READINGS IN MATTHEW'S GOSPEL (5)
READINGS IN MATTHEW’S GOSPEL (5)
JT This incident of the Lord going through the cornfields evidently implies at least the thought of food, which is always an important thought. The Lord gives a lead here, and, although He does not pluck the corn, His disciples do. That is to say, He gives the lead, but the disciples take the liberty that He gives. “His disciples were hungry”, it says, “and began to pluck the ears and to eat”. That is to say, the Lord gave them liberty to do it, though He Himself did not do it. He set example before them, which we ought to be able to understand as we proceed, by the liberty of His own movements, and the brethren took liberty from it, and the Lord approved it. He justified it, although the enemy attacked it. We have constantly this sort of attack in connection with the ministry. This chapter is full of that which is needful to strengthen us in our service, and in our worship.
Ques Does what the Lord brings forward in verse 3 show how He would support and approve of what they had done?
JT I think it would, and it would run into a general principle, that the Lord may do things; He may not be always specific; He may leave it with others whom He may fit to serve and develop the truth.
Rem He says: “Have ye not read what David did when he was hungry”.
JT David was a godly man, and he represents the idea of godly men, men to be trusted and to be allowed to do things. Heaven will commend them in due time, if they are right.
EAL The Lord in this chapter not only endorses what David did but He also endorses John the baptist’s ministry, because He uses the same term, “offspring of vipers”.
JT Terrible words, showing how severe words may be employed in ministry. Others may say, it is too severe; but is it too severe? Certain severe things have to be said at times, and we have to see why it is that they are said.
AA Does this illustrate the thought of latitude that you spoke of earlier in these meetings?
JT That is just the thought, and we are attempting to enlarge on it now in chapter 12.
JAP Why does He do these things on the Sabbath? Was it that the Sabbath had ceased to yield anything for God under the old system?
JT The Sabbath had ceased to be what it was in the beginning of Genesis. It is now being, as it were, set aside by the Lord’s ministry. We cannot commend it now; we cannot just speak of the Sabbath now in the ordinary sense of the word, especially in this country where they make so much of the Sabbath and of ordinary religious ceremonials.
Ques Would this trustworthiness attach to these persons as having taken the yoke that the Lord refers to in the previous chapter? They had learnt from Him, and is it not working out now, in trustworthy persons to whom much liberty can be given under the Lord’s direction?
JT Just so, and then the next thing is an attack by the Pharisees, but the Lord set a certain example and the disciples followed it. The Lord did not direct them to follow it, exactly, but they did, and the Lord approves it and justifies it, so that the word ‘here’ is inserted in verse 6: “I say unto you, that there is here what is greater than the temple”. That is the great point that was to be brought out, the greatness and glory of Christ.
MAW Do the opening words of the chapter, “At that time”, stand over against the legality of the [p. 168] sabbath and does it connect with verse, 25 of the previous chapter, “At that time, Jesus answering said, I praise thee, Father”?
JT We noted yesterday this final section of chapter 11. What a moment it was and what words they were! “Jesus answering said, I praise thee, Father”. Think of that: “I praise thee” — that the Son should be praising the Father: “I praise thee, Father, Lord of the heaven and of the earth”. It is a question there of the communication between the Father and the Son, but this passage we are now considering is not just on the same level, but still it is to bring out another thing. That is to say, the Lord sets examples to His disciples and they follow them. He did not direct them to do it, but He gave them latitude to do it, and they did it, and then the Lord Himself defends them. The truth is brought out in the paragraph that the Lord had set down something which was in itself quite right and involved food, but He did not tell the disciples to do the same thing, although they did it, and He approved them and justified them. It is thus a question of the Lord setting the saints at liberty. We may be tied up in a country like this, or in America, by certain principles and practices and customs, whereas the Spirit of God would set us free from all that and give us liberty to do certain things that are right in themselves so that we might carry on the service of God, and the preaching of the gospel.
GMS So that in the passage we have not only what David did, but twice over reference is made to those that were with him; and again in verse 5 it says, “the priests” in the plural.
JT So that the thought of latitude or liberty is particularly unfolded in this passage, and it is now a time of liberty. Here at this meeting in this city we are in the time of liberty, and it is for us to lay hold of the liberty and enjoy it and manifest it as [p. 169] coming from God. Paul gives us the idea when he says, “Christ has set us free in freedom; stand fast therefore”, Galatians 5: 1.
WSS Would there be a typical allusion to the Lord’s Person in the corn; the Lord being the old corn of the land, the heavenly Man not appreciated by the Pharisees but appreciated by the disciples?
JT Very good. It is the idea of food of the highest quality.
WSS And the Lord speaks of what is “greater” — greater than Jonas, greater than Solomon, greater than the temple. What was greater was being missed by the Pharisees, and I wondered if the suggestion is that the disciples are persons who are apprehending what is greater in the Lord.
JT Quite so, and surely that is what is in our minds today as a goodly number of us are here together — that we are more and more apprehending the greatness and glory of Christ. “He shall be great”, it says, but then He is great. The Lord Jesus is the greatest of all; indeed, He is God Himself.
AH The Lord repeats the expression, “Have ye not read ... ?” Does our reading of the Scriptures and reading the ministry have a bearing on this matter of our acquiring liberty?
JT Just so. How much of the Scriptures do we read, especially in the morning reading with the children? Sometimes we are wanting in time, running off to our businesses and the like, but we should take time, because time was made by God. He inaugurated the seven days of time, from the first to the seventh day. That is to say, God is indicating that He is affording time for His people to go in for His things and to enjoy them, and to enjoy one another too, in a holy, righteous way.
JP I would like to ask in regard to verse 6, how much is involved in the word “what is greater than the temple”? Does it include not only the Lord but what is there in the disciples?
JT Just so. It is not a question really, it is a statement of fact. That is to say, a certain thing is greater — greater than the temple. The Lord is greater than the temple — what is here; it is a neuter pronoun; it is what is here greater than the temple, what is in mind is the Lord Jesus Himself, and now we might say what is here, in the Spirit. It is not right to say the Spirit of God is on earth; the Spirit of God is here but He is in the assembly. That is important because we often do say that the Spirit is here on earth. Although in a certain sense He is, yet strictly, He is not on the earth, as I am or as any man on the earth is, but He is in the assembly. How many are there in the assembly? Only comparatively few. But all those who have the Spirit of God are in the assembly, and that is where things are.
EAL You have helped us to see the Spirit is not characteristically an earth dweller.
JT That is right. The Spirit is characteristically in a vessel.
WSS The Lord Jesus when here had no abiding place, but the Holy Spirit has an abiding place in the assembly.
GMS In 1 Peter 1, speaking of the Holy Spirit, it says, “the Holy Spirit, sent from heaven”. We often misquote it, saying, ‘the Holy Spirit sent down from heaven’.
JT Quite so. “Sent from heaven” — not ‘sent down’. Although, of course, literally it is so, yet the word down should not be there. It is a moral matter; the Spirit of God is here on those lines and He is here in a vessel. The Lord Jesus was not here in a vessel like that; He was here Himself personally. According to the facts, He was literally here; first of all as a babe, then a boy, and then a man, as it says in Luke, “Jesus himself was beginning to be about thirty years old”. He was not in a vessel; He was here as a Man; indeed He was the Vessel Himself of what was of God on the earth at that time.
JMR Could you help us as to the scripture, “where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty”? It says here that “the Son of man is Lord of the sabbath”. Would that suggest that where there is subjection on our side, there is liberty, but not licence?
JT I would say that, fully.
JSE Would this matter of the cornfield and the details underlying it illustrate what is said elsewhere, “Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free”? In our prayer this morning we distinguished between the truth as food and the truth by itself in its setting.
JT Quite so. Then as to food, the idea is constantly used, for the mind needs to be fed as well is the stomach, and we are dealing now with the mind. But then we go further than that and we think of the heart and the affections. We are hoping that the dear sisters who are here will be taking all this in, because the Lord will probably be raising some questions presently as to how matters are in the assembly, and what place sisters have in it; what their place may be and what their duties may be. The question of the heart thus comes up, and the mind, and the affections, and the idea of food enters into it, just as we have it here.
VCL In connection with the truth and purity, would you say a word as to the necessity of putting Mr. Darby’s translation into the hands of the children from the outset that they might have the best from the start.
JT I would think that is right. We have now come to it that we should read this translation, and [p. 172] that the ordinary King James translation (as it is called) is not accurate enough for public readings and for our own reading of the word of God. I think it is quite in order, and good too, that the children should be brought up, so to speak, on the Darby Translation, in the sense of being fed in their minds by the Scriptures. It is almost universally read now, as far as I know, especially in America, and I suppose it is so here. We hardly ever read the King James translation in our public readings.
HB In connection with the public preaching of the word, what should be read?
JT I would think it is a question of any brother taking liberty according to what he has found out in his experience with God. If we are preaching the gospel, and if there is an audience of many outside people, it might be well to say that the King James version is not exactly accurate in every case, whereas the Darby Translation, which is now well known among Christians in the world, is more accurate. It is wise to read what is best, and what is best is the New Translation revised by Mr. Darby. I would say that is the way the thing should be taken up.
JSE The father would allow nothing but the best robe for the son. Should we not be helped in allowing for nothing but the best in the translation of the Scriptures?
JT I would say that is very good. Now in the next paragraph; that is, from verse 9, the first thing to be considered is the relative value of a man. “How much better then is a man than a sheep!” So we have now to begin to see the value of a man. Anyone who knows might say, There are so many millions on the earth; and yet the question of value arises and we have to consider it particularly as thinking of what God may make out of him. Someone has said the best study of man [p. 173] is man.
GMS The full quotation, if I remember, is: ‘Know then thyself; presume not God to scan; the proper study of mankind is man’.
JT I am thankful to get that. I just call it to mind and thought it was a good remark, although, of course, it is not Scripture.
AHG Would the title “Son of man” mentioned in the end of the previous section bear on this matter?
JT The word ‘man’ in itself is not equal to the word ‘Son of man’. There is only one Son of man in the whole universe in that sense; and that is the Lord Jesus. He is the Son of man. It says in 1 Timothy 2: 5, “God is one, and the mediator of God and men one, the man Christ Jesus”. He is the only Man to be thought of now in this setting.
HFN Does the passage in Psalm 8 put the distinction between ‘man’ and ‘Son of man’ in its right setting? “What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?”
JT I think the Son of man in that Psalm would refer really to Christ, to the Messiah.
HFN I thought it confirmed what you were saying. The first word, ‘man’, according to the note is ‘mortal man’, and the second, “the son of man”, is a different word, bringing out the unique and glorious distinction that belonged to the Lord.
JT Then again, in the first book of Psalms, we get the verse, “This afflicted one called”. That is also the Messiah, that is Christ, showing how the Lord humbled Himself in His circumstances down here.
WmH Is this expression, “How much better then is a man than a sheep!” referring to men generally, so that they might be relieved of every disability and available for the service of God?
JT Quite so. “How much better then”, that is to say it is a conclusion reached, “is a man than a sheep!” So that if we think of mere literal values according to man, we might say that men are not much worth and the cattle we have are of more worth; certain persons might so think, but the real thought is to bring out the idea of man; that person, that being, as we get it in Genesis 1: “Let us make man in our image”, and then the word is immediately, “let them have dominion”. It includes the female too, and that is how the Spirit of God brings the matter in in Genesis.
TT-s The term “Son of man” is used frequently in Ezekiel. What is the significance of it there?
JT It is just the foreshadowing of the Lord’s birth, His coming to earth. It is the position in the Psalms. We might well and profitably think of the use of the word ‘man’, and the recency of his creation. He is created, according to Genesis 1; God made him in His own image after His likeness, and according to that his creation is recent. But then the idea of birth is the next thing to think of; and so the new birth, too, is also to be thought of: “How can a man be born being old?” Nicodemus says, but the Lord says, “Except any one be born anew he cannot see the kingdom of God”.
WC Is there something in the references in Job 7? Job says “What is man?” I think he is the first one to ask that question, and he speaks there of God as “thou Observer of men”. Does that suggest the deep interest of God in man and his reactions to His discipline and ways?
JT Quite so. “Thou Observer of men” would refer to the way man is thought of. God does that; He takes account of what men are doing, and so forth. That is, he is to be considered, and God is doing it, and the next thing is, what God would make out of him, and I would think then it is a question of the new birth. “Except any one be born anew he cannot see the kingdom of God”. It is the new birth, really, of man. The Lord had no confidence in any of them, at first, according to the end of the second chapter of John’s gospel, but then chapter 3 begins, “But there was a man ... his name Nicodemus”, and then the Lord deals with him. Nicodemus says, “How can a man be born being old?” and so forth, but the real thing now is the birth — the new birth. It is a question of what man is as born anew. So that this verse, “How much better then is a man than a sheep!” covers all that.
JTJr Would Isaiah 45: 11 - 13, help? “Thus saith Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker: Ask me of the things to come; concerning my sons, and concerning the work of my hands, command ye me. It is I that have made the earth, and created man upon it; it is I, my hands, that have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded. It is I that have raised him up in righteousness, and I will make all his ways straight: he shall build my city, and he shall let go my captives, not for price nor reward, saith Jehovah of hosts”.
JT It is a question for interpretation as to the use of the word ‘man’ there and how it may work out. The great thought of man comes into mind, as we have been saying and as we are now thinking of it: “How much better then is a man than a sheep!” But then if we speak of the Lord Jesus, He is not spoken of in that way, for He is the Son of man.
RMcK Is the enemy attacking this great thought of man? Verse 14 says the Pharisees took counsel together that they might destroy Him, following the healing of this man.
JT Quite so. The devil was aiming at Him. Thank God He has overcome the devil! He has gained the victory.
[p. 176] Ques Would the exclamation in this sentence indicate that divine feelings and affections enter into this estimate of man?
JT Quite so. You do not get such feelings in the lower animals. These were all brought to Adam, and whatever Adam called them, God left the names. But now when we come to the idea of man in Christ, we are on the highest possible level, and then as to man literally he is capable of feelings and affections, although without new birth there can be no moral value at all.
Ques Does this section lead up to the unique place that Christ had, as Isaiah says, “Behold my servant, whom I have chosen, my beloved, in whom my soul has found its delight”? Is the fulness of everything set out in Christ personally?
JT That is what I would say. So that we are entitled to bring in the idea of better; as it says here, “How much better ...” But then you cannot think of that as applying to Christ. You cannot use the word ‘better’ as applying to Him.
VCL Would it be right to say that one of the distinctions of man after the order of the Lord Jesus is that the Spirit of God has come upon us? Is that not the greatest elevation that man could be given?
JT Quite so. The Spirit came on Christ Himself.
MAW Would the full thought of God’s pleasure in man be seen in Revelation 21, “The tabernacle of God is with men”?
JT It is in the plural, “with men”. That is to say, it is over against the Jewish position and the claims that they make; it is a question of men.
Ques Is there some special significance in the mention of the nations twice in the latter part of the paragraph, showing that God was going outside what was national, in the Jew? “He shall show forth judgment to the nations”, and “on his name shall the nations hope”. Does it show that mankind was in view altogether?
JT That is what I think, and in Revelation 21 the same thing would be true, “the tabernacle of God is with men”. It is not with the Jews any more, it is with men. That is really what we have here today in our looking into the Scriptures, for in a certain sense the tabernacle of God is with us here in the presence of the Spirit of God. It is with men, with ourselves really, and that, of course, leads up to the thought of the assembly.
Ques What is the point of the withered hand here? It seems to be a matter of making the man sound.
JT Would it not be to make him useful and able to do things? Is that not to bring out the true thought in the way of mending or repair?
Rem If man is to be serviceable to God, he must be made sound.
JT That is the idea, and spiritually the brethren must be made sound, but first of all they must be born anew. Then the next thing is that they get to know redemption, and then they get the Spirit. That is the whole idea, the thought of man, is man possessed by the Spirit of God, and every true believer is to be regarded in this dignified light, that he has the Spirit of God. The first question asked by Paul to some was, “Did ye receive the Holy Spirit when ye had believed?” and they did not know about Him. The question is whether we all know about Him, and the great thought of His indwelling.
AB In regard of the man’s hand being healed, would it have in mind that men should lift up holy hands?
JT Quite so. It says that in 1 Timothy.
HFN In view of what you have been saying in regard to the Spirit, would you kindly say a word [p. 178] on the four references to the Spirit in this chapter. In verse 18, “I will put my Spirit upon him”; in verse 28, “But if I by the Spirit of God cast out demons, then indeed the kingdom of God is come upon you”. Then in verse 31, “speaking injuriously of the Spirit”, and finally in verse 32, “whosoever shall speak against the Holy Spirit”.
JT Well, of course it is very much in the chapter. The possession or reception of the Spirit of God is a great thing in relation to Christianity, according to what we have just been saying. The apostle says, “Did ye receive the Holy Spirit when ye had believed?” and they did not know about it. Well now, the question is, Are there any here in this hall who have not received the Spirit? It is a question for them to ask themselves. We want to be honest, and to acknowledge the truth as to it. If we have not received the Spirit we are not Christians in the full sense.
HFN I think that is one of the most important questions that can be raised. I can only say in my own experience I was breaking bread for eight years before I had received the Spirit.
JT I am thankful you say that, because perhaps many a young person here would like to know how we get the Spirit. Maybe you can tell us from your own experience, how you actually received the, Spirit.
HFN You have often reminded us, that there comes a moment when we ask the Father for the Holy Spirit.
JT “How much rather shall the Father who is of heaven give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?” The Father has to be asked; the Spirit may be definitely asked for.
HM Where is a believer positionally who has [p. 179] not the Spirit?
JT He is not in the assembly; that is one thing to begin with. He is not in the assembly, and he has probably not peace in his soul if he has not the Spirit. The fact that he is troubled with spiritual troubles and moral troubles is because he does not know the possession of the Spirit.
HM That helps, but I was thinking of the stress you have made in these meetings as to some believers not being in the assembly. Many are not clear as to that, and I was wondering where such an one was positionally.
JT The best and most sensible way to put that is in the negative. If he has not the Spirit he is not in the assembly anyway. We have reached a good point when we put it in the negative in that sense.
JSE Is this not raising the whole matter with us as to whether our major concern really is what is proper to the assembly?
JT Very good.
EAL In Romans 8, it says, “But ye are not in flesh but in Spirit, if indeed God’s Spirit dwell in you; but if any one has not the Spirit of Christ he is not of him”. Then it adds, “But if the Spirit of him that has raised up Jesus from among the dead dwell in you, he that has raised up Christ from among the dead shall quicken your mortal bodies also on account of his Spirit which dwells in you”. We have had the truth established that it is the Spirit who does the quickening of the mortal body and it is therefore a great challenge to us, if we have not the Spirit, where we should be if the Lord should come.
JT Yes. That is a matter to be taken up by persons who preach the gospel, or any persons, for that matter. If there is any indication that persons have not the Spirit, tell them about it and ask them about it. Why is it you have not got the Spirit? Why is it you are not free in the service among the [p. 180] brethren? Romans 8 is a most helpful chapter in this matter, because it is intended to bring believers into deliverance and into spiritual power, so that they may serve God; that they may pray and give thanks to Him for the things they are brought into.
AH Would what you are remarking link in any way with verses 43 and 44, or would that be going too far? It seems a dangerous position for a house to be unoccupied.
JT It reads, “But when the unclean spirit has gone out of the man, he goes through dry places, seeking rest, and does not find it. Then he says, I will return to my house whence I came out; and having come, he finds it unoccupied, swept, and adorned. Then he goes and takes with himself seven other spirits worse than himself, and entering in, they dwell there; and the last condition of that man becomes worse than the first. Thus shall it be to this wicked generation also”. I would say in answer to all that, that we are dealing now with what is coming in, and which is almost imminent, and that is the great apostasy in Christendom. It is a terrible thing to think of. We are almost coming to it, the devil is going to take the place of the truth of Christianity, the truth of Christ and the Spirit. It is just open apostasy, and we are nearing it now. I do not know anything more solemn and more dreadful to think of, than the imminence of the great apostasy.
AH Is the great bulwark against that the Holy Spirit in my soul?
JT Just so, and the presence of the Spirit, in whatever there may be in a collective way, in the sense of the assembly.
JAC Is that what Jude has in mind when be speaks of these “who set themselves apart, natural men, not having the Spirit”?
JT Just so. That is just the passage that applies; “natural men, not having the Spirit”.
JAC But the antidote to that, “But ye, beloved, building yourselves up on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God, awaiting the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life”, Jude 20.
JT That is an excellent passage. Thank God for it, and that it is brought in at this time.
Ques Has not the preacher of the gospel a responsibility to bring in this thought of the Spirit? The brethren also who interview those who wish to break bread, have they not a responsibility to discern if persons have the Spirit, knowing that without the Spirit they are quite incapable of taking up the assembly position?
JT Quite so. See that they have the Spirit. The second reference in John 3 should be brought in now; the first is, “Except any one be born anew”, and then the second is, “Except any one be born of water and of Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God”. Certain brethren use the expression ‘B.A.’ as applying to persons who are born again. That is what they mean, born again, but that does not mean that the person is actually indwelt by the Spirit. They are entirely wrong on those points, for a person may be born again and not have the Spirit. Would you say that?
Rem Fully, and holding that error you could hardly look for the development of the assembly.
JT Quite so. They do not know it. Not that we want to traduce our brethren, if they are our brethren, but they do not know the idea of an indwelling Spirit, God dwelling in us of a truth.
AR Would what Peter says in Acts 2 help? When they say, “What shall we do, brethren?”. Peter said to them, “Repent, and be baptised, each one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for remission [p. 182] of sins, and ye will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit”. He includes the gift of the Holy Spirit in his message as he is preaching.
JT That is not included in what I was speaking about as to certain brethren. When they say ‘B.A.’ they mean just born again. They have not received the Spirit. They do not fully understand it, or teach it really in their meetings. Not that I wish to speak of these dear brethren, because some of them are really Christians, only we ought to be on our guard about it. We have the truth and are enjoying it at these three-day meetings and the like, and we should see to it and be sure that each one of us has the Spirit and that he is of the assembly.
AB Is it important too that as having the Spirit we do not grieve Him?
JT Quite. “Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God”, Ephesians 4: 30.