CONFESSORS OF THE SON OF GOD (2)
[p. 330] CONFESSORS OF THE SON OF GOD (2)
Galatians 1:15-19; Acts 9:17-21; 2 Corinthians 1:18-22
JT I think the brethren will see the rightness of the remark that Paul’s confession of Christ as Son of God, is in relation to preaching. He makes a great deal of the preaching, saying at the end of his ministry, “that by me the preaching might be fully known”; he also says he is an architect and builder (1 Corinthians 3:10; 2 Corinthians 10:8; 2 Corinthians 13:10). Our subject now is connected with the preaching in his ministry. “God ... was pleased to reveal his Son in me, that I may announce him as glad tidings among the nations”.
Ques Would it seem from Ephesians 4 that the preaching was part of the divine arrangement that you spoke of, as the gifts show? “He has given some apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists, and some shepherds and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints; with a view to the work of the ministry, with a view to the edifying of the body of Christ; until we all arrive at the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, at the full-grown man, at the measure of the stature of the fulness of the Christ” (Ephesians 4:11-13).
JT Yes. The preaching would stand in relation to the gift of the evangelist; that the preaching should be fully done, not merely in an ordinary way, but in a full way, resulting in full or clear knowledge. The preaching helps to the full knowledge of the Son of God.
You can understand that in referring to the preaching the apostle had his evangelical power in mind. So that he begins the epistle to the Romans in saying, “the gospel of God ... concerning his Son”. It is the gospel of God. Then he goes on to say that the Son of God is declared or marked off in power by resurrection of the dead. What is in Paul’s mind is the preaching and that Christ’s sonship is attested in power. That is dynamic power: not simply authority, but actual power; that is what is needed in the gospel. There are several ways [p. 331] in which Christ is known as Son. In Luke the angel announced that He shall be called Son of God; then there is the Father’s announcement at His baptism; but Paul’s thought is not these, but that He was declared to be Son of God as exercising actual power. There could be no gospel unless there was actual power. The preposition in Romans 1 indicates that power characterised the Son of God — “in power” — active power; expressed by “resurrection of the dead”. It is a plural thought; we have many evidences of it testifying that to the utmost extremity of man’s dire helplessness, the Lord could meet him, and had the power to raise him up. The Lord sent a message to John — the “dead are raised” (Matthew 11:5).
CAM Referring to his commission (Acts 26:22), Paul says, “Having therefore met with the help which is from God, I have stood firm unto this day, witnessing both to small and great”. The idea of witnessing or confessing is what is before us.
JT Paul was to bear the Lord’s name before “nations and kings and the sons of Israel”. The steady way, against all opposition, in which Paul went on, keeping the Son of God in mind, is stressed. He preached the Son of God. The Son of God is on God’s side as exercising power on the behalf of man.
ANW Paul preached the Son of God among the nations. Is that in keeping with his particular line of ministry? Peter preached Christ.
JT Yes, he makes a distinction between his ministry and Peter’s in Galatians. His mission was to the nations, and I think he had Titus at Jerusalem at that time, as an evidence of the power of his ministry. Was there anywhere a better product of the work of God than Titus?
AR Would it be right to say that Paul, conscious that “God ... was pleased to reveal his Son in me, that I may announce him as glad tidings among the nations”, would have power in what he was [p. 332] saying?
JT Yes; and the same may be said of the revelation to Peter. The Father had made it. It is a foundational thought to Peter. The Father selected him from among the others for this. It is not, however, presented as a subject of special ministry by Peter. Peter never presents the Son of God in his ministry; though in his last letter, when speaking of the mount of transfiguration, and what happened there, he uses the title “my beloved Son”. In his true levitical way, Peter refrains from the use of the appellation Son of God in his ministry. But the revelation to Paul had his ministry in view. Paul begins with this before he was actually commissioned, according to what we read in Acts 9:20. “And straightway in the synagogues he preached Jesus that he is the Son of God.” Christ was revealed to him as the Son of God; He had acquired control of his heart. Later he speaks of the Son of God as having loved him and given Himself for him. The Son of God expresses the love of God. Love is the leading feature as marking the relationship of Father and Son. The Son is peculiarly an object of faith and affection. This is seen beautifully in Paul.
AEH Is this revelation of the Son of God in Paul to provide matter for testimony? I was thinking of Elihu in Job 32:17-19. He says, “I will answer, I also in my turn, I also will shew what I know: for I am full of matter, the spirit within me constraineth me. Behold, my belly is as wine which hath no vent; like new flasks, it is ready to burst”.
JT Yes. That bears on what we are saying. Paul is not fully commissioned in Acts 9, as far as Scripture records, but nevertheless he preached in the synagogues, one after another, saying that Jesus is the Son of God. He must have been full of the great fact “that he is the Son of God”. God was speaking in Him; no longer in the prophets; God was now speaking in the Son (Hebrews 1). He was here in power, so that He raises [p. 333] the dead.
WGT Acts 9:22 supports what you are saying. “Saul increased the more in power”. God was helping him in the matter of power.
JT It was a question of power — what would be the use of preaching without power? The Lord Jesus came in power. The greatest evidence of it was that He raised dead people; not just one person, but dead persons.
AR That is very interesting. John says “the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they that have heard shall live” (John 5:25). Preaching the Son of God should effect that morally now.
JT The Lord sent the word to John the baptist in prison, saying “that dead are raised”. We have to wait, of course, for actual resurrection, but that the Son of God raises the dead is the fact that is apparent. How many the Lord raised, we cannot say. We have examples. Paul alludes to it, as the Lord does. The Lord says, the “dead are raised” (Matthew 11:5). Paul says, “marked out Son of God in power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by resurrection of the dead” (Romans 1:4).
Ques Would the Lord have that in mind in John 9 in regard to the blind man? “Thou, dost thou believe on the Son of God?”. He reached that point very quickly.
JT I think the Lord had in mind the full thought of divine works. The man needed this divine touch. He had believed a good deal already; the chapter shows that he was a believing man. As the conversation of the people proceeded, he was ready for everything that came up. Every incident brought out fresh light from him, but this was one thing the Lord was concerned about in him after he was cast out — an outcast, without any protection or support from man or man’s religion. “Thou, dost thou believe on the Son of God? He answered and said, And who is he, Lord, that I may believe on him? And Jesus said to him, Thou hast [p. 334] both seen him, and he that speaks with thee is he. And he said, I believe, Lord: and he did him homage” (John 9:35-38). The man is finished now and ready for further service.
SMcC Was this revelation of God’s Son in Paul initial in God’s taking him up, or was it subsequent?
JT I would say he must have got light at the start. I think that he includes all that happened, because he says in Galatians, giving an account of it, “But when God, who set me apart even from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son in me, that I may announce him as glad tidings among the nations, immediately I took not counsel with flesh and blood, nor went I up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me; but I went to Arabia, and again returned to Damascus”. He went into Arabia, which, I think, would mean he was not seeking man’s help. He was going to work out the truth in his own soul in the desert.
ANW Did not Paul have a revelation inwardly? and is not the objective side of the truth seen in the expression of the centurion, “Truly this was the Son of God”? The centurion’s confession looks like an historical matter. Paul preached “Jesus that he is the Son of God”.
JT “Truly this was the Son of God” (Matthew 27:54), would mean that He was that as alive here on earth. I suppose the centurion did not have the full idea of the resurrection in mind, for the resurrection was subsequent to that confession. The centurion alluded to what Christ was as a man here on earth; that He was the Son of God historically. Clearly he had light and no doubt would come to the full truth. The resurrection of Christ brings out the full truth of who He is. The earthquake and the things that took place immediately affected the centurion and those with him. Those that had fallen asleep coming out of their tombs would be subsequent to that; the scripture says, “going [p. 335] out of the tombs after his arising, entered into the holy city and appeared unto many” (Matthew 27:53). I suppose the centurion, as continuing in the light he had, would learn that the Lord not only was, but is the Son of God.
Rem Paul “preached Jesus that he is the Son of God” — he proclaimed it as a herald.
JT The centurion only said it. He referred to the fact that the Person there was the Son of God. Paul’s point is that He is alive, and He raises the dead; “marked out Son of God in power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by resurrection of the dead”.
JRH Is there any distinction between the Father’s revelation to Peter and the revelation by God to Paul as stated in Galatians?
JT Well, to Peter it is the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is foundational, as we have said. The revelation to Paul is the Son only, and that He might be announced as glad tidings among the nations. The Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world. The most formal and, we may say, official presentation, of the Son is in Romans 1:1-4: “the gospel of God ... concerning his Son ... “.
AB Would it be right to say that the revelation in connection with Peter is more the idea of impression, but with Paul it is rather in view of expression, in the sense of preaching and announcing?
JT Yes, and in power. Preaching would be in power, in keeping with the statement in Romans, declared, or marked out, Son of God in power. There is something in preaching beyond just saying things.
AR Some of us in preaching might convert sinners from their sins, but Paul would link them on with another world.
JT Yes; and in the epistle to Corinth he links up two other brothers with him in the preaching of the Son of God — “he who has been preached by us among you (by me and Silvanus and Timotheus)”. It is not simply that he would say things about the [p. 336] Lord Jesus, but he would preach them. When the Lord Himself announces His own commission in Luke 4:18, He says, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach glad tidings to the poor; he has sent me to preach to captives deliverance, and to the blind sight ...”. There is power in the preaching.
Ques In Romans 1:9 he says, “God is my witness, whom I serve in my spirit in the glad tidings of his Son”.
JT In that same connection he says, “I am not ashamed of the glad tidings; for it is God’s power to salvation, to every one that believes” (Romans 1:16). He is again stressing the idea of power.
AEH Why does he say in 1 Corinthians 1:21, “the foolishness of the preaching”? Is that what it is in the minds of those who are unaffected by it?
JT It is to bring out the wisdom of God in the manner of the thing He ordained to be preached, and man’s folly in refusing it. At Athens, on Mars’ Hill, they said of Paul, “What would this chatterer say?” (Acts 17:18). Had they ever heard him? Never could a Greek orator speak as he did; but they called it chattering, hence he says that it was “unto the Greeks foolishness” (1 Corinthians 1:23). The preaching was such that it affected men, and converted them. Although certain ones might say his speech was contemptible, yet there was something in it that did not attach to ordinary men.
Ques Is establishment in mind: “to him that is able to establish you, according to my glad tidings and the preaching of Jesus Christ” (Romans 16:25)?
JT Yes; as hearing a brother speak in power, you are affected by it. It is not only what he says, but the power of it.
SMcC From the preaching at Areopagus there were results, believers were secured, among whom was Dionysius the Areopagite. That was a testimony to the power there was to overcome all the objections men had been raising.
JT [p. 337] I suppose Dionysius before his conversion would represent the spirit of the place, specially linked with the institution.
Ques What is the secret of preaching the Son of God in power?
JT To be full of the Son of God. As our brother was saying, like Elihu he was full, he wanted to give vent to his inward feelings — I believe that is the idea. The Spirit of God is upon you as the anointing; that is involved in the gift of preaching. In Acts 14:1 they so spoke that a great multitude believed. It was the way Paul and Barnabas spoke. So the lame man heard Paul speak, as if stress is on the speaking.
CAM In reference to Paul’s line, do you think this expression, “separated me from my mother’s womb” is the kind of thing referred to in Jeremiah, that the vessel is sanctified by God before there is any history at all?
JT I think so. All his faculties would be in the divine mind in his very creation, as we might say, or before he was brought into existence; a man not only has to be born again to be for God, but his vessel has to be prepared. His physical and mental qualities are prepared beforehand. In Paul’s case they were prepared in view of the great service he was called to. The Lord says Paul was an elect vessel to Him. The vessel was there before he was called. That is, God made the vessel, so he was fitted for the wonderful gifts that he received. Of course the spiritual work of God in him, and the Spirit Himself in him, would affect all this.
CAM That settles a number of things. We might think we form the vessel in some sort of a way, but it is really God’s creation.
JT I think that is important to keep in mind. If God is going to take up a man, He had him in mind before the world was, and He acts in his antecedents, so that he will be suitable for the work He gives him [p. 338] to do.
JRH In the three accounts given of Paul’s conversion, there is nothing recorded as happening between the Lord and Paul to bring His sonship into evidence. Would the word in Galatians show that it was a deep inward matter personally in the vessel?
JT I think so. The Lord had His part in it. He said, “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?”. Paul says, He spoke in the Hebrew tongue. Why was that? That marked the Lord’s part, showing sympathy with Saul. He says, “I am Jesus”. But then God was there too; divine Persons were operating together. Whatever there was would become enlarged, of course. The Spirit as received, would confirm and enlarge what impressions he had. Ananias told Paul that the Lord had sent him to him, that he might see and be filled with the Holy Spirit; and in the accounts he gives of the Lord’s appearing to him there is increase. That would indicate that there was increase in his apprehension of Christ as he went on.
Ques Would you look for this power to be in evidence today in the preaching, as we speak of it? We have to humbly own there is not much.
JT I suppose your exercise, when you go to preach the gospel, is to go into your closet and ask the Lord for a word. You not only want a general idea as to what you should say, but you want power. The two things are distinct. In ministry there must be preparation. The angels, (Revelation 8:6), “prepared themselves that they might sound”. Paul says of himself in 1 Corinthians 9:16; 1 Corinthians 9:23; 1 Corinthians 9:26,27 “It is woe to me if I should not announce the glad tidings”; and again, “I do all things for the sake of the glad tidings, that I may be fellow-partaker with them ... I therefore thus run, as not uncertainly; so I combat, as not beating the air. But I buffet my body, and lead it captive, lest after having preached to others I should be myself rejected”. He furnishes instruction from his own attitude of mind and experiences in the service to show how the preaching of Christ is accompanied [p. 339] by divine power. You do not trust in natural things, and moreover, you do not indulge your body; it is to be marked as a vessel of the Spirit. I believe the secret of power is largely in disallowing nature. I have to make room for the Spirit; so that, not only do I get an inkling from the Lord as to what I should say in the preaching, but I am dealing with myself all the time so there is power when I stand up. There is something that is not natural.
CHH Is that the idea in 2 Corinthians 5:20, “We are ambassadors therefore for Christ, God as it were beseeching by us, we entreat for Christ, be reconciled to God”? And he says God had put in him the word of reconciliation.
JT A very real thing too. The thing was in him. That goes with what we are saying. God, he says, “was pleased to reveal his Son in me”; so that God was there. The vessel is another matter, and is needed in order that the holy matter that you have, may find an outlet in your vocal powers, and in other bodily features — so that you convey the things fully. It is said that they marvelled at the words of grace that came out of the Lord’s mouth. It is not only what is inside, but how it comes out, the latter implying the anointing.
CAM What do you understand by a castaway?
JT One might preach and not be a true believer. The apostle stresses the need of self-judgment in the preacher, that he should control his body, holding it wholly for God and His service; that he should be equal to the work he had taken on.
AMcD Did Jonah have to go through that — according to what he records in the second chapter of his book? The Lord says to him afterwards, “Go to Nineveh, the great city, and preach unto it the preaching that I shall bid thee” (chapter 3:2).
JT Yes; typically, he was to go as a risen man. But he needed more discipline, for the element of complaint continued with him. No doubt he wrote the [p. 340] book and hence we may decide that he learnt his lesson, for he records evidences of his complaining spirit. His preaching had its full effect, “Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown!”. A lone foreigner going through that great city, announcing only judgment and effecting such universal results testifies clearly to the power that was with the preacher. That his service was so successful, notwithstanding that he complained against God, is a remarkable testimony to God’s patience with His servants. The sequel shows that Jonah judged himself and was adjusted.
RWS Paul at Ephesus laboured daily for two years, “and God wrought no ordinary miracles by the hands of Paul, so that even napkins or aprons were brought from his body and put upon the sick, and the diseases left them, and the wicked spirits went out” (Acts 19:11,12). Is that an evidence of power resulting from separation, and holding the body for God in His service?
JT The napkins from his body effecting cures would show this. It was a sanctified body. It was kept under control.
ANW Among the Corinthians, the power was manifested in outward weakness, fear and much trembling (1 Corinthians 2:3).
JT The preaching was thus in demonstration of the Spirit and power.
Rem Philip “preached the Christ” (Acts 8), and Paul “preached Jesus that he is the Son of God” (Acts 9).
JT There is a difference. Philip preached the Christ, who was the Anointed, the great Operator of God; that is implied in the meaning of “the Christ”. The preaching of the Christ was specially suitable for the Samaritans. They were rivals of what was at Jerusalem. The Lord had said, “salvation is of the Jews”; He had made known to the woman of Samaria that He is the Christ. Then the testimony of the woman herself was, “Is not he the Christ?” (John 4:22,29). Why should she say that? It was not simply that He had told her He was [p. 341] Christ, but because He had told her all things that ever she did. She was a true preacher in that sense. She said, “Come, see a man who told me all things I had ever done” — that was her message. It was a question of what He could do; so Philip follows on with that. He preached the Christ, implying, What will He not do for you? He can do everything, as Job said of God. As distinct from this the Son of God involves attraction, He is the object of the affections of the believers. He is the Beloved of the Father and becomes the Beloved of the saints. He draws us out of this world into another. He stabilises us, for in Him all the promises of God are Yea and Amen.
JB Would Ecclesiastes help us? It speaks of “The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem” Ecclesiastes 1:1).
JT Yes, there is a meaning to that word that is worth looking at. It is ‘ a former, or a caller together, of assemblies ‘. In chapter 12:11 we have a further word, “The words of the wise are as goads, and the collections of them as nails fastened in: they are given from one shepherd”. If you are converted, you want to come to the assembly; you are not to be an isolated person, like some of those converted through popular preachers; they have no idea of material for an assembly, whereas the writer of this book did. To form assemblies is rightly added to the thought of preaching.
FS What is the difference between the lines of ministry of Peter and Paul?
JT We were remarking that Peter hardly uses the title Son of God in his ministry. You might think he would be the first to use it. In his first great sermon, why does he not? Because he is under the Lord, and is a true levite. In preaching you do not say everything you know. A man who stands up to preach is governed by the sense that he has something from the Lord for the time. Peter as a true levite knew what to say; he spoke in the power of the Spirit — as he says in his epistle, “by the Holy Spirit, sent from heaven” (1 Peter 1:12). He would turn to the Lord undoubtedly before he preached, and the Lord would indicate to him what to say — through the Spirit. As he had a revelation from the Father, that Christ was the Son of God, he must have been practically under the Lord in what he was preaching, so that he did not simply say what he knew. On this same principle Paul said to those at Corinth, “I did not judge it well to know anything among you save Jesus Christ, and him crucified” (1 Corinthians 2:2).
JB In Acts 6, Stephen spoke not only with power, but with wisdom.
Rem In regard to our brother’s remark that we have such poor returns, we have to remember that the best fish are caught by a line, and that we cannot look for such large results as obtained years ago at so-called revivals.
JT We have to be content with outwardly small things now, nevertheless we must preach the word; be urgent in season and out of season (2 Timothy 4:1,2). Peter was a net fisherman; and his first preaching brought in a great haul of converts; three thousand. That corresponds pretty much with what you get where his name is first mentioned in Luke. The haul was very great. In mentioning it the Spirit of God has in His mind the great truth of fellowship (Luke 5:1-11). Two words for partners occur there, indicating thoughts which enter into the forming of assemblies. So in his first preaching Peter got three thousand into fellowship. “And they persevered in the teaching and fellowship of the apostles, in breaking of bread and prayers” (Acts 2:42).
AEH While Peter was capable of speaking to a large number as at that time, still he refers to “eight souls” being saved through water (1 Peter 3:20).
JT Quite so. One of the first things we have to learn in seeking to preach, is to speak to small numbers. Many of us have had to learn that, but the small number [p. 343] should not make us feel that we can get along with just anything in the way of an address. The Lord wishes us to be as earnest about six as we would be if we were preaching to a thousand. Peter speaks of Christ in Spirit preaching in the days of Noah: “In which also going he preached to the spirits which are in prison, heretofore disobedient, when the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah while the ark was preparing, into which few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water”. I only refer to that because we all have to learn that if we are to speak successfully to few or many we must have power. We must not misrepresent the Lord in preaching. If we stand up to preach let us get the word and the power.
MB In localities where numbers are small we are tested, especially if all are saints breaking bread. I was wondering if the absence of the strangers in our room should make any difference in the power of the preaching.
JT What we are saying is just to meet that. We must go on with small things. It is a day of small things. The word to Zerubbabel was — “Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith Jehovah of hosts” (Zechariah 4:6). That is the thing. Even if you have no outsiders, the saints ought to be the best listeners. Get your word and your power; and you cannot get the power without keeping the body under as already remarked.
EF You have previously remarked that the children of the saints are the great reservoir from which we draw the material for the assembly.
JT Well, they are now, but we cannot say they were when Peter preached. I am sure we ought to have in mind to get others, and what we had this morning ought to help in that way. What are men saying about the Son of man? Well, the disciples knew. How did they know? They must have talked to them. They talked to other [p. 344] people.
AR If you were in a small meeting, say one having five brothers, would you say they each should take a turn in the preaching?
JT No one should preach unless he is sent. The fact that one is a brother is in itself no reason why he should preach. Of course, any christian may speak to people, but preaching is on the ground of being sent.
AR Would that be Philip’s line?
JT That is right. He went down to Samaria and preached the Christ to them. If I do not preach well, Christ can, and the oftener I preach Him, the better preacher I become.
Rem So there is not only the question of the buffeting of the body to secure power, but there must be the idea of commission.
JT The Lord was the Sent One. You must represent Him. He says, “He who receives whomsoever I shall send receives me” (John 13:20).
WGT So in Romans 10:15 it is, “How shall they preach unless they have been sent?”, and further, “How beautiful the feet of them that announce glad tidings of peace, of them that announce glad tidings of good things!”. The walk of the preacher enters into his service.
JT That is right. See how the woman of Luke 7 regarded the Lord’s feet!
AR Paul says, “We will not boast out of measure”. Does that refer to persons going where God does not send them?
JT Yes. As to this, the apostle could say that the Lord said to him at the outset of the work in Corinth, “I have much people in this city”. It was his obligation to get those people. Hence he says to the Corinthians that he and those with him had a measure apportioned by God to “reach to you also” (2 Corinthians 10:13). That is, he reached them spiritually. Each one proves his measure in this way. I must see what effect I have on [p. 345] those to whom I preach. The preaching may not reach to them.
MB It says of the eunuch that he went on his way rejoicing. Is that the result of power being with Philip?
JT It was evidence of effective preaching. Philip preached to large numbers at a time and had results, but he is carried away by the Spirit, to go to another place. He is a subject man, a very excellent example for all in service. Acts 8:39 shows how a real preacher is subject, ready to be sent anywhere, and finally the Spirit of God raptures him. Clearly he was pleasing to God in his service. I think facts given of the eunuch’s conversion are largely to bring out the effectiveness of Philip’s work.
W Do you preach to believers as to unbelievers?
JT Well, discernment is needed and we must calculate, as Paul at Corinth, as to what feature of the truth is to be presented. At Lystra (Acts 14), Paul and Barnabas so spoke that a great multitude believed. That is one thing. Now there is one man that the Spirit of God has in His mind, and that man, we are told, heard Paul speak. That is important. Thousands heard him in the ordinary sense, but that man heard him, as the sequel shows, spiritually. He discerned something in that speaking and Paul saw that he had faith. Now something for God is going to be effected. Paul has an eye on the man, and he on Paul. He has an eye on Paul, because Paul is speaking, and Paul has an eye on him because he has faith. “Rise up straight upon thy feet”, Paul says, “and he sprang up and walked”. We have a striking instance there of the preacher discerning his audience.