GOD'S ASSEMBLY
GOD’S ASSEMBLY
1 Corinthians 1:1 - 3; 1 Corinthians 11:17 - 22; 1 Corinthians 14:23 - 25; 1 Corinthians 12:28
JT What is in mind is to consider the assembly, that is, how it is employed as such as seen in this letter. There are other scriptures bearing on the subject, but these four are selected to show: firstly, the general thought, that it is God’s assembly in any given place; then, secondly, that it is employed locally for the service of God, inclusive of the celebration of the Lord’s supper; and, thirdly, that it is viewed as in chapter 14, come together in all its members, that is in each person belonging to it, for spiritual ministry, and that it is itself to be ministered to and that this ministry is to be edifying; and then, fourthly, that the gifts are set in it according to chapter 12, implying its universal bearing. This will lead, I believe, to our seeing perhaps more clearly than before that, even as used in the celebration of the Lord’s supper, it is still God’s assembly, and therefore the thought of God in the sense of ownership and control attaches to it, even whilst the Lord’s supper is being celebrated, for, as to the very subject of the Lord’s supper, the apostle says, “Do ye despise the assembly of God?”. Their conduct implied that they despised the assembly of God in what they were doing. So that, although the celebration of the Lord’s supper is limited to the dominical idea, as the passages in chapters 10 and 11 which relate to it show, the thought of God is not to be ignored. Is what I have said clear, do you think?
FW In that way is it the service of God right through?
JT Yes, it all enters into the service of God, the Lord’s supper included.
[p. 226] Ques Will you say a little more what you mean as to the assembly being employed in this epistle?
JT Well, it is conveyed, I think, in the verses read from chapter 11, “When ye come therefore together into one place, it is not to eat the Lord’s supper”, meaning that they were not conducting themselves rightly because of the way they acted; it should have been the Lord’s supper; that was the intent. They were to come together in assembly to break bread, to celebrate the Lord’s supper; and so in Acts 20:7, “we being assembled”, it says “to break bread”, that is, the thing itself is necessary now. It had been done in houses, according to Acts 2, but now it necessitates the assembly; the assembly indeed is employed by the Lord, and singing in it is referred to in Hebrews; and it also has the place of the house of God in Hebrews, “Whose house are we, if indeed we hold fast the boldness and the boast of hope firm to the end” Hebrews 3:6, so that it takes on the character of the sanctuary. Do you think that is right?
Rem Yes. I was thinking perhaps we have looked at the assembly more as the place of our enjoyment, instead of seeing what it is for God, as you speak of it, to be employed for Him.
JT Yes, and in that respect I suppose we should not overlook the Lord’s first word as to it: “I will build my assembly” Matthew 16:18, He says, as if He would use it thus.
PL Is it the vessel for God’s testimony as to His rights over the earth: “The earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof” Psalm 24:1, among other thoughts?
JT It is the vessel He has now — quite so, as of old He had Israel. Only that the thought of the service of God was brought down to a special family, Aaron and his house and the Levites; they had [p. 227] a material tabernacle, but it is the same idea; the assembly takes the place, not only of the tabernacle but of Israel itself. The primary thought of Israel was that it was to be a nation of priests and God was to have it in that peculiar way among the nations; now He has the assembly.
FI Do you mean in the Lord’s supper there is a service that goes on in a dual way, that is, what is due to God and what is due to the Lord, at the same time?
JT Well, ‘at the same time’ brings it down to detail, which is worthy of consideration. The dominical part, as we rightly speak of it, implies that it is in regard of the Lord Himself, that there is something that relates to Himself in it. Some of us lately were speaking of a certain king making a marriage for his son. The king took control of the marriage feast; there is nothing at all about the son appreciating it there but what is kept in mind is what the king did for his son. I think, in a general way, that is applicable to what we are speaking of; it is God’s assembly and He honours His Son in it. But then the celebration of the Lord’s supper has a special place. It will not go on in the world to come, as far as we can see; it refers only to the period of the Lord’s absence from this world; it is necessitated by that indeed, so it is not a continuous thought. The service of God will go on eternally, but the Lord’s supper is a special thing that involves relations between Himself and His own, the assembly itself, during the period of His absence: so it is to be considered in that light and therefore it is a dominical thought, whereas in general the service is God’s, God honours the Son and the Son honours the Father, for the Lord has laid down that the Son must be honoured as the Father is honoured. So the great feast in Matthew 22 would point, in a general [p. 228] way, to how God honours Christ, but the assembly is the sphere of it. Do you think that?
FI Yes. What you have in mind is the great thought of assembly service; what is due to the Lord will uphold this.
JT It has in mind that part, and is provisional, only applying to the period of the Lord’s absence from this world, but the Lord’s service will go on millennially and eternally.
PL Is that special part more inward and spiritual, hence “My assembly”? If it is God’s assembly, is that God’s rights in relation to His service and testimony in a more public way?
JT I think He has rights in it; it is put in that way, He has purchased it. It is a peculiar expression, “purchased with the blood of his own” Acts 20:28, the blood of Christ; but it has cost Him that, and He has rights in it and He implies it here. If He wishes to honour His Son in it, He can do that freely and He does. Another thing that is provisional is the house of God, the idea referring to the earth; it will not apply eternally as far as I see. We have the Father’s house, but the house of God refers to what we get in Israel and is continued on now and will be, as Ezekiel shows, in the millennium too. So there are provisional ideas attaching to the assembly, that is, ideas that are not permanent, and the Lord’s supper is included in these. I think it is worth while viewing the matter in this way, so that we may have suitable thoughts as we eat the Lord’s supper, that a wider circle is involved, not called into activity, but about to be, and intelligence enables us to act rightly in each position.
FI Does the primary thought of the assembly stand in relation to God, but He employs it to honour His Son?
JT Yes, He honours His Son down here in Matthew 22 and in Luke 14, too.
[p. 229] Ques Have you in mind that this relates to a locality particularly in this provisional setting you are speaking of?
JT It does, that is how it stands, I think. That is why I selected this epistle for it affords more light, I think, as to the assembly and the use made of it divinely than any other. The more one looks into it the more remarkable are the number of references to it, not only the word ‘assembly’, but the body of Christ and the temple of God; and indeed it is in that verse called “the Christ”, meaning it is an anointed vessel here, as He was for God.
EG The first thought as to the tabernacle was that God should dwell among them.
JT That is quite true. In the antitype that is seen in Ephesians, but it is the primary thought of God; primary thoughts are generally thrown out first in scripture and details follow.
PH Will you say another word as to the Lord’s singing in the assembly in Hebrews 2?
JT I only mentioned it there just now because of the question of the Lord using it coming up, how it is used, that that is one of the uses made of it, He sings in the assembly; but in itself that leads us on to the final thought in the assembly, that is not a provisional thing, it is what we shall enjoy finally.
PH I thought you were referring to the use made of the assembly by Christ just as you were referring to the use made of the assembly by God for the celebrating of His Son — did I understand you to say that that goes into eternity — Hebrews 2?
JT I believe that is the first note after the Lord Jesus arises from amongst the dead, “I will declare thy name to my brethren; in the midst of the assembly will I sing thy praises” Hebrews 2:12; that is a final thought, a primary and final thought.
[p. 230] Ques Does that not belong to the universal position now, but what we are considering at the moment is the local setting?
JT It does. I thought, in order to understand the subject, we ought to take it as it is here. 1 Corinthians does not go as far as that; it is very initial but very essential.
AWR Does that emphasise the greatness of the vessel of praise in Hebrews 2?
JT It does. Our first consideration is what the assembly is as seen in the first scripture read — the assembly of God which is in Corinth. It is seen throughout from this point of view and is indeed in one passage ranged alongside the Jew and the gentile, so that it is very specifically the public side of the assembly that is in mind.
Rem In Corinth it takes account of all that were in the place as over against it.
JT That is obvious; not simply all the Lord’s people in Corinth, but the assembly of God — the Jew, the gentile and the assembly of God — a known public thing there; a most important thing to keep before us, because it is what God has as over against what man has. The title “the Christ” applied to it in chapter 12 would mean it is anointed as Christ was anointed here in testimony.
Ques Do you not get a cluster of beautiful thoughts suggested in Psalm 74:2, “Remember thine assembly, which thou hast purchased of old, which thou hast redeemed to be the portion of thine inheritance, this mount Zion, wherein thou hast dwelt”?
JT A very rich allusion to what we are speaking of, but going further really than this epistle: it brings in mount Zion. You might think he was alluding to all Israel, and in a way he is, but he is linking up in his mind the more spiritual side of the [p. 231] position, mount Zion; that is where the whole matter lay.
Ques Is the apostle concerned that the assembly might be available locally in a right state for the Lord’s use?
JT Yes, that is in mind. They were to purge out the old leaven; then he says, “according as ye are unleavened” 1 Corinthians 5:7 — they are held fundamentally to be for God.
Reverting to what has been quoted from Psalm 74, the psalms are very rich in allusions to what we have been speaking of. Take any of the three great holy convocations; there were seven, but three are selected in Deuteronomy, that is, the feast of the passover, the feast of Pentecost and the feast of tabernacles, I think in the reference in the psalm what God had on any of those occasions would be in mind. If we view them abstractly and assume that they were just as God would wish them to be, that the people came up in holy separation to God, full of Himself, full of praise and full of reverence for Himself and love to one another, what He would have at any given time in Jerusalem on any such occasion! That would be Israel, that would be the assembly that He had.
Ques Would not that bring to pass an exercise to be constantly living, as it were, in the enjoyment of communion with God as each one composing the assembly in any locality?
JT The males came up before God in Deuteronomy. It was from the divine point of view a very great matter, and not one was to be empty. So you can see the myriads of Israel as they went up, how pleasing they were to God even in going up, what joy He had in His people, joying over them with singing. Well now, we ought to be able to reach such a thought in our localities, bringing it down to any locality, and this whole matter is God’s, He has [p. 232] had it in mind and it has now come about, and this epistle would show that is dominical, it is the Lord. Divine authority is seen in the Lord, in Jesus, so that we have formally stated in this epistle, “There are gods many and lords many, yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom all things, and we for him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him”, 1 Corinthians 8:6. So that the initial part of the service is the lordship of Christ, He has His own matter between Him and His saints, and the assembly too, for the bread denotes it; He has His own part with us, and we recognise that it is His part, it is the Lord’s supper. It is a provisional matter whilst He is away, but it runs into the great matter of the service of God; that is a primary and eternal thought.
Ques Would it be in keeping to refer to Exodus and the authority that was given to Moses, not only ministerially, but all the instruction, all that was for God dependent on the people listening to Moses? Is not that the start particularly in our localities?
JT That helps greatly, the service of Moses as typical of the Lord in His authority. So, as redeemed, it says they believed in the Lord and His servant Moses — that is to say, they believed on the Lord Jesus. One is struck by much that Moses said of himself in Exodus, indicating that the Lord Jesus takes things on and carries them through in authority. He is making the assembly in its relations to Himself all the more suitable for the great primary and final thoughts.
Rem In Revelation 1:6 we get that we are a kingdom of “priests to his God and Father”. Revelation 1:6 He has done that — that bears on what we are saying. Christ has made us a kingdom, as if He were to say, This is essential to the great end in mind. Then the next thing is, “priests to his God and Father”.
PH In connection with what you have said as to Exodus, the word ‘assembly’ comes in in chapter 12 where God says to Moses, “Speak unto all the assembly of Israel” Exodus 12:3. Would it be right to say that that is really God’s assembly held in Israel and His instructions need obedience on our part to our Moses in order that we may begin to have part in the service of God?
JT Just so. That shows how the whole thought is involved in the word ‘assembly’, but it is really seen concretely in their celebrating something. He was approaching the great subject of the passover there, and so there are two words used, as we have often noticed; one denotes the assembly with enough persons to carry on, to execute whatever is in mind; the other word denotes every person that belongs to it, the passover requires that primarily, so that the next-door neighbour could be brought in to help to eat the lamb. But it is remarkable there that the word comes in as covering the whole nation, but with a view to a particular observance, which later is linked on, in Deuteronomy, with the feast of Pentecost and the feast of tabernacles. The idea would appear in a concrete way before God when they were celebrating these great occasions in which God would have part. When a man was ploughing his field or feeding his cattle or occupied with other industrial matters, that would not convey the thought of Israel being God’s assembly; but then, God places His name in a certain place and they are to come there and not to appear before Him empty.
Ques Does that emphasise the real importance of our gatherings together?
JT I think all we have been saying as to Israel does, what it was in the mind of God as God’s assembly, and how that worked out in the males appearing before God in Jerusalem three times a year and not appearing empty. All that works out [p. 234] in what we are speaking of; we have God before us in coming together.
Rem I was thinking perhaps we have been a little inclined to think of the assembly in an abstract way because of local conditions, whereas in what you are saying as to Exodus, the thought applies, though all may not be present, and gives great force to our actual meetings.
JT It does. “All Israel that were present” 2 Chronicles 31:1 is mentioned in connection with Hezekiah in regard of one of these occasions, although the number was reduced. It is not a loose thought here of the persons themselves being it because we are nominally of it, but there is an exercise leading up to it.
HOE Would that be indicated in Mark 14:26, “Having sung a hymn, they went out to the mount of Olives”; all joined in?
JT Yes, that would clearly be a movement in the service of God. You can see in the tribes going up what exercise there would be, and every step would imply they were going to meet God. How important that every step should imply intelligence!
PL So “They go from strength to strength: each one will appear before God in Zion”, Psalm 84:7.
JT Very good — “strength to strength” — we are not jaded when we get there.
Ques It is a universal gathering; would we always have what is universal in view when we come together in assembly?
JT Yes, in a secondary way; we have primarily the thought of the local position before us. They came together, “we being assembled to break bread” Acts 20:7, that can never be anything else but a local position now; but we work up to the other; we have the other in mind.
Rem I was thinking of the first passage read, “with all that in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ”.
JT [p. 235] The whole position is in mind, but it is “every place”, it is every locality that is referred to: we have the universal thought, only in the sense of the number of gatherings there are in the world. But the other thought is the saints viewed personally as all of the assembly of God in a spiritual way; Ephesians contemplates this. The verses read contemplate the universality; they refer to the number of gatherings there are in the world, but the universal bearing spiritually is in Ephesians; that it is what we are, “One body and one Spirit” Ephesians 4:4, that is the spiritual side; there are not two bodies or two houses of God, but there are many assemblies, and that is what is in mind in the first passage.
PL The unity, the catholicity, lying in the person.
JT That is it. You are glad to hear letters of commendation on the Lord’s day morning; it is what the Lord has here while He is away; but Ephesians contemplates what He has spiritually, one great idea in assemblies.
Ques Is that why God delights in the increase of the number of assemblies?
JT Quite so. The assemblies were increased day by day.
Ques Does the loaf represent the universal thought?
JT Yes, it represents what is local and what is general, the local merges into the general. There are not two fellowships, there is the local and the general aspect of it, and both are in mind in this epistle.
Ques Would it be right to say that we qualify for the general universal side by accepting the adjustment the Lord gives us in our localities?
JT I think that is right; it is a question of spiritual power. Many of us have part in the local setting, and the Lord takes account of it, whereas [p. 236] we may not enter on the universal side of the service of God.
Ques Would this in any sense connect with the thought of the assembly in the wilderness, the saints viewed in their localities, all linked together, but not so much the heavenly side as reached, but on the way to it?
JT That is right. We rightly sing, ‘In wilderness surroundings’. (376:2). This town is a wilderness to the brethren as they sit down together, but then they pass out of that, in the measure in which they have spiritual power, into the divine realm.
Rem So in the addresses to the seven churches the Lord is calling attention to this thought, in Ephesus and so forth, what is in the town.
JT That is helpful, that is what we have here. It is well for young people to dwell on this a bit, because the Lord is helping us on these lines, and it would be a great matter to have all the young people moving along with the truth; because things are stated in the clearest possible manner in a meeting like this, for example, and next Lord’s day, in the assembly service, you find them contradicted by what is said, in the hymns given out, and the like. So it is well for us all to be on the alert as to what God is leading us on in, so that we are all in it.
Rem That we might act together as intelligent people in the assembly, and especially on the Lord’s day morning.
JT Yes, and that all the assemblies should be governed by the same principles, “Thus I ordain in all the assemblies” 1 Corinthians 7:17, the apostle says.
PH Is the preparation for this, as to the celebration of the Supper and God’s service, in our coming together “in assembly”; not so many individuals coming together as an automatic matter, but in [p. 237] assembly?
JT That is the next thing to notice, that the wording in chapter 11:17 is, “But in prescribing to you on this which I now enter on, I do not praise, namely, that ye come together, not for the better, but for the worse. For first, when ye come together in assembly, I hear there exist divisions among you”. And then he goes on to say (verse 20), “When ye come therefore together into one place, it is not to eat the Lord’s supper”, clearly meaning that it ought to have been that, only their conduct forbad them enjoying the Lord’s supper; they came together in assembly for that purpose.
FI It might help us if you would tell us the distinction between coming together in assembly in chapter 11, and the whole assembly come together in one place. Some of us, I think, may not be clear as to that.
JT Well, the distinction pointed out in Exodus 12 will help. Before any remarks are made, perhaps we might listen while the note to Exodus 12:6 in the New Translation is read. (’Congregation is, I apprehend, the actual subsisting congregation composed of all its members; assembly, more the congregation looked at as a moral whole, a corporate person before God’.) These remarks have been a great help in entering on what we are saying now. 1 Corinthians 11 alludes to the latter definition; all the saints may not be present, but, as it is said, a moral whole, that is, enough are there for the idea, for one whole idea, so that the Lord’s supper should be celebrated. Chapter 14 alludes to the other definition, namely, all the saints personally being present as the assembly in one place, every member present.
PL It needs as many as possible in the city for hearing the word of God, in chapter 14; whereas in the earlier setting in relation to the Lord’s supper, it is a question of what is most serviceable in regard [p. 238] of numbers and subdivisions in that way where there are several gatherings for the service of God.
JT Quite so. God obtains more from a number of gatherings, from four in a city for instance, than from one, even though the one had as many persons as the four. The idea of one whole that is alluded to in the note read just now is perhaps little understood, but it is very essential to the idea of the service of God, especially the Lord’s supper. We must arrive at one idea, that we are not simply so many persons, but “we being many, are ... one body” 1 Corinthians 10:17; that is stressed in relation to the Lord’s supper, so we must learn to merge with one another in the power of the Spirit. So, running right through Scripture, beginning with Exodus in relation to the passover, we have the thought “neither shall ye break a bone thereof” Exodus 12:46. Now if every member were essential, an absentee would forbid the service, because all were not present. Where the whole idea is included in that a bone shall not be broken, the framework stands, and the more spiritual the persons are the more the framework would appear; hence we have, “neither shall ye break a bone thereof”, and Joseph’s bones, mentioned at the same time. Whether it be Christ, whether it be the assembly, whether it be any one of us, the thought goes through.
Rem Thomas was absent, but that did not interfere with the Lord’s coming.
JT It did not, because when you come to Acts 2 the spiritual understanding was present, so it says they were all together.
FI So would it be right to say that, in chapter 11 the thought is more what is characteristic as having the whole thing in view, not the whole being there?
JT Just so; we might have twenty-five subdivisions, and it would apply, they are all together in this attitude, together in assembly. So in Josiah’s passover we have the remark, “All ... Israel that were present” 2 Chronicles 35:18, that is, you have enough of Israel for the thought.
Ques Does “the many”, in 2 Corinthians 2:6 in connection with the rebuke, imply the moral whole?
JT It does imply it; “the many” would mean the whole thought was there.
Ques There were a number of subdivisions in Corinth; does this letter refer to one of them, or did what we get here characterise all the subdivisions in Corinth?
JT It would appear it did. We cannot say there were many subdivisions; there may have been; if so, this must have characterised them all. It would look as if they were all characterised by certain things.
Rem So one subdivision cannot wash its hands of what takes place in another in the same town.
EG That is very important, because whatever happens in one meeting in this town happens in the other; whatever attaches to one attaches to the other. And if there is an elder in this town in one of these meetings, he has to say to the other, too; he is appointed for the city.
JT I think that is good; for if one of the gatherings was immune, in one sense, from what we have as in chapter 5, it was not in another sense; it was in the city and they had to take on the obligation for it.
PH And God being “amongst you” would apply to all in the same way. “He will do homage to God, reporting that God is indeed amongst you”.
JT That is amongst the saints at Corinth; that is alluding to the assembly viewed, as you read from the note, as composed of all its members.
Ques Are not both expressions used in chapter 14?
JT It says, “If therefore the whole assembly come together in one place”. There may be an allusion there to subdivisions, but this meeting does not admit of any subdivisions; all must be present.
Ques What is the difference between that and chapter 11, “When ye come therefore together into one place”?
JT That would be whatever the position was, the ‘ye’ would refer to any subdivisions. Chapter 11 bears throughout on a possible subdivision or subdivisions; the ‘ye’ would be just the persons in any subdivision.
Rem Does it not stand over against the thought of houses in that connection, whereas chapter 14 stands more over against the thought of subdivisions? The “one place” would be in contradistinction to the thought of houses to eat and drink in; whereas “the whole assembly in one place” would be all the saints gathered together in one place literally.
JT Just so. I think the Lord is helping on this point, enabling some of the brethren to see that all the assembly together in one place for ministry is right, and we may expect more from it than from the same kind of a meeting in different subdivisions; we should find the idea of the temple of God working out more. “Ye are the temple of God, and ... the Spirit of God dwells in you” 1 Corinthians 6:19 would work out more effectively in all the saints being in one place than if they are meeting in subdivisions.
FI So you would expect more power and help in a general reading than in a reading in a subdivision.
PL So that, where possible, a reading weekly in a city as a whole would be desirable.
JT I think that has worked out with great effect. One has ventured to commend it to the brethren that, however many subdivisions there may be, the brethren should be together once a week if possible.
[p. 241] It is due to God that what He has in the town should be seen together.
PL The assembly’s history in the town being a weekly one commencing with the first day of the week.
JT Quite so.
Ques You would not call 1 Corinthians 14 a formal convening of the assembly?
JT It would only be in that way, for ministry. It does not say “come together in assembly”, it is the whole assembly coming together in one place; so that the stress is not so much on our attitude as assembling, but that all are there and all are there for the purpose in mind, namely for ministry, particularly prophecy. So that verse 26 enlarges on it by saying, “What is it then, brethren? whenever ye come together, each of you has a psalm” 1 Corinthians 14:26; you can see that is not for the Lord’s supper, it is a question of what you have to give out to the brethren.
PL So He commanded the multitude to sit down on the ground in Matthew in one of the feedings, there are no subdivisions; whereas in Luke, where the service of God is more in mind, the subdivisions are in evidence: they sat down in fifties.
JT That is good.
Ques Is the suggestion here of what you said earlier that the assembly should take the place of Israel in making God known? An unbeliever comes in and God is made known to his conscience.
JT It is perfectly evident that what God set out in Israel has taken form in the assembly.
Ques Is the assembly so delightful to God that, although there is public failure, He provides for it to go on in 2 Timothy, as Moses did in Exodus 32?
JT Yes. We can see how the holy convocations went on; in fact the brightest one is in the days of Hezekiah. It says, “Since the time of Solomon the son of David, king of Israel, there had not been the like in Jerusalem”, 2 Chronicles 30:26.
[p. 242] Now the final scripture is in chapter 12, the assembly in the same sense only in its universal bearing as having the gifts in it. “God has set certain in the assembly: first, apostles; secondly, prophets; thirdly, teachers; then miraculous powers; then gifts of healings; helps; governments; kinds of tongues”. Gifts might be seen in Jerusalem, or anywhere in a way, but it is the universal thought; it is not an office, but a question of power or ability.
Ques Why the change from the body to the assembly?
JT I think just for the reason we are speaking of, that the word ‘assembly’ denotes what God has in this public way; the truth of the body lies in the Spirit more; it is more the inner working of the assembly. The assembly is dependent on the body for its working, but the assembly denotes a number of persons called out, but so constituted that they act with intelligence, are amenable to God and representative of God, a vessel anointed which He can employ according to His purpose in this world for testimony. We can see it now, but presently we shall see it in relation to the millennium and then in relation to eternity.
Ques God has ‘set’ them; what do you say as to that?
JT It is in accord with what we are saying; it belongs to God. We have been looking at certain ways in which He uses it now: He uses it for this purpose — He puts all His gifts there like a setting of precious stones, they are set where they are enhanced, they are supported by the assembly and they adorn the assembly, they are representative of God in it.
FI Chapter 12 is not confined to a local setting, but chapter 14 is; is that [p. 243] right?
JT All we have been speaking of would be local, you might see it at Jerusalem or Antioch, but it is the universal thought, what God has in this scene as inclusive of all the local gatherings in the world.
Ques Why does ‘evangelist’ not come in here; it does in Ephesians?
JT I think the allusion would be to the poverty, that it is a sort of rebuke that evangelisation is absent.
PL No branches could go over the wall; there was no wall at Corinth.
Ques Do you see the thought in Acts 13:1, “Now there were in Antioch, in the assembly which was there, prophets and teachers” and that leads to the branches going over the wall in that case?
JT Yes, conditions were there for it, so two great evangelists are sent out. It is very beautiful to see there the richness of the work of God, the product at Antioch, and do you not think the Spirit would remind us that the foundation at Antioch was by Paul and Barnabas, although the scattered ones began to preach there first? Paul and Barnabas taught a great crowd in the assembly for a year, a remarkable statement, showing that the great idea of the assembly is not only teaching but exemplification in the persons who are learning; the idea is there all the time: they were taught in the assembly for a whole year. So that we are reminded of the need of learning how to be in assembly, how to sit in assembly; the outlook, the attitude of mind, how we are ready for the great divine uses, so that the service of God may go on, whatever it may be.
Ques A complete period, would you not say, a whole year?
JT Quite so.
Ques Why does the apostle number these things? “First ... secondly ... thirdly” — then he adds, “miraculous powers; then gifts of healings; helps; governments; kinds of tongues”.
Is there a reason for stressing the order?
JT I should think the apostles, prophets and teachers are the three great ones; they are superior to any sign gifts. There are no sign gifts mentioned in Ephesians and the order is as here, save that the word ‘evangelists’ is left out; the order in Ephesians is, “apostles ... prophets ... evangelists ... shepherds and teachers”. Ephesians 4:11.
Ques Would it be right to say that, to benefit by the minor gifts, you have to appreciate these others? Would the apostles make way for the teaching, which is a more steady thing?
JT Quite so. It is most important that the truth is forced into your mind by teaching, and you know what to do as taught, how to take part in the assembly and the service of God.
PL Does “after that” suggest in a moral way, that is to say that there is nothing God has put there that does not serve you?
JT Yes, the “miraculous powers”, whatever they may include; then gifts of healings, helps, governments, kinds of tongues. These, you mean, would have their full place; they are not noted in the order but they will have their full place if people are taught.
PH Does that mean the state of things in any locality can only be put right as these things have their place with us?
JT I think so. I think if Paul were present and there is a man with a gift of government, he would even be silent to let him speak — it is so important. Persons who have profited by the other gifts would say, We do not need to make much of miraculous healing, for the testimony of christianity has gone far and wide. Occupy yourself with what is needed; teaching is needed.