DIVINE ENERGY RENEWED IN REVIVAL (2)
DIVINE ENERGY RENEWED IN REVIVAL (2)
JT I believe the brethren will discern that these two chapters (Acts 13 and 14) are distinctive and bear on the revived dispensation coming under the direct influence and direction of Paul; then the effect of Judaism is again noted. There is already enough said about it in the chapter itself, but chapter 15 is to bring out how it was used of the devil to interfere with the course of Christianity. Chapter 13 is more general and leads up to a result of the preaching that is described in the last verse: “And the disciples were filled with joy and the Holy Spirit”. You find such notices as this from time to time in the Acts showing the progress of the truth and the jubilant character of it, all in the Spirit, as if the Spirit would remind us we should stay with Himself; remain with Him, as it were. And then another thing in chapter 13 which should be carried forward in our minds, is the fact that eternal life is noted.
APT Is the last verse indicative of the enjoyment of the state of eternal life? John says, “that your joy may be full” in his epistle. Is there any suggestion here that they had arrived at some sense of the good of eternal life?
JT I think it is to be taken notice of, as already remarked, and that it is the characteristic blessing of the millennium. “There hath Jehovah commanded the blessing, life for evermore”, Psalm 133: 3. It is the characteristic blessing of the millennium, I would think, as vouchsafed to the gentiles. They are brought into it.
SMcC How do you understand the expression, “as many as were ordained to eternal life”? How far does that ordaining go? Has it to do with the purpose of God, or is it connected with the ways of God?
JT [p. 524] I think it is the general thought of John; it is John’s line, I would think. Eternal life is a question of the purpose of God; the promise of life, we are told, and John’s line would confirm it. He quotes the Lord as saying, “I give them life eternal; and they shall never perish, and no one shall seize them out of my hand. My Father who has given them to me is greater than all, and no one can seize out of the hand of my Father”, John 10: 28, 29. I think it is a stabilizing thought of eternal life as set up here on earth.
ANW And yet judging “yourselves unworthy of eternal life” would indicate a state which would refuse it; not a right kind of sense of unworthiness; “but, since ye thrust it from you” he says in chapter 13: 46. Their action made them unworthy of eternal life. While there is God’s side, there is the unworthiness created by my side.
JT “It was necessary that the word of God should be first spoken to you; but, since ye thrust it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, lo, we turn to the nations”. That confirms what one had in mind as entering into John’s line of truth, and particularly where the Lord says, “The Father loves the Son, and has given all things to be in his hand. He that believes on the Son has life eternal, and he that is not subject to the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides upon him”, John 3: 35, 36. It is to confirm the idea, not exactly that judgment is a fixed matter with God, but that it is an effect that has to be conformed with. So the refusal of eternal life, the refusal of the Son involving the denying ourselves of eternal life, confirms the divine thought of judgment. In Isaiah 30 the pile of fire, eternal judgment, is ignited by God Himself, as if it were a necessity. He is forced to it. He desires the blessing of all; He desires mercy for all, but He is obliged to have recourse to judgment;
[p. 525] and hence He lights the fire with His own breath, showing how it is a decision reached by God which has been rendered necessary because of man’s will, the exercise of his will in refusing blessing. For the blessing is a thought of God: eternal life. The blessing is commanded in Zion. And so the Lord in confirmation of that says, “I know that His commandment is life eternal”. That is to say, it is the express desire of God that all should be blessed, and it is a fixed thing that those who are blessed have eternal life and they shall never perish. But nevertheless, God is obliged to turn to the curse, to judgment.
SMcC I was wondering as to this thought of ordaining; whether it is specific or general. When do you apprehend such were ordained?
JT Well, it is a question of God’s counsels, I should think. In result everything must be according to counsel; at the same time, to make out that judgment is ordained is rather going too far. The ordination of eternal life on the principle of faith is a fixed matter with God, but judgment is an obligation on God’s part. It is a moral obligation, because of the outcome of man’s will. That has to be taken care of. God is determined to have to do with that and to carry it out. Therefore, in result it becomes a fixed matter.
ANW And so in Romans 9, while the vessels of mercy are said to be prepared beforehand, the vessels of wrath are not spoken of exactly in that way. They show themselves, but they are not prepared beforehand.
JT That is seen in Pharaoh. God had mercy in His mind. Anyone can see in reading through the facts of the plagues that God had mercy in His mind, but Pharaoh hardened his heart. Therefore, God would say, It is fixed; it will be the way you [p. 526] make it.
CAM The will of man is a very serious matter. It would almost look as if that was the only thing against the counsels of God. It says, “He that will, let him take the water of life freely”, Revelation 22: 17; as if the only ones that miss the thing are those that are against it.
JT It has often been remarked how much man’s will will accomplish in effect. And if one were to say the lake of fire will be filled, it is the accomplishment of man’s will, showing how terrible it is to exercise our wills and let our wills rule us; for God’s way is not that; He is not willing that any should perish.
RHS What did the Lord have in mind when He said, “and every one who lives and believes on me shall never die”, John 11: 26?
JT It is a statement of fact. It brings out the position now. Saying that he never dies would just mean that those who are alive and remain, for instance, never die in fact. So that the difference is only between those who fall asleep and those who never die. The falling asleep is only a kind feeling on God’s part. They have the same footing in result as those who never die. “Every one who lives and believes on me shall never die”. That means that the idea of falling asleep is, in a sense, of no consequence.
AR Does this word ‘ordain’ mean that God goes ahead of the preacher? “As many as were ordained to eternal life”, it says.
JT I do not know what you mean by ‘going ahead’.
AR The Lord said to Paul “I have much people in this city” in regard to Corinth.
JT Quite so. There is the question of ordination, and, as you may say, when you go inside you see it, as it were, ordained before the world was. You look around on all the persons that are there, that were ordained before the world was. But then outside [p. 527] you have a different word: whosoever. The word ‘whosoever’ covers anyone, whereas inside you are marked off as fixed; your position is fixed. Outside it is not yet fixed; it is only in God’s mind.
APT In Acts 2 it says, “those that were to be saved”. Is there something similar in that?
JT That pretty much corresponds with ordination unto eternal life only that it covers rather the Jewish position. It is the remnant of the Jews. “The Lord added to the assembly daily those that were to be saved”. That is, that number are going to be saved and they are added to the assembly. They are really elevated in the fact that they are added to the assembly. So that our dispensation implies a higher level and it is the level of the gospel.
GMacPh Is the assembly the sphere now where eternal life is enjoyed?
JT Yes; in the measure in which it is enjoyed now, which is only in a provisional sense.
ANW The way the record puts it is striking, because the thrusting away by the Jews is the opening of the door to the gentiles. It brings to pass this word of their being ordained to eternal life.
JT It is remarkable that it is so. It is pretty much like the word in John 3 that we have just quoted: “He that believes on the Son has life eternal, and he that is not subject to the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides upon him”. That is a terrible word and it corresponds pretty much with what we have here in Paul.
GW What is meant in Matthew 12: 18, “I will put my Spirit upon him, and he shall shew forth judgment to the nations”? Does that bring in this thought of revival for the nations?
JT Just so. Christ is said to have become “a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises of the fathers;” (that is what the Jews were then obtaining), “and that the nations should glorify God for mercy; according as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the nations, and will sing to thy name. And again he says, Rejoice, nations, with his people. And again, Praise the Lord, all ye nations, and let all the peoples laud him. And again, Esaias says, There shall be the root of Jesse, and one that arises, to rule over the nations: in him shall the nations hope”, Romans 15: 8 - 13. This is to bring out Paul’s way of confirming the truth of the gospel which he preached. God was fair to the Jews and would do all possible for them, but He was also operating with the gentiles, and Paul was taken up for that purpose. So it says, “Lo, we turn to the nations” (verse 46). He is justifying his work and his way of dealing with the gentiles. All is fixed as a question of sovereignty on the line of blessing, but we cannot just put the line of curse or judgment on it in that way. God is easing it off, as it were, according to His own thoughts and the thoughts entering into this dispensation. It is marvellous that we should be still in it in this year, as it is called the year of grace; that we are still in it. This same gospel is still going on however feebly; the Lord “is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance”, 2 Peter 3: 9.
EAL In Acts 13: 48, it says, “And those of the nations, hearing it, rejoiced, and glorified the word of the Lord, and believed”. Is that a magnification of what we see earlier? After Herod died it says, “But the word of God grew and spread itself”, Acts 12: 24.
JT Just so. God is going on and that is one of the greatest comforts. Let us go on. Some may say, We are not going on; but let us say, We are going on. That is the resolve proceeding from the mind of God Himself that we should go [p. 529] on.
GVD I notice it says in the next verse, “And the word of the Lord was carried through the whole country”. There is a suggestion in the word ‘carried’, perhaps, of the levitical thought in relation to the ark of the testimony?
JT Just so; very good. There are some there to do it. Paul had carried it many a long mile from Jerusalem round about to Illyricum. So the word was primarily beginning at Jerusalem. Where it will end is a question. We have just to wait and see.
Well, to keep in our chapter as much as we can, the thought of eternal life has now been before us rightly. It enters into chapter 13; the first of these two great chapters. The end of the first is the Holy Spirit, joy in the Holy Spirit. “The disciples were filled with joy and the Holy Spirit”. Well now, we see what the ministers were doing. The result is plain enough there. The Holy Spirit Himself has taken the things up and fixed them. They were filled with the Spirit. But then it says, “And it came to pass in Iconium that they entered together into the synagogue of the Jews, and so spake that a great multitude of both Jews and Greeks believed”. The ministers are in unity; they entered together. The Lord has raised up a good many brethren that are able to minister. It is very encouraging too, but the question is whether we are together. Earlier it is said, “And all that believed were together”, Acts 2: 44. That is true in a general way. In verse 1 of chapter 2 “they were all together in one place”; the assembly was there in principle in one place, but in the end of chapter 2 they are seen as together on general grounds. They have affection one for another; and how they were carrying on indicated that unity was the point. They were all together at the end of the chapter, and the Lord added to that. Now here we have these two great ministers and it is said of them they are still together. They entered together [p. 530] into the synagogue of the Jews. That is to say, that is what those who are ministered to will say; that the great ministers were together. They were all of one mind.
CAM That is a very interesting thing. One of them was much more of a speaker than the other, but still they were together.
JT Paul had already become that; so that the word is ‘so’. That word means that the ‘together’ was bearing on the results; there were results, and that they were of one mind was bearing on that. The end of the next chapter would show they were not of one mind, but so far they are, and that mind was bearing on the results.
AAT Do you mean when Barnabas left them they were not together?
JT They were divided for a while anyway, and John Mark had his part in that; but the work of God went on. Paul went on and Barnabas took his own way, but it says, “And Barnabas taking Mark sailed away to Cyprus; but Paul having chosen Silas went forth, committed by the brethren to the grace of God”, Acts 15: 39, 40. That shows that the work of God is going on and it is a question now of another unity; of persons who are united being together, and the work of God is still going on. God solves the matter by being with us.
GMacPh Does the thought of the word ‘together’ in the light of the Psalms suggest the working out of the principle of eternal life in the ministry, or in the service of the ministers?
JT I suppose that is so; more than that. Chapter 16 brings out another chapter in the testimony: what Paul was there, a man that is to be noted, and how he and Silas suffered together. Paul and Barnabas here went together into the synagogue, but suffering together is a great matter. Of course, Barnabas too suffered with Paul, but Silas suffered [p. 531] peculiarly with him. Chapter 16 brings that out, and how they sang in their sufferings. They began in prayer and they sang in the prayer.
DMacd The levites seem to go out two by two. We do not go on those lines today, do we?
JT We may, if we like each other, but it is rare. We are in a day of small things; the Lord sent them out two by two.
APT Verse 13 of chapter 13 says, “Paul and his company”. What would that company involve and who would they be?
JT It is to signalise Paul; it is not a partisan company. That is another thing. We may choose each other for our companions in labour or it may be social. But it is not that. Paul and his company is based on what came out in Paul at that particular time. He had done a great work, a solemn work in regard of Elymas and in regard of the deputy; Paul is signalised in respect of the quality that he brought in; the intelligence of this man, only one man, but his intelligence was greater even than what was at Athens. There were only a few at Athens but the quality there was not equal to the quality here. So Paul’s companions, although John Mark had left him, were glad to be with him. Why did John leave him? He went back from the work.
AAT Is that what you mean by levitical principles not being carried out?
JT Why should John leave him? Levitical principles would work out in John staying there where the work was going on. Think of a man going back from the work, not simply leaving Paul.
RWS They go back when they have fulfilled the work. It says in verse 26, “whence they had been committed to the grace of God for the work which they had fulfilled”.
JT That is the finish of the section. It links up these two chapters in a most remarkable way.
[p. 532] The levitical side is in them; and another thing we ought to notice and will, I suppose, is that this chapter adds to what we have been already looking at, namely, the stabilisation of the local assembly. It is not now eternal life, which, of course, is a great matter as we have had it, but the stabilisation of the assembly. In verse 23 we will see: “And having chosen them elders in each assembly, having prayed with fastings, [p. 545] they committed them to the Lord, on whom they had believed”. That is, before this section is finished, we have the idea of local assemblies being stabilised; able to stand, as it were, each by itself; as here in Washington, the meeting is set up and refreshed and fitted so as to stand by itself and maintain assembly principles by itself.
GVD Would you connect eldership with stabilisation?
JT That is what the thing means. Persons who are able to move and hold things together. The principles of the assembly are held in stability. That is one of the greatest things to have before us.
RBP How about Titus establishing elders in each city? Is that the same principle?
JT It is the same principle, only that it brings out that one elder in our meeting might have jurisdiction over the whole city although there might be twenty meetings in it; he has jurisdiction over the whole city. He is not simply an elder in his own meeting. Here it is an elder in the assembly.
AAT How does that work out today? These brothers established these elders, but how does that work out today?
JT You know. You lived in New York and we carried on these meetings on the principle of the city for many years. It is the principle of the city; this principle is just the local assembly.
AAT There is no such thing as an official [p. 533] elder.
JT It is a question of the thing, you know. What we had already today is what was there; “the assembly which was there”; “the assembly which was” is really better. So, we will say that you are an elder. Well, are you? If you are then the word applies. That is what I would say. There are brethren who are. I am not saying you are not one; I think you are; I have had to do with you in that sense. It is a question of the thing; even although the thing may not be officially stated. If the thing is there we can name it. That is one of the greatest principles that came out in the human race: Adam could name things.
SMcC Would you say something more about the assembly and the city. Do not the two ideas correspond?
JT They do; you work on those lines in Detroit?
SMcC Yes; but you would not call a subdivision an assembly?
JT No; I would not think it is properly. It says here, “And having chosen them elders in each assembly”. I would say it would be local, the only assembly in the position in the city. It would not mean a city where there are several subdivisions, because the word ‘elder’ would cover the city then. I think it is because there is only one assembly that the word ‘elder’ is put in here.
SMcC That is very helpful.
ANW Would our brother’s reference to Titus suggest perhaps an eldership that would make for assembly material? Establishing elders in every city might be a little different from choosing elders in each assembly.
JT There would not be any elders at all if there were no assembly. If the assembly did not exist the elders would not exist. Therefore Titus’ commission inferred that there were assemblies in Crete, and possibly one or more in a town. Therefore, he [p. 534] was to ordain them even although there might be five of them; there would be five persons to rule in them or more; that would be elders in each city instead of each assembly. It is to bring out the city idea which has had a great place amongst us during the last few years, because boundaries enter into that matter.
CAM When you said that eldership would not apply to a local meeting, you were referring to a meeting in a city that had more than one meeting.
JT Just so. I think that is important too.
CAM In the ordinary way, I take it, in a great many of our cities we have only one meeting; then eldership would be local, would it not?
JT The force of it would be in that meeting.
ATD Verse 23 has reference to three cities.
JT Well, it is the word ‘assembly’. It is not the word ‘city’ that governs what is said; what is said is the assembly. It is to bring out, I think, that the metropolitan idea had ceased. The word ‘assembly’ does not appear really in Acts 2; it should not be there properly. The metropolitan idea was still in power. The word ‘assembly’ if it were used without specification, would mean Jerusalem. It is said that Paul went up and saluted the assembly. He went up to the metropolis. That meant he saluted the brethren in Jerusalem; he saluted the whole assembly there. That had continued right on until this chapter, even in chapter 9 where you have the word, ‘assemblies’. Some think the plural is not there, but even if it be there we have not got the idea of eldership in it. That is brought in in this chapter. That is the reason I have alluded to it. This is a section and it runs on; Paul’s line runs on. It is not the metropolitan line; it is the individual assembly line. That is to say, the assembly has authority locally in its own realm, in its own sphere. It cannot be governed by any other assembly, whereas [p. 535] the metropolitan idea means it can. Such an idea means that some assembly has authority universally, and Rome has arrogated that authority to itself, but it is false. The only universal idea now is Jerusalem above, and that is the influence we are said to be under, she is our mother.
APT Chapter 15 could only be possible then in relation to the apostles.
JT Just so; because the matter was settled in Jerusalem. That is, their influence is an occurrence of that. Therefore, Rome is false in the idea of the assertion of universal dominion or universal influence in the assembly sense. Jerusalem above is the only assembly that has universal influence, and that is an abstract idea, because the assembly is not above yet except in a moral sense.
APT An elder in Washington might be a help in government at the same time.
JT Quite so; he might be a help if he had the gift of rule, the gift of government; but the gift of government is not the gift of an elder. The gift of government is another matter, although it runs very close to the idea of eldership, yet eldership is not a gift.
APT Perhaps help is needed by a good many that a brother who is an elder in Washington or Baltimore might be a help in a local difficulty in either place.
JT Only in the sense of having a gift. To exercise eldership in any other place would be going beyond his limit. The gift of government is specified in 1 Corinthians 12. Among the gifts is the gift of government and a man that has the gift of government has a right to interfere or to say something anywhere, but not simply because he is an elder. An elder is more a matter of the man’s age and experience and the state of his house, [p. 536] etc.
SMcC In the end of the last chapter of 1 Peter, does eldership there have a more extended thought? It is not quite the thought that we are referring to now. Peter speaks of being their fellow-elder. Eldership there alludes to something more than what is local.
JT I think it means in that particular case, experience, involving of course, what he was as an apostle. The apostles all could exercise ability in that sense. Even Paul would have liberty anywhere, but it would be because of his, gift and experience.
ANW He seems to emphasize three phases of elderhood in his epistle to Timothy. “Who take the lead” as though there may be some who do not take the lead; and then “those labouring in word and teaching”, 1 Timothy 5: 17.
JT Very good; but it gives everything its place. With a man who can take the lead it is more the moral power he has that you have to listen to him because of his experience and power in other ways. He is a man who is proved to have moral power, and we cannot ignore him. But then if he has ability to teach that only adds to him. Then, take a man such as Peter, an apostle. If he is there, we must listen to him. He is one of the Lord’s apostles. There were only twelve and Paul and Barnabas were added to that.
RBP Does “Paul the aged” suggest experience?
JT Just so; “being such an one as Paul the aged”.
RM If you were in a locality where you felt the need of elderhood, what would you do? Pray about it?
JT I would do that and more than that; I have done more than that. In recent times the enemy has had a certain peculiar time among the gatherings. They were being upset some years back about this, that and the other thing; especially about the [p. 537] collection, and different views arose. What was needed was experience. That was used. Many were able to say things that were right in this matter of the collection, for instance, and the matter is now settled as far as I know. We have no more difficulty about it. It is because the truth has come out in a measure of authority, and these are all important matters. No matter where a man is, if he has authority he ought to be listened to.
RWS You support those who are in the right.
JT Quite so, and maybe give instruction that had not been understood.
RBP Would you say a little more as to the gift of government?
JT There it is. In 1 Corinthians 12, it is among the gifts; it is a lower grade, I would say, and I use the word ‘grade’ rightly. There are grades; and a man that has the gift of government would not be equal to a man who is an evangelist or a prophet or a pastor. So that I would not classify him very much, but still he is to be recognized, that God has given such as that, who has the gift of government. It is not one thing; it is usually in the plural, governments. That would mean persons; more than one person who has that ability.
GMacPh It is those who are ordained who are qualified to rule in the assembly. The idea of ordination of the elders in each local assembly is that they are qualified to rule.
JT It is choice; it is a question of the apostolic choice. Paul and Barnabas would say, There is a man; we ought to put upon him the thought of responsibility for the stabilisation of the assembly in this town. I remember fifty years ago there was trouble in Baltimore, and there was a man who led publicly in the meetings, and he said, Do you not know that I am an elder; that I have a gift? That was his assertion, and that was the claim he put [p. 538] forward that he should rule in the assembly in Baltimore. The truth is he and several others were creating trouble in the meeting. The Lord did not give them the rule of the meeting. That is what we are speaking about. It is the stabilisation of the meetings that is needed, and that comes about from men who are experienced; if you add to the idea of experience ability to rule in the sense of saying what is right, asserting what is right in the way of conduct, and what should be done in any matter.
AR It says, “shepherd the assembly of God”, Acts 20: 28.
JT Just so.
AW “Light is sown for the righteous, and joy for the upright in heart”, Psalm 97:11. Would that be eternal life or eldership?
JT Light is sown; that is what God does. God is good to us, and a righteous man will get light. Whatever he may need in the way of light, it is sown; as if it were a matter to be sown in the field.
AAT In regard to the gift of government, have we a sample brother in the New Testament who is marked by the gift of government?
JT I think all the apostles would be. Their epistles would show they had it. If you examine their epistles you can tell. Take Peter; he had the gift of government; so did Paul and James, I would say.
Ques Would you say that the apostle recognized in Titus something of that when he said, “For this cause I left thee in Crete, that thou mightest go on to set right what remained unordered”, Titus 1: 5?
JT Paul selected him for that purpose. Crete was a difficult place. He tells us why: “Cretans are always liars”. They were difficult people. These characteristic things are apt to creep in amongst us in the meetings, and we must not overlook that. Certain places are characterised by certain things.
[p. 539] For instance, coal miners are difficult hard men; people who work down in the bowels of the earth and have to dig coal. They are apt to be hard. They have to earn their living by hard work; and so whatever the characteristic of a community is we have to watch against that. Take this city, for instance; take notice of what characterises the city. So it was in Crete. There were several meetings in Crete. The question is what characterised Crete at Paul’s time. Jerusalem would be what the city was, religiously, pretentious, etc.
AAT Do you mean Luke was a physician?
JT He might carry the ‘doctor’ idea too far, and become characterised by it, for it is only one idea; whereas the gift of government is given and God takes account of the communities in which the assemblies are, where the gift has to serve. If anything would protrude in him he has to watch that, that it is not to be relied on too much.
ANW Luke gave way to Paul. Paul was the recoverer.
JT These things are all very practical because there are certain features that characterise certain places and we have to watch those.
EAL Would a place like Crete be marked by isolation? It is an island position.
JT An island suggests isolation.
RWS An elder in each city for each assembly, the plural idea; I suppose the more elders the better the meetings.
JT Just so. You feel how they needed it at Ephesus. Paul called them over to him and put on them the burden of the government of that assembly. We have not much time to say more, but we should keep in mind the features of this particular gathering, and the first one we noticed was the unity of two brothers, and then the distinctive sign that is noted in this place. It says, “And a certain man in [p. 540] Lystra, impotent in his feet, sat, being lame from his mother’s womb, who had never walked. This man heard Paul speaking” (Notice the reference to Paul’s speaking, because we had it already and God is calling attention to it: a man who can speak so that men are helped), “who, fixing his eyes on him”, meaning you have to discern persons who are the subjects of the work of God, like Abigail, to whom David said, “Blessed be thy discernment”, “and seeing that he had faith to be healed, said with a loud voice, Rise up straight upon thy feet: and he sprang up and walked”. That is what the man did. Paul discerned what was the trouble and met it and used his voice, saying, “Rise up straight upon thy feet”. It was very urgent. The use of the voice is to be noted in ministry; the way the voice is used. He sprang up and walked. The man in chapter 3 was lame, but here this man had never walked. It would be an allusion to the gentiles; they never knew how to walk according to God.
RBP Peter in chapter 3 invites that man that you were speaking of to look on them. “Look on us”, he says.
JT Yes; he was to see how the fellowship was to go on; he had been brought into the fellowship. The point was the fellowship. He heard Peter and John. It is the idea of holding together in a band, a bundle of life; but this man never walked.
GMacPh Conditions like this in a locality need more than prayer. They need the right kind of speaking.
JT And the right kind of voice; the voice has to do with it, showing the idea of a man is in God’s mind.
JET Would spiritual discernment come in here too?
JT That is just what we have said. Paul fixed his eyes on this man and he raised his voice accordingly,
as if to make it urgent. “Rise up straight upon thy feet”.
CAM Speaking of this matter of using our voices, sometimes we are able to recognise the feelings in a certain local setting, but we have hardly done much in just calling attention to the defect. The power is in the positive idea. He actually discerned faith and brought power in. That reminds us of the life of Christ.
JT The voice of Paul must have carried something to the man’s soul. The divine ideal is carried in Paul’s voice. I believe that raises the whole question of gift and assembly formation; how we are all to be perfected. Paul says, “to the end that we may present every man perfect in Christ”, Colossians 1: 28. We do not want any dwarfs or deformed people. Paul had in mind that this would be a good brother; he would be an elder.
Ques Does the idea of personality enter into the voice?
JT Very much. That word ‘personality’ traces it back to the Lord where everything begins. What a Person He was!
PO There is authority in the voice too.
JT Just so; it was an apostolic voice. That is another matter in this book. They persevered in the teaching and fellowship of the apostles. That was the beginning of this book.
GW Would not the voice of James in the next chapter show authority? “Brethren, listen to me” (verse 13).
JT That was authority in the assembly because he had an apostolic place.
Ques Would you say this idea of speaking and the voice come out in all their blessedness in Christ? “Never man spoke thus, as this man speaks”.
JT Just so; what a Man He was! So Mark says, “He does all things well”, Mark 7: 37. But [p. 542] the speaking is beautiful. Luke touches on that; the words of grace that were coming out of His mouth. That is beautiful. Luke has the ornament, as it were, the ornamentation of the vessel; as they were coming out of His mouth. It is not simply the things that He said, but the words of grace that were coming out of His mouth.
GMacPh Is there more emphasis laid on the thought of the voice than on the thought of speaking? I was thinking of Acts 9, the reference to hearing the voice; not only did he hear the word but he heard the voice.
JT Are you speaking of Paul?
GMacPh I was wondering if the voice would convey the kind of persons that speak the word.
JT Just so; we never fail when we come back to Christ and Paul. If you can get Christ and Paul you have ideals you can go by.
RWS He fixed his eyes on him; that would be a help. We do not preach looking at the ceiling but at the audience.
JT Just so; his countenance ought to be seen. It is a matter of the touch of health in it. The beginning of the second book of Psalms brings that in: “the health of my countenance, and my God”, Psalm 42:11. God’s countenance has salvation in it and it imparts it to your countenance. So the face of a man is made so much of in Ezekiel.
PO So Barnabas and Paul would zealously guard what belongs to the Lord too in not accepting sacrifice from the crowd.
JT If we are to get on through this chapter we must run on to that. The devil would revive the old pagan empire, and he has revived it; not that we want to name things too much to incite antagonism, but the pagan empire has been revived in a certain system that we do not need to name, and I believe it is in mind here. After Paul’s performance of this great miracle it says, “But the crowds, who saw what Paul had done, lifted up their voices in Lycaonian, saying, The gods, having made themselves like men, are come down to us”. How remarkable that is. I was thinking of “sons of God” who came down in Genesis 6; that came down and corrupted the earth. “The gods, having made themselves like men, are come down to us. And they called Barnabas Jupiter, and Paul Mercury, because he took the lead in speaking”. They are just deifying his speaking. The Greeks loved oratory and would make it an extraordinary thing in a man, like Demosthenes. “And the priest of Jupiter who was before the city, having brought bulls and garlands to the gates, would have done sacrifice along with the crowds. But the apostles Barnabas and Paul, having heard it, rent their garments, and rushed out to the crowd, crying and saying, Men, why do ye these things?”. See how the apostolic voice is there; “Why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you, preaching to you to turn from these vanities to the living God, who made the heaven, and the earth, and the sea, and all things in them; who in the past generations suffered all the nations to go in their own ways, though indeed he did not leave himself without witness, doing good, and giving to you from heaven rain and fruitful seasons, filling your hearts with food and gladness. And saying these things, they with difficulty kept the crowds from sacrificing to them”. They would set up the old pagan empire; that is what the devil would do. Then it says, as if God came in to check all this, “But there came Jews from Antioch and Iconium, and having persuaded the crowds and stoned Paul, drew him out of the city”. See how they turn; we cannot trust them, politicians and the like. “Having persuaded the crowds and stoned Paul, drew him out of the city, supposing him to have died. But while the disciples encircled him”. Now we come back to the circle of fellowship which has come into strong vogue amongst us, the word ‘circle’. It really originates in Mark. “He rose up and entered into the city”. So that the circle of the saints is now the great thought among the brethren; the circle.
PO There is power in life there.
JT Yes; where the circle is there is a link all around. I suppose there is some allusion to it in the heavens. There are certain things in an astronomical sense that would suggest the idea of a circle, how the brethren move together and how they love one another. “By this shall all know that ye are disciples of mine, if ye have love amongst yourselves”, John 13: 35. That is the word, love amongst yourselves; love is amongst us.
VCL Does it extend the thought of revival from Paul and Barnabas to where the system itself is now able to carry the matter on? I was thinking of the circle of the saints. The saints are now all filled with what was started by Paul and Barnabas.
JT So that it says, “And having announced the glad tidings”. The word ‘circle’ is the word one would not like to get away from. “But while the disciples encircled him, he rose up and entered into the city”. As you were saying, the idea of life comes in, and I believe the idea of resurrection enters into this chapter; the principle of resurrection, not simply the raising up of the man, the lame man, but the principle of resurrection in the apostle; in the minister. “And having announced the glad tidings to that city, and having made many disciples, they returned to Lystra, and Iconium, and Antioch”, (this is Antioch in Pisidia) “establishing the souls of the disciples, exhorting them to abide in the faith, and that through many tribulations we must enter into the kingdom of God. And having chosen them elders in each assembly, having prayed with fastings,
they committed them to the Lord, on whom they had believed”. And then the chapter runs on to what we have already alluded to. “And having arrived, and having brought together the assembly, they related to them all that God had done with them, and that he had opened a door of faith to the nations”. The assembly there would be the assembly at Antioch proper (chapter 13: 1). This is a great matter. “And they stayed no little time with the disciples”. This is a point that has come up lately, that brethren who have gift to go out to use their gift and exercise it, and perhaps ignore the local conditions in which they may be set; the home front, as we may call it. It has come up in London, and New York, and many places, so that the servants have to be watchful not to forget the home front in exercising their gift; but to stay with the brethren. “And they stayed no little time with the disciples”. That is with the disciples in Antioch.
GVD What quality of the apostle is suggested in his desire to return to the points he had previously visited?
JT Just to see how they got on. What is alluded to is characteristic of Timothy. He had no one like-minded who cared how the saints got on. I think it would be a general feature of a servant, that he has an eye on how the saints get on; not simply their conversion, but how they get on.
AAT Was Paul local at Antioch?
JT Well, I should not like to say that, but he certainly showed something of that kind. He would be concerned about the local conditions at Antioch. As someone said this morning, it was a key city; it was for a time at least, and Paul would be concerned that it should remain that. It would be a power in Syria and no doubt it was. His presence there would make it that. So that he and Barnabas acted as local brothers really, going up as [p. 546] sort of delegates to Jerusalem in this matter of circumcision.
AAT Sometimes our brethren have the privilege of going to a distance and ministering and then coming back. We are glad to see them, but should they be encouraged to report something of their visit and the intercourse with the brethren?
JT That is too metropolitan. I do not think I would encourage that too much. Let them tell it in an ordinary way; let it come out. Paul says about the Corinthians that he told everywhere in every place how they were getting on; he made much of the Corinthians. I believe that it is a matter that should be casual rather than formal. We are apt to sink down into formalities. I notice in certain parts that I visit, not so much in this country, that they usually have prayer before going to bed, which is nice, but it is apt to be formal; and if a brother is staying there and he is tired he cannot go to bed until that happens. I think we ought to be on our guard against mere formalities. “Thus I ordain in all the assemblies”, 1 Corinthians 7: 17. He would do certain things and what he would do would have power in it; but we might do it and it would lose its power.
CAM I think that is a very good suggestion. I suppose in a place like that the man would say the same thing every night.