The murmuring could easily come up. It came at the beginning of Israel’s history, it came at the end of the wilderness history. They murmured. It is a thing that can easily spring up, but it was met there by persons who were full of the Holy Spirit.

DBR Now I have a practical question. The apostle speaks about “using diligence to keep the unity of the Spirit in the uniting bond of peace”, Ephesians 4: 3. Do you think that is something that I should be governed by in all my arrangements? We do arrange things, things are arranged and they have to be arranged. But in arranging them all we should arrange them in such way that we are “using diligence to keep the unity of the Spirit in the uniting bond of peace”. Without that you get disturbance, and rebellion, and bad feeling. I am sorry to bring these negative features in but I think we need to learn in all of our arrangements to consider if we are “using diligence to keep the unity of the Spirit in the uniting bond of peace”. Do you think?

NJH Yes I would agree with that. We should love peace among the brethren. It should be a governing matter that the exercises among the brethren should be recognised. Spiritual, priestly exercise should be listened to, and it helps, because that is not selfish. We have to work things out but the great thing is that what is governing us is the unity of the Spirit; being diligent and held in the bond of peace. The brethren want peace. We do not want to bring anything in that does not spread or secure peace.

DBR J. N. Darby’s note there says, ‘It is not only ‘bond’, but the ‘bond-together’’. It is a wonderful bond, the bond-together. Well does it exist and am I in it? That is the question for me, Am I in it?

NJH We take it to our own hearts. Take to heart what the truth is, and it is the bond of the Spirit. The unity of the faith is how we hold the truth, but there it is a divine Person that has formed that glorious bond. We should be careful about it.

KM Besides asking for the Spirit, scripture tells us that God gives the Holy Spirit to those that obey Him. Now what obedience is that? Is it the obedience that would put our faith in Christ in relation to our sins and our lawlessnesses so that we have a sense of forgiveness? I was thinking of the expression “those that obey Him”, Acts 5: 32.

NJH I think it is the way that divine love takes us on, how divine grace meets us, and we become submissive to the Lord. Look at Saul of Taurus. He very quickly received the Spirit because the man was changed. Your whole person is changed. That is what conversion means. You cannot convert yourself. God can do it. He does it in His grace through the gospel. Saul was led by the hand into the city first. He was a changed man and I think in principle God saw that he was in the path of obedience. He was giving up his own will. He was not pursuing his murderous course, but he was now in a new frame of mind and a new state of heart. And I think God gives the Spirit to that person.

RDP It says of the eunuch does it not, “he commanded the chariot to stop”, Acts 8: 38. There was a new light governing him. He was marked by the obedience of faith.

NJH Yes, that is good.

JWeb I just wondered if, along with the obedience of faith, the Spirit of God would create in us the desire to practise God’s will, as we had in John 7?

NJH You are now in the way of righteousness. It may be early stages, but there must be a change. Conversion is not just a change of mind to think another way. There is a change in the person. Instead of desiring, loving self, you now love the Person that is presented to you in the gospel. You are obeying Him. You come under the influence of Christ and then you will understand His lordship. He has a right to my affections. He has a right to my path.

JWeb You know within yourself that the Spirit of God is working in creating desires which were not there before. You desire to practise God’s will.

NJH He will give you the power for it. The power is there in the Spirit to do it. Based on what we said as to Acts, I would like to refer to Romans 16: 25–27, because I think it gives these three verses a marvellous opening up of things. “Now to him that is able to establish you”, that is God, “according to my glad tidings and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, as to which silence has been kept in the times of the ages, but which has now been made manifest, and by prophetic scriptures, according to commandment of the eternal God, made known for obedience of faith to all the nations—the only wise God, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory for ever. Amen”. Is it not remarkable? This has been hidden throughout the ages, “silence has been kept in the times of the ages, but which has now been made manifest”. That is the time we are in.

PM Does divine counsel enter into the silence having been kept? Divine Persons waited. They knew that They were waiting for a time in which the fulness of divine thoughts, made known in Christ glorified, and the Spirit here, could all be manifested to men for the obedience of faith.

NJH That is it. They waited. Counsel entered into it. The revelation of God had to take place in Christ. The Father had to be made known. Think of what is already here in the presence of the Spirit. He comes and stays. He is established here. But think of the whole divine arrangement in the heart of God being kept hidden throughout the ages, and now we are in the time of it being manifested, “has now been made manifest ... made known for obedience of faith to all the nations”.

JAG Is this now how we find our way into the assembly? I was thinking of the twelve apostles. Their names are in the foundation of the wall of the city. That kind of ministry is basic to it. I am thinking of Him being made Lord and Christ.

NJH Yes, exactly. You can see the whole thing working out as He is made Lord and Christ. God has this thing now manifested. It is all assembled, we might say, and He says to all the nations, ‘See what I have reached in Christ’.

RT So is this the culmination of the teaching of the Roman epistle? They have been led up to present their bodies a living sacrifice, and this is the outgoing of that, is it?

NJH That is good, yes. He brings in just a touch at the beginning of chapter 1, but I think this is the final thought in the Roman epistle. As you say, the end is reached that the whole thing is “through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory for ever”. What a Man He is, to establish everything for God.

JS Do you think it would bring out the need for our being established in the present time? Both in Paul’s glad tidings and the truth of the mystery?

NJH Yes, he speaks at the end of Ephesians as to the “mystery of the glad tidings” (Ephesians 6: 19), which involves the body.

JS I was thinking of the point he is making about being established. We are steady in these things. We are not carried away from them.

NJH I think that is a good and needed word. God knows our needs. We might try to interpret our needs but He knows the needs among the brethren. He knows the needs among men, of course. But He knows the needs among the brethren, and anticipated needs, and I think one of the things He is pressing on us is the need to be established, “established in the present truth”, 2 Peter 1: 12. But here it is, “to establish you, according to my glad tidings and the preaching of Jesus Christ”.

JCG Do you think what we have in Romans 16 is extended in Colossian truth, “the dispensation of God which is given me towards you to complete the word of God, the mystery which has been hidden from ages and from generations, but has now been made manifest to his saints; to whom God would make known what are the riches of the glory of this mystery among the nations, which is Christ in you the hope of glory”, and then later “to the end that we may present every man perfect in Christ”, Colossians 1: 25–28? Does that bear on your earlier reference to His being made “both Lord and Christ”? We are progressing, do you think, in relation to assembly-mindedness?

NJH Yes, that is good. And really the completion of the word of God involved the bringing in of the nations. That is what he has in mind in Colossians. “Christ in you” was the nations, and here it is to all the nations. God is now forming the assembly out of the nations

PAG Are you suggesting that the full appreciation of the Father’s delight in Jesus involves both their acceptance of the truth of the gospel, and their acceptance of the truth of the assembly? We will not get a full understanding of God’s appreciation of Christ without both, will we?

NJH I think that is very helpful, because who knows the Christ like the assembly? Who recognises the glory, personal glory and worth of Christ like the assembly? What I would say to all of us, the young too, is have your own appreciation of Christ, and come into the company and you will find that appreciation enlarges. Suddenly persons express some view of Christ you had not seen before and you worship Him for it. I think that is a good point to bring in the need for both the gospel and the assembly.

RDP The obedience of faith is at the beginning and the end as you said. I suppose we would all recognise the thought of obedience of faith in relation to the gospel basically as it is preached. But do you think we may not be quite as firm in our thoughts as to the obedience of faith in relation to the revelation of the mystery? It is on the same level really.

NJH Some say we make too much of the assembly. Paul says, “This mystery is great, but I speak as to Christ, and as to the assembly”, Ephesians 5: 32. It is the most remarkable vessel that God will have, and it will be united to Christ. And her place eternally is already set. It is already in the counsel of God the place she will fill out. Now I cannot trifle with that. I submit myself to that truth and I love the very thought of the assembly. I love Christ and I love the assembly. The course of Mr. J. N. Darby was determined by the light that Christ in heaven is the Head of the assembly, which is His body, united to Him by the Holy Spirit, and that each believer is a member of the body. If someone says, ‘I want to break bread’, it is because you want to be with the brethren, because you know you are going to be eternally with them? We shall be raptured together. We shall go up together. In breaking bread you commit yourself to the Lord, and His rights, but you are committing yourself to the people of God. You say, ‘I am going to be with these people’. If they are despised, I will be with them. When they are glorified, I will be with them. In 2 Peter 1, there is the reference to the Spirit uttering, “prophecy was not ever uttered by the will of man, but holy men of God spake under the power of the Holy Spirit”. Now that continues. And it is governed, we might say, by what was uttered to Christ on the mount. The voice was, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight”. And the wealth of these affections expressed then are meant to be carried down by the Holy Spirit. So you need holy men, “holy men of God spake under the power of the Holy Spirit”. That continues, that is how it works.

RDP There is the verse in 1 Peter that says, “To whom it was revealed, that not to themselves”, that would be those who went before, “but to you they ministered those things, which have now been announced to you by those who have declared to you the glad tidings by the Holy Spirit, sent from heaven, which angels desire to look into” (1 Peter 1: 12), remarkable scripture.

NJH So you can see all the wealth of the Father’s pleasure in Christ is expressed by the Spirit and the assembly.

DBR Those men, holy men, are really the product of divine formation, and they knew what is was to frequent the presence of God. Those men would live there. It says “holy men of God”, do you think?

NJH Yes, they were morally formed. “Holy men of God” involved moral formation, and those men came out from the presence of God.

DBR That is no assumption. It can never be assumed. It is either there or it is not there.

NJH Yes, intrinsic holiness was only in Christ. He was through and through holy, perfect. But morally we can be formed after it, with no evidence of the man that brought in unholiness, it is all gone. It says, “we have the prophetic word made surer”. That goes back to what was referred to as being established. The prophetic word is made surer. “To which ye do well taking heed (as to a lamp shining in an obscure place) until the day dawn and the morning star arise in your hearts”.

JAG The spirit of prophecy is the testimony of Jesus, and so they had a foretaste of it on the holy mountain. That is the confirmation, is it?

NJH Yes, exactly. The testimony of Jesus, and here we see the wealth of this. You see the Father’s affections, He has poured out His affections on Christ without stint. And then all that appreciation is brought down in the power of the Holy Spirit to the local assembly.

JS I think that would be borne out in what the Father said, “This is my beloved Son—hear him”, Mark 9: 7. Do you think His voice has continued in the speaking of the Spirit to the assemblies?

NJH I think that has value, because it is said of the Spirit that what He hears, He shall speak. So there is something in the Spirit’s speaking that is brought immediately from the presence of God right into the assembly. You have to hear Him. He does not stop speaking, the problem is my ears. I may not hear Him but “he that has an ear” means there is something that God has given to a believer that he is responsible to use to hear the Spirit’s voice. But here it is “hear him”. I think it is very beautiful.

GBG The way the Father would have said it to Christ is fine. We might say a thing with not much feeling in it. Peter says, “such a voice”. I think the full love of the Father was in that voice in saying that to the Son.

NJH I think the same tone is given by the Spirit. The Father’s Spirit would set out the same depth of tone. The Spirit gives it—it is as if the Father was saying it Himself. The Spirit is right here in the company, and is making known the way the Father said about Christ, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight—hear him”, Matthew 17: 5. The Spirit would bring that in.

AM Mr. A. J. Gardiner said of this scripture, it was the tones of the Father’s affections for Christ. And that is really conveyed by Peter as a holy man of God.

NJH Yes, that is good, l think that is why the same word is used. “Uttered” is used in both cases. Both “we heard uttered from heaven” and then in verse 21, “not ever uttered by the will of man, but holy men of God spake under the power of the Holy Spirit”. ‘Uttered’ seems to suggest a deep inward link with what is said.

Reading No. 2 at Dundee
6 April 2012

KEY TO INITIALS

D. C. Brown	A. Gray	D. B. Robertson
R. H. Brown	R. Gray	C. K. Robinson
R. Campbell	N. J. Henry	J. Spinks
J. A. Gardiner	A. Mair	J. Strachan
A. P. Grant	K. Marshall	R. Taylor
G. B. Grant	Martin	J. Webster
J. C. Gray	R. D. Plant	J. Wright
J. D. Gray	Q. A. Poore