READINGS IN MATTHEW'S GOSPEL (8)
READINGS IN MATTHEW’S GOSPEL (8)
JT It might not be out of place to urge the brethren to seek to chasten their souls in view of the great truth that is to be unfolded to us in this chapter. It is so familiar to us from past experience that we are apt to take it in a shallow way, whereas the immense spiritual importance of it should be taken into account, because we have to do directly with the divine Persons, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Then added to that, there is the idea of the assembly, and the great servant whom God raised to help in the truth of the assembly, that is Peter. The Sadducean effort is to be noted particularly, indeed we have the Sadducees and the Pharisees, as if the devil had his agents ready to confront the truth and nullify it if possible. Thus we have almost immediately the Father Himself intervening, and then the Son intervening too, saying, “I also”.
PHH Would the Sadducean element be met by the sign of Jonas? According to chapter 22, the Sadducees say there is no resurrection.
JT Whereas the sign of Jonas points to resurrection. Well, that agrees with Peter’s confession, and shows that the Father had to do with him in the revelation. It was the Father’s revelation; it was not simply the Son Himself acting, but the Father, we might say, acting first, and the Son and the Holy Spirit added to the great facts relative to the assembly.
Ques Is it necessary, in view of our taking on what is living, to be completely free of shallowness and lack of faith, which might be indicated by the Pharisee and Sadducee?
JT Just so. The Lord’s remark to Peter was, “flesh and blood [p. 222] has not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in the heavens”.
[p. 220] Ques In verse 1 do we find the enemy presuming in the realm of heaven’s right to assert itself, having in mind your subject on Lord’s day afternoon? They ask to be shown a sign out of heaven.
JT Just so. The book of Acts makes a point of that. We had it on Lord’s day, as you say, and I think it would be well to call attention to it, before we enter fully into the matter in hand now. We might challenge our souls as to whether we are spiritual, for we are dealing with spiritual things. It says, “The spiritual discerns all things, and he is discerned of no one”, 1 Corinthians 2: 15. So that the spiritual is of peculiar importance as we look into a chapter like this. Matthew 16 is the great assembly chapter.
Rem We were speaking this morning of discernment. Is it important to discern the signs of the times as a background of the assembly? The Lord says in verse 3, “Ye cannot [discern] the signs of the times”.
JT The question of discernment is something to be looked into by all of us. David said to Abigail, “Blessed be thy discernment”. The spiritual power of discernment seems to be a point to be stressed amongst us, because the enemy particularly aims at this chapter. In the great system that we speak of sometimes, the enemy has wrought to nullify this chapter.
RWS So is the opposition in the first four verses to be left, and then also those who speculate, a little later on, when it says, “Some, John the Baptist; and others, Elias”. In the presence of opposition and speculation are we to judge those features in ourselves, in order really to understand what is in mind in this chapter?
JT Quite so, and the shallowness of the disciples, too, in questioning the matter of mere bread. How easily we may take up a point of little or no [p. 221] importance and make an issue of it. We should be dealing with great things, as the Lord said to Nathanael, “Thou shalt see greater things than these”.
Ques The Lord is warning His disciples as to the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees. Would you say a little as to what particularly that is, so that we might be on our guard against it?
JT Pharisaism, of course, is superficial, religious pride and the like, whereas the Sadducees represent open infidelity, and there is a great deal of that at the present time. People are so ready to say anything they please, without any regard for the truth or the judgment of God. So that, on entering into this chapter, I think we ought to challenge our souls as to all the matters that come up here, so that we might be free to enter into the spiritual side of things.
HH Might I ask how this would compare with Paul’s version of things in regard of his knowledge of Christ and the assembly?
JT It corresponds, of course. We are dealing with Peter here as an apostle, and Paul, of course, was also an apostle, and he leads too, because he deals with the body; he has to do with the body of Christ, which is a prime feature in the assembly. Peter is a stone and lie treats of the structure, but Paul deals with the assembly as a body, and he speaks of Christ and the assembly in that light “I speak”, he says, “as to Christ, and as to the assembly”. “I speak”. So that what Paul says enters into our conversation in a peculiar way, but still we are not dealing with Paul, we are dealing with Peter here, and the great revelation made to him. Paul had a revelation too, for he says God revealed His Son in him, but the Father revealed Christ to Peter. Paul does not say the Father revealed His Son in him, but here the Lord says to Peter as to the confession he made, “flesh and blood has not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in the heavens”. So that we are dealing with the greatest things in this chapter, in that sense.
AJG Have you in mind that the revelation of the Father to Peter constituted him invulnerable material?
JT Just so; invulnerable.
AJG I mean if the assembly is to be invulnerable, is it not important that each of the saints composing it should be invulnerable?
JT Just so; and marked by permanency too. I would think the idea of a stone is permanency.
Ques [p. 240] Would it be right to say that the Lord delighted in the evidence of the work of the Father, and He takes it on immediately in view of assembly structure?
JT Just so. “My Father worketh hitherto”, He says, “and I work”. The Father took the lead in everything, you might say. The Father is first; He is supreme. The economy is what is hardly understood much by us, but we have the supremacy of the Father in the economy, and then the Son and then the Spirit. The order is in chapter 28 of this book, “the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”. The three divine Persons are seen there.
PHH Is it your point that the Father comes in here immediately, over against all the speculations in Christendom, as we might say, to reveal to Peter?
JT Just so. The Lord challenges the disciples as to who men said that He was, and the disciples could hardly give an answer, but Peter gave an answer. I mean to say, there was no answer except the one that Peter gave, and that was through the Father. It was the supreme answer; there could he nothing greater than it. It all deals with the Person of Christ, and life, particularly life.
Ques Why does the Lord say, “flesh and blood has not revealed it to thee”?
JT It was in contrast to all that had existed earlier, even in the service of God; it was a new thought entirely. The Father is intervening Himself to answer the question that was raised. So the Lord says, “flesh and blood has not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in the heavens”. It is the supreme answer; there could be no greater.
Ques The spirituality of the matter is thus emphasised?
JT Well, I would say so, the spirituality of it, and the living character of it too, because it was a question of life. It is “the living God”, not simply God. In Genesis 1 we have “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”, and so forth, but here it is “the living God”. It is a question of life and a new order of things entirely different from anything that God had been going on with.
PHH Do you mean that “the living God” and “the Son of the living God” would stand over against all the deadness of accredited religion before?
JT Just so. ‘Deadness’ is a good word on this point, because Christendom is just dead. But when we come to the Sadducees and Pharisees it is worse than that, for their attack is not merely deadness, but it is satanic, and we have satanic darkness abroad at the present time. So it is not only deadness, but satanic work. It is what belongs to the unseen world and it is still active in opposition to what is of God.
Ques Is this operation of the Father a necessary thing for each one of us?
JT If you apply John 3, I would say that it is, but this is, of course, a special thing. We are dealing with special things. What is ordinary in believers, or in men and women, is one thing, but special [p. 224] things, or specialities, are another, and Peter had a special revelation.
Ques That is to bring out the truth, which is for all of us?
JT Just so. We are to be onlookers. It is one thing to be a specialty, to have a special thought or to lead in anything, but it is another thing to be a bystander or an onlooker. In a certain sense we are called into bystanding; that is, entering into the thing in that sense, but not the specialist. We are dealing now with a special matter, and that is that Peter has this great privilege, and that is what the Lord stresses as He answers him.
Rem I was noticing that the Lord does not say this of the others who were there, but only of Peter.
JT That is just what I am trying to say, that Peter is a specialist here. He has got a special matter, and the Father has taken him up. It is a question of the Father’s selection. There is no other one like it. Paul, of course, has a similar word but, as I said, Paul says, “God ... was pleased to reveal his Son in me”. God had done it, but it has not the same distinction as Peter has here. In Paul’s case it was not to establish a new system, or a new line of thought, whereas in Peter’s case it was. It was the foundational thought.
EuR The “Thou” is emphatic — “Thou art Peter”. Would that involve what you are saying?
JT It does, fully. These special pronouns in the gospels are very important to notice, and Matthew’s gospel is specially marked by them.
HH You get the thought of Peter as a stone in relation to the Rock. There is a very close connection, is there not?
JT Quite. It is part of the rock, you might say, but it is distinct; it is an entity. It is not a structure, yet it is an entity.
[p. 225] Ques Does that fit in with the word, “To whom coming, a living stone, cast away indeed as worthless by men, but with God chosen, precious, yourselves also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house”, 1 Peter 2: 4.
JT That is the structure, but here it is the foundation. “To whom coming” is the foundation. Movement is the point, I think, when you come to the persons of the saints, but the revelation is a sovereign act of the Father’s. It is a sovereign act. It does not bring in all the saints at all; I mean to say, not each individual. The structure, of course, is in mind, but the action of the Father is a sovereign action, and no one else has any part in it directly. It is a sovereign action of the Father in Peter’s soul.
R.W.S. At the moment?
JT Well, at the moment; the Spirit had to come in to make it effective, but it was there anyway. It was the Father’s action. And so, corresponding to this, it says, in Luke 11: 13, “If therefore ye, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much rather shall the Father who is of heaven give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?”. But in this case it is the sovereign action of the Father. No one else has part in it but Peter. We come into it, of course, in due time through redemption and the Spirit, but this is a sovereign action of the Father, and the Lord says, “flesh and blood has not revealed it to thee”, notice “to thee” — “but my Father who is in the heavens”. It is a sovereign action of the Father.
FCH Do you connect the sovereign action with what the Lord says, “I also, I say unto thee ... I will build my assembly”?
JT Just so. It is an “I also”, but it is the second thought. The Father has the first thought, but the Lord says, “I also”. That is, the Lord is taking the second place. He also does something,
and He says something to Peter, “I say unto thee”. He called Peter ‘a stone’.
Ques Would you say that the assembly has been given to Christ by the Father?
JT I would like the quotation from Scripture to cover your question. What scripture are you alluding to?
Rem John 6: 37, “All that the Father gives me shall come to me”.
JT I would go with that.
HH Would you say a little more on sovereignty, and how it applies at the present time?
JT It is a word that applies peculiarly to the Father. Of course, the Son has sovereign rights too, and the Spirit has sovereign rights, but it is a term applicable peculiarly to the Father.
PHH Would you be free to connect this at all with the mention of Moriah in the Old Testament? It means, ‘that which Jehovah shows’, both in connection with Abraham and later in connection with Solomon, where Solomon built the house.
JT Quite so. These are sovereign actions. Zion was a symbol of what is sovereign.
PHH May I just read the verse, in 2 Chronicles 3: 1, “And Solomon began to build the house of Jehovah at Jerusalem on mount Moriah”, which means ‘shown by Jehovah’, “where he appeared to David his father”. I wondered whether the showing by Jehovah was at all comparable with the Father revealing to Peter.
JT It is very like it. You feel peculiarly about this chapter, how sovereignty comes into it. It is the laying of the foundation of Christianity. It is not the millennium, but Christianity; that is, Christianity to be known in the assembly, because we have to regard things in this way.
ESH Does the Canaanitish woman in chapter 15 also involve [p. 227] sovereignty?
JT That passage contains a group of facts which characterise the Lord’s ministry here, but I do not think it is specially a matter of the sovereignty of the Father.
PL Is the Father in all this actuated by love for His Son, that where He is rejected He should have a vessel — the assembly — where He could give His mind?
JT Well, you have to come to that, but what is the particular thing you allude to here?
PL The sovereignty of the Father. Is it not a matter of love with Him that the Lord rejected should have a vessel He could call His assembly?
JT Just so. We have not come to it, though. I think we should try and keep to the passage, verse by verse; it is so full and important.
Ques Do you mean that whilst Peter was assembly material, the assembly was still prospective?
JT Still prospective, because the Spirit had not come down. Everything waited for the Spirit coming down, and the Spirit coming down awaited the Lord going to heaven. It was not simply the dying and the resurrection of Christ, but the going to heaven, and the exaltation of Christ.
AB Would the reference to “my Father who is in the heavens” have relation to the Father’s supremacy in His own sphere?
JT Just so. It is the place He has. It is heaven having pre-eminence in all these things, and then it is not simply heaven, but “the heavens”, and that brings in the whole point of the heavens, and where they are and what they are. Elsewhere we get the third heaven, and then we get what is beyond all the heavens, and that the Lord has gone as far as that. These are questions that need to be answered in our souls, because the Lord went beyond all the heavens, into a non-created condition which the creatures do not [p. 228] reach.
EuR Have you in mind that “Thou art Peter” involves the sovereign work of God in the believer?
JT Peter had made a confession and that confession was that Christ was the Son of the living God. As we have noticed, it is not simply the Son of God, but “the Son of the living God”, and then the Lord says, “Thou art Peter, and on this rock ...” meaning that “this rock” is the Lord Himself.
EuR Would you say that the stone really is akin to the rock, and does that involve that the believer is taken account of in an abstract way as the subject of the work of God?
JT I suppose that would be right, but I think it is well to take account of the foundation by itself. There is only one foundation. The Rock is the foundation, and the Rock is the Christ.
JTJr It was what the Father did. The Lord did not do it; the Father did it, and that stands by itself?
JT Yes, quite so, and then the Lord just takes it on; He adds, “I say unto thee ...” The Lord takes on things, so as to give them form and bring them into the concrete structural position. But then everything, in this sense, awaited the death, resurrection and ascension of Christ and the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Ques Is there perfect continuity in that work, in the Father and the Son, and, as soon as it was needful for the Spirit to come, He comes?
JT Very good. One has often wondered at the absence of any allusion to the Spirit in 1 Corinthians 8. We have, “there is one God, the Father ... and one Lord, Jesus Christ”. One has often wondered why the Spirit is not mentioned there. But we have to make way for Him, and I think God has helped us to do so in recent times. There must be room for the Spirit. We must have the three Persons as in this gospel: “the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”.
JP What are we to learn from the Lord’s words in the end of verse 18, “Hades’ gates shall not prevail against it”? The footnote refers to the character of the opposition.
JT It is the unseen world in its activity. In warfare an unseen or hidden position gives a great advantage, and so it is that Hades is a hidden position and it has a great advantage, but the Lord says it will not prevail; in spite of its advantage it will not prevail. So that the advantage is in divine hands in everything.
AJG The revelation by the Father in Peter’s soul was a hidden matter, was it not?
JT Just so. It had to come out and it has come out.
PHH You mean it has come out in ministry?
JT Quite so.
PHH What is involved in the double expression “the Christ” and then “the Son of the living God”?
JT Well, I suppose “the Christ” is the Messiah. That is to say, it covers the whole matter of Israel’s place, which is awaiting the fulness of the nations, but still Israel’s place has to come in. “The Christ” involves Israel’s place, only it is a term which also fits in in Christianity. Peter says, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God”, so that “the Christ” has a place in Christianity. The chapter has to do with Christianity, in truth, as is evident in the chapter itself.
Ques Does it show that what belonged to Israel was not overlooked, but the assembly takes precedence?
JT The assembly takes precedence over Israel. I would accept that fully.
[p. 230] Rem Because the Lord does not say anything more, or speak about anything else but the assembly.
JT Quite so; and so in Acts 1, when the disciples inquired as to whether the kingdom would come in immediately, the Lord says, “It is not yours to know times or seasons, which the Father has placed in his own authority”, and therefore the Lord tells them what they are to do, and that the Spirit was to come upon them. That was the point for them to learn and to go on with, rather than to refer to Israel.
AJG Is not the thought of “the Christ” greatly enlarged in Christianity, especially in the epistle to the Ephesians?
JT I would say that fully.
JMcK Would this structure have specially the earth in mind, and administration on the earth, as in keeping with Matthew generally, involving the present time?
JT It involves the earth, but Peter had committed to him the keys of the kingdom of the heavens, according to this chapter: “And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of the heavens; and whatsoever thou mayest bind upon the earth shall be bound in the heavens; and whatsoever thou mayest loose on the earth shall be loosed in the heavens”. Well, that is that earth is not everything, it is only touched on here; the heavens are pre-eminent in this passage. In view of Christianity and the assembly the heavens are pre-eminent; so that the truth is that the assembly comes down from God out of heaven. It is not an earthly thing at all; it is indigenous to heaven, and the sooner we make that plain to each other and generally, the safer we are, because earth is one thing and heaven is another, and the assembly belongs to heaven. It comes down from God out of heaven, “having the glory of God” — it is a marvellous statement!
[p. 231] Ques Is that what Peter had to learn in Acts 10, as to the vessel coming down from heaven like a sheet?
JT Just so. It is a four-cornered thing, which alludes to what is universal, but it is all taken up to heaven. It goes up to heaven to stay there, clearly, and I suppose the assembly is involved in it.
HFN Is that why in Edinburgh, in reference to the Holy Spirit, you were impressing the fact upon us that He is dwelling in us and in the assembly, and not exactly down here on earth?
JT That is very good, because many times one has heard or discerned that the Spirit is regarded as on earth, whereas it is not so literally. The Spirit is in the assembly; He is in a vessel, and so, in Elijah’s day, things were to be put in vessels.
Ques “On this rock I will build my assembly”. Is it in your mind that “I will build” involves His glorification?
JT Quite so. It must be, because it is a question of the Spirit coming down. He said to the disciples that He was going to heaven and that they would do greater things than He was doing on earth, so that the heavenly position is shown thus to be pre-eminent.
Rem Would you say then a little more about the rock? It seems as though at this time the rock was existing, but that the building of the assembly was a future idea.
JT That is true. There was no building until Christ died and went to heaven. The building is by the Spirit, and although it is accredited to the Lord Jesus, yet the actual immediate building is by the Spirit. The Spirit is operating as One sent from heaven.
FCH Is that covered by the expression in Hebrews 3: 3? “For he has been counted worthy of greater glory than Moses, by how much he that has [p. 232] built it has more honour than the house. For every house is built by some one; but he who has built all things is God”. He who built all is God.
JT Well, that is the Deity stressed, but as identified here with Christ. He was the builder; and not one thing was done without Him — that is, God in that sense. The first chapter of John’s gospel shows that, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God ... All things received being through him, and without him not one thing received being which has received being”. That is, He is God Himself. I think that is the idea in the passage in Hebrews 3 to which you allude.
FCH Would that connect with this scripture as the one who builds — “I will build”?
JT Quite so. The Son builds, and the Son is God Himself. So it is in John’s epistle, “He is the true God and eternal life”, and that shows how Scripture changes things for us and makes them intelligible to us, so that we can compare spiritual with spiritual and not contradict anything that is in Scripture. We ought to be clear that everything that Scripture says is absolutely right.
GHM Is there any link with Paul’s reference to the foundation? “Other foundation can no man lay besides that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ”.
JT That is a good question. That is 1 Corinthians 3, whereas we are dealing now with Matthew 16, but I think we have to see that Paul’s line implies a foundation too. There is no other foundation laid but Jesus Christ, but that does not set aside what Peter states here as a confession. Paul does not deny what Peter says. They are both agreed really, for Paul is supported by Peter in his epistle. There is no disagreement, I would say, in the two statements. There is just one foundation really, and we get it again in the epistle to Timothy. It says,
“the firm foundation of God stands”, that would cover both, “having this seal, the Lord knows those that are his”, showing that divine Persons know everything. Everything is within their reach in the sense of knowledge.
GHM That confirms your thought that the Person is the foundation.
Ques Why do you think the Lord says, “And I also”? Would that substantiate His deity?
JT It substantiates His right to speak as the Father speaks. The Father and the Son are agreed. That brings out another matter, how the divine Persons are one. We never should say they are united; they are one. The divine Persons are one. “I and the Father are one”.
Ques Does that not result in the synchronisation of divine operations?
JT Just so. Sometimes in John’s writings you can hardly say whether it is the Father or the Son; it is often so; They are one.
WC May I ask if the building here is viewed as complete or still going on, that is anticipatively of the Spirit’s day?
JT It is still going on, because we are in the Spirit’s day. I think we might say that this is the Spirit’s day, although I do not think that it is actually scriptural. “The Spirit was not yet”, it says in John 7, “because Jesus had not yet been glorified”, and that helps us as to the presence of the Spirit here below. “The Spirit was not yet, because Jesus had not yet been glorified”. So that the two things synchronise.
AJG So that whilst the building is attributed here to the Lord, in that He says, “I will build”, does it actually take place by the Holy Spirit acting through gift?
JT That is what I would say. The Holy Spirit is sent down, and He is the great Operator, and I [p. 234] believe the word expanse in Genesis 1 is to give scope for divine operations, and that is the position at the present time.
WC Would you say how it links on with the building of the woman, in Genesis 2?
JT I think it is used as a type. It is the first type of the kind that we get and the first time the word ‘built’ is used. I think it just alludes to the assembly secretly, as it were, or covertly introduced, and how often we have found joy in the thought of it! “Jehovah Elohim built the rib that he had taken from Man into a woman”, Genesis 2: 22.
PHH Do you think the building in Genesis 2 is to be viewed as a completed thing?
JT It will be noticed that Jehovah did not say anything, but He allowed Adam to say it. It says, “And Jehovah Elohim caused a deep sleep to fall upon Man; and he slept. And he took one of his ribs and closed up flesh in its stead. And Jehovah Elohim built the rib that he had taken from Man into a woman; and brought her to Man. And Man said, This time it is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh: this shall be called Woman, because this was taken out of a man”. The brethren will notice that God is not said to say anything in all that statement. It is what He does, but Adam says the things. God is honouring His servant. And so it is earlier that He brought the animals to Adam, that he should name them, and so Adam named his wife too; he calls her ‘woman’.
PHH Is it in your mind then that this scripture in Genesis 2 views the assembly as a completed thing; that it does not refer so much to process of time?
JT Well, of course, the word ‘complete’ might fit there, but as to teaching or instruction it is not completed. We have to wait for the Spirit to come down and redemption accomplished, before it could [p. 235] be completed. I am sure you have in your mind what is right in a sense, but I think we ought here to keep to the Scriptures. How could we say the figure is complete? It is just a figure.
PHH I must confess that I thought that, in a certain sense, the building was still going on, viewing it as a type, and God now doing it by the Holy Spirit. I thought that it was still going on, but perhaps I am wrong in that. Perhaps it is the complete assembly as the woman that is to be in our minds.
JT Well, it is only a type, of course. The real thing now is going on by the Spirit, what we have in the Spirit.
Rem So that in Ephesians 2, whilst it speaks of the future, “the building fitted together increases to a holy temple in the Lord”, it also says, “in whom ye also are built together for a habitation of God in the Spirit” — as though there was a certain touch of completeness at the present time.
JT Well, that is Ephesians. That is real building by the Spirit.
RWS Does the expression in verse 21, “From that time”, suggest that all that has preceded now has to be worked out. It is all anticipative up till now, but the Lord has to go to Jerusalem and suffer and die and be raised, for the working out of all this great matter.
JT Quite so, and I can see that now clearly, that the Lord has enjoined silence as to this great matter; it is an assembly matter. It is not a public matter, and never is a public matter really. It is a wonderful secret; it is a mystery. The assembly is a mystery, and Paul says he had the mystery of the assembly. So that we are not to speak about it in the ordinary sense at all, because man does not understand it. He simply does not understand it, and, as we have said before, the truth is to be hidden [p. 236] sometimes and concealed from the natural mind. It only harms men if we instruct them beyond their spiritual ability. If they are not converted, they only spoil the truth, if they talk about it at all. We have to leave the truth as it is presented to us in the Scriptures, and leave it to be brought out by the ministry of the Spirit; and we have that, for we have the Spirit by whom we can minister. So that we have the word, “He enjoined on his disciples that they should say to no man that he was the Christ”. So we had better just deny the natural mind information about the things of God, because it only builds up Christendom, which is to be destroyed, according to Revelation.
Ques Is the silence enjoined in verse 20 in keeping with the sovereignty of the revelation to which you have referred?
JT It is. It is in keeping with the truth, and the truth is that spiritual matters should not be exposed or opened up to the natural mind; it just spoils them.
Rem “Give not that which is holy to the dogs, nor cast your pearls before the swine, lest they trample them with their feet, and turning round rend you”, Matthew 7: 6.
JT I think that is a very good word.
AJG I suppose if the Lord had been made known as the Christ before He had died, people would have thought that He had come in to improve the world and set up man in the flesh.
JT That is what they intended to do, according to John’s gospel.
Ques Ought anything to be said as to the terrible attack on the truth of the Rock, that has been made by the Jezebel system? I was wondering if hades’ gates had made a tremendous attack on the truth of the Rock, in asserting that the rock is [p. 237] Peter.
JT Quite so. We know what the system that we have already alluded to has made of it; they make Peter the foundation of the assembly, and there could not be anything more false.
APB Is it noteworthy that the Lord Jesus here does not use a parable or a type, but for the first time says, “My assembly”, bringing it into great prominence.
JT The Lord is claiming it for Himself. It is wonderful, and we all should cherish it. We have it in the service of God every Lord’s day morning professedly, but it is wonderful that the Lord can say of the assembly, “My assembly”.
AB Would it suggest how precious it is to Him and how He will protect it?
JT I am sure He does protect it.
PHH We may expect that the service in the assembly will go on till the end?
JT I think so. It will go on until the Lord is pleased to take us up. He has definitely told us that we are going to be taken up, in the passage, “The Lord himself, with an assembling shout, with archangel’s voice and with trump of God, shall descend from heaven; and the dead in Christ shall rise first; then we, the living who remain, shall be caught up”. Not till that happens will the Spirit depart. The Spirit is here now and He is helping us.
AJG When you say that Christ is Himself the Rock on which the assembly is built, do you mean that it is the Person of Christ as presented in ministry or the Person of Christ as held in the affections of the saints, or both?
JT Well, of course, the Lord’s own instruction, “On this rock I will build my assembly”, is an anticipative thing. It is a thing which He is going to do, but it would all depend on His death and resurrection and ascension to heaven and the Spirit’s coming down, before you could have the real building [p. 238] going on. I mean to say, we must have truth; we must have ministry, and the ministry lies in the Spirit; it is going on all the time.
PHH Would it be right to say that it is Christ subjectively formed in the saints?
JT Well, it is. It is brought down from heaven really, in a certain sense, but it is ministry by the Spirit, and ministry by gift too. He has given gifts to men, and gifts are being used. So that it says, “some apostles, and some prophets, ... and some shepherds and teachers”; and so forth. The Lord did that. The work is going on, in the power of gift, which is a most important thing, and it should be made room for.
JTJr On the first day of the week the Lord would come to us and He would have something to say to us every time He came in?
JT Just so, and we greet Him. When He comes in, there is a change in our attitude, and normally there is a stir too in our affections, because we are gradually coming up to the idea of the oneness of the body, the actual fact of the body of Christ and the brethren of Christ.
RB Was the sovereign revelation of the Father to Peter peculiar to him or is that extended to us now?
JT It has come in because the Spirit has come in, on the ground of redemption, the word ‘redemption’ there implying that He has gone into heaven and angels and principalities are subject to Him, and so the work proceeds. It is a thing that has happened once; that is to say, the Lord Jesus has been raised from the dead and has ascended into heaven, and angels and principalities are subject to Him, and the work proceeds because the Spirit is here. The gifts are going on in their work; so that this is not a matter that takes place in every soul, it is light for every soul to come into. This chapter involves [p. 239] the light, and that light is maintained by the Spirit. I would again repeat that this chapter is light. To say that every believer gets such a revelation as this is not right, but the light is here, and the Holy Spirit is here to shed the light and make it effective.
Rem So that in the passage you have already quoted in Ephesians, the operations of the gifts are “until we all arrive at the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God”.
JT Just so. That is what is going on; it is going on today.
WC Might not this truth be described as church property? It has come out and now it is the property of the church.
JT It is church property; not church property in the sense that it is in the Collected Writings or any other writings of man, but the Spirit of God has put it into our hearts and maintains it in our hearts, so that it will remain there eternally. The building is thus secured permanently, and that is, I believe, what the word ‘stone’ involves. It implies the permanency of the building, the rock, of course, being the foundation. The Lord says, “And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of the heavens; and whatsoever thou mayest bind upon the earth shall be bound in the heavens; and whatsoever thou mayest loose on the earth shall be loosed in the heavens”. And then we have already quoted verse 20, where all is protected. We are not to spread things abroad, as it says, “Then he enjoined on his disciples that they should say to no man that he was the Christ”. Verse 19 is the administration given to Peter. It was given to Peter by One who has authority to give. Only One could give the keys; that is to say, the Lord has the authority to do it. He has the authority of the kingdom of the heavens, and He has given that authority to Peter.
SB Would it be right to say that those keys could not be used until Peter, to whom they were entrusted, had been himself brought into the truth of what was involved in them as opening the door and speaking of Jesus as the Christ, to the Jew on the day of Pentecost, and to the gentile in Cornelius’ house?
JT Yes, that is the truth, and Peter was the man that we are dealing with here. Then in Acts 2 we see he is fitted now to open the door, and there were three thousand people opened to. Peter stood up with the eleven; all the apostles were recognised. It was a question of apostleship, persons who could do things, and Peter was the leader of it all. So they said, “What shall we do, brethren?” and Peter said, “Repent, and be baptised, each one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for remission of sins, and ye will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit”. That had to come about and they were suitable persons to bring it about. The vessel was there.
SB And then he has to be instructed as to Cornelius and the gentiles by means of the vision of the sheet and its contents.
JT Peter is fitted to be the vessel for opening the door to the gentiles as well as to the Jews, the Jews first and also the gentiles. We want to get that one point that Peter is established to open the door. “I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of the heavens”, and so forth. Peter is established in that position. Nobody else but Peter had the keys of the kingdom.
PHH Could a word be said about the mention of Satan in verse 23. “He said to Peter, Get away behind me, Satan”. Is that concentration of hostility, his name means ‘the adversary’?
JT It shows, I think, what material we are, to which the Lord puts His hand, what unfaithful material we are. It is remarkable that the Lord allows this to happen in Peter’s case, just after he had been wonderfully honoured in being enabled to make the confession as to the Son of God. Immediately after that happened he becomes Satan. It is very remarkable and very terrible, and very humbling, that it should happen.
AJG Does it show how unspirituality exposes us to Satan?
JT It does indeed. It just shows even with a person who is a real Christian, a real spiritual man, how the devil can get in. It reminds us of David too, and how a similar thing happened. We have thus to challenge our own hearts and find out what they are capable of. I often think of it, even at the Lord’s supper, what am I capable of, and refer to it, too. It says, “the same night in which he was betrayed ...” Well, who betrayed Him? It was Judas, one of the apostles.
Ques Did Moses have to learn that, in putting his hand into his bosom after he was commissioned?
JT Quite so. It was to prepare him for the great service that was being opened up to him.
EuR Would you say something as to the connection of the mind with this? The Lord says, “Thy mind is not on the things that are of God, but on the things that are of men”. Does not the mind come in very much in relation to the Lord’s supper?
JT It does, but it shows what we are all capable of, and how we have to keep our hearts, according to the word, “Keep thy heart more than anything that is guarded; for out of it are the issues of life”, Proverbs 4: 23.
PL Is this how the mystery of iniquity would work in opposition to the truth? The things that are of men will culminate in the man of sin, will they not?
JT Just so. We have the word in that connection. “There is he who restrains now until he be gone”. That is a great comfort. But then it goes on “and then the lawless one shall be revealed”. As soon as the hand of God is lifted, the wicked one will be revealed. The Spirit of God is now standing in the way, and the government of God is also standing in the way, and the powers that be are standing in the way. But when these are removed, then we shall have the apostasy; it is a terrible thought.
Ques Do you link that with hades’ gates?
JT Just so. The devil is not showing himself all the time. The word ‘hades’ implies that he is hidden, but he is operating, nevertheless.
Rem He would attack those nearest to the Lord, if he could.
PHH The antidote in us being denying ourselves and taking up the cross?
JT That is just what we should touch on, and close.
PHH “If any one desires to come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me”. That keeps Satan out, I suppose?
JT Yes, quite so. Then it goes on: “For what does a man profit, if he should gain the whole world and suffer the loss of his soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? For the Son of man is about to come in the glory of his Father with his angels, and then he will render to each according to his doings. Verily I say unto you, There are some of those standing here” (a very wonderful thing would happen here), “that shall not taste of death at all until they shall have seen the Son of man coming in his kingdom”. That is the end of chapter 16.