SPIRITUAL INSTRUCTION FOR PART IN THE ASSEMBLY (2)
[p. 180] SPIRITUAL INSTRUCTION FOR PART IN THE ASSEMBLY (2)
JT What I had in mind was to follow the spiritual vein of this writer, leading on to the assembly, developed under Paul’s ministry. We may be very much behind what we have heard, and even what we have said. Things are very often taken in by the mind and not assimilated so as to be characteristic of us. It is said here, “And rising up the same hour, they returned to Jerusalem. And they found the eleven, and those with them, gathered together, saying, [p. 182] The Lord is indeed risen and has appeared to Simon. And they related what had happened on the way, and how he was made known to them in the breaking of bread”, Luke 24: 33 - 35.
They had, as you might say, a meeting like this, in which we speak together of certain facts. Yet when they are tested, it is proved that they had not assimilated the truth they had. The appearance of the Lord in their midst would not have caused them to be confounded and frightened, if they really believed what they had been speaking about. This thought runs on from chapter 23, verses 55 and 56. These women had heard the resurrection spoken of and yet came to look for Him, as believing Him to be dead. This, when the Lord had expressly said, “and after three days rise again”, Mark 8: 31. So they have to be reminded of words already heard; “two men suddenly stood by them in shining raiment” and said to them, “Why seek ye the living one among the dead? He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spoke to you, being yet in Galilee, saying, The Son of man must be delivered up into the hands of sinners, and be crucified, and rise the third day”, Luke 24: 5 - 7.
They had not retained these words, yet, most momentous words! We can understand how the disciples would [p. 181] have spoken together of the resurrection; yet when the time came to apply the truth, they failed, and so with us. Have we not often actually spoken of His resurrection in assembly as gathered together? Nevertheless when we were tested, we were not able to apply it. So that it raises the question as to our meetings and our conversations, as to what we may know mentally of what we have heard, and yet may have failed to assimilate. We may have the knowledge of the truth but be unable to apply it. Indeed, it is in the application of truth that it is verified to us.
CCE I remember a brother saying in regard to Mr. Darby’s teaching, that he and several others had sat under him and heard what Mr. Darby had said; but that he now realised they did not really receive it into their souls. They had not assimilated it at the time, but another, afterwards a prominent brother, had really taken it in; in him it became effective.
JT That illustrates what I have in mind.
FJF Does it not need a touch from the Lord privately to understand what He says?
JT It does. These scriptures bring out what adjusting power is necessary among the saints. Divine provision has been made for these weaknesses in us; but it is important to accept and own that the weaknesses exist; that I hear, but do not assimilate; and when the time comes for application, I do not know how to use the truth. It is well to bow to these facts, for the incidents in chapter 24 are not recorded to expose the failure of the disciples. If there were no more in it than that, the Holy Spirit would never have spread abroad the failure of those saints, but it is because what marked them marks us. They are not alone in this, and the Lord would use this chapter as a lesson for us; to bring us to own that these features are marking us, albeit we are conscious of loving the Lord and of valuing the Scriptures. Indeed, we also are prone to speak of things we have not yet assimilated.
“The Lord is indeed risen and has appeared to Simon”, and then the two from Emmaus related what had happened on the way. It was “as they were saying these things, he himself stood in their midst” (verse 36). They were saying that the Lord was risen indeed, when the Lord came in. At that very instant they were speaking of it — nevertheless, when He was there in their midst they were upset, as if it could not be, whereas His presence was intended to confirm than, which it did eventually. “They, being confounded and being frightened, supposed they beheld a spirit”.
BHT The state of our spirit hinders the Lord having His way with us.
JT It does indeed. In reading these scriptures and seeing how remiss were these dear brethren, our thoughts should be to avoid such a situation being produced in our midst. This chapter is like a navigation chart, to which mariners do well to pay attention, in order to avoid the rocks that would damage the ship. If I read the Scriptures prayerfully I note the dangers they point out and that which the Holy Spirit is directing my attention to.
We are reading together at this time about the Lord, that He is risen indeed, and we are speaking of how He is made known to us in the breaking of bread. If the Lord were to appear now corporeally in our midst, what would be the general feeling? Would many be ready for it? I fancy there would not be so much difference in the effect on ourselves.
FFE You mean, not much difference in our bearing from that which we read of in Luke 24?
JT Exactly. Would we be any different from them? John has to say to Peter on another occasion, “It is the Lord”. Peter had not discerned it. We want to be ready to discern the Lord’s presence amongst us.
JMB It says, “their eyes were holden so as not to know him” (verse 16).
JT That verse has to be kept in its setting. In that [p. 183] case, God did it — there is nothing like that here. This is consecutive and cumulative. The inference in the section we are considering at the moment is that God’s intervention should not have been needed. The Lord expects us to discern His presence and not to feel affrighted and confounded. Would the Lord want to come in to affright anyone? Jesus would never do that to His own. If you read Canticles, you will find the bride is never frightened, she is ready. She is remiss sometimes, but notice how instantaneously she discerns her Beloved.
FJF “He taught his disciples and said to them, The Son of man is delivered into men’s hands, and they shall kill him; and having been killed, after three days he shall rise again. But they understood not the saying, and feared to ask him”, Mark 9: 31, 32. Do you think that was the fault?
JT I think so. Why should we be afraid to ask the Lord anything? He would answer if we ask, He took little children in His arms.
FJF If, in gathering together, we were in a state of faith and affection, the effect of the Lord’s presence would not be to confound.
JT No. Affection alone is insufficient, for their devotion was not in question here; but more than that is needed. One must carefully balance things. I see Him and conclude it is the Lord. There is every evidence that it is He. No one else, in just that way, can say, “Peace be unto you!” There is His voice, and His presence. It is Himself! A real Person there, and not, as on the way to Emmaus, in another form, but Himself. I am to discern Him thus. The Lord says, “behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Handle me and see, for a spirit has not flesh and bones as ye see me having” (verse 39). It was this same Person whom they came later to discern. He did not change His form.
JHH The spiritual element in the assembly would always recognise when the Lord is present, would it not?
JT That is what we want to get at — the spiritual element. “The spiritual discerns all things”, 1 Corinthians 2: 15. Discernment belongs peculiarly to the assembly.
HWR We profess to look for the Lord’s coming. If that is real with us, would we be affrighted at it?
JT We should not be. But suppose some one is at a picture show when He comes. What a state of things that would be!
JS Are we not tested as to the kind of hymns we give out in the assembly, and our thanksgivings after the breaking of bread? If we have the spirit of discernment, would we not move in relation to His movements?
JT It is a question of applying the truth. We are tested as to procedure. There is a time for everything, and we ought to know the times. We should be concerned to be spiritual, so that we do understand and are able to discern the Lord and what is suitable to the moment. “I will sing with the spirit, but I will sing also with the understanding”, 1 Corinthians 14: 15. How has the Lord moved? That is to control our movements.
RB If we are to acknowledge our state before the Lord, it calls for deep humiliation.
JT That is what we begin with. We are to put ourselves into this, and acknowledge that we are capable of it. Out of this acknowledgment comes our deliverance.
RB My thought was that we might make an acknowledgment and not be in the good of it.
JT Acknowledgment goes a long way. I judge this thing to begin with, and the Lord comes in for me as I accept the application of this chapter to myself.
JHH Is not this state due to our having allowed something in ourselves that should be judged? There has been a lack of self-judgment.
JT It is like cleaning a pair of spectacles. You must remove the thing that is blurring your vision. Something obviously is hindering, so that you do not see clearly. Why is it? Others can see. All this works out in self-judgment. As you accept it humbly, [p. 185] the Lord helps you, but in disregarding it your marred vision continues.
JR Later it could be said, “which we have seen with our eyes ... concerning the word of life”, 1 John 1: 1.
JT What eyesight they had!
JMB The message that Mary of Magdala, Johanna and Mary the mother of James had brought to the eleven, should have prepared them for the presence of the Lord.
JT Yes, but also what they were saying themselves. It is “as they were saying these things, he himself stood in their midst”. It was not even yesterday that they had been talking of them, they were actually doing it.
ND Does the Lord raise this question with us each time we come together?
JT If there is anything like this state amongst us He would. He is blaming them, He has to reproach them “Why are ye troubled? and why are thoughts rising in your hearts?” (verse 38.) Why do we allow such thoughts? The doctrine we hold should forbid them. It must be the state we are in, that there is this palpable lack of appropriation.
FJF The Lord coming in — does that constitute a reading or an assembly meeting?
JT The question is of what follows and what precedes. An assembly meeting is properly when we come together “in assembly”. It is our own action. “When ye come together in assembly”, see 1 Corinthians 11: 18. The article is omitted. The Lord honours us in thus coming together, and He comes in; He comes in as we call Him to mind.
CCE It is deliberate on our part.
JT “I speak as to intelligent persons”, 1 Corinthians 10: 15. Here we read, “they found the eleven, and those with them, gathered together”. That would admit many others — the Marys and the disciples; and they say those things to them. But as they proceed, the principle of the assembly comes into view. The assembly is here,
[p. 186] but informally. The time for it had not really arrived. Nevertheless, we do have the thought contained in this gospel. They were gathered together in recognition of the apostles, and they were saying suitable things. Then the Lord comes in. It is the pattern of the assembly, but of its public or external character. The Lord is not stopping at the thought of the assembly, but He is going on to the gospel, and what ensues shows what is in His mind; “that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name to all the nations beginning at Jerusalem”, Luke 24: 47. The assembly and the gospel must never be separated — they go on to the present moment. The assembly in a sense is the home of the gospel.
HJR In assembly on the Lord’s day, would you say that light precedes experiences? “As they were saying these things, he himself stood in their midst”.
JT As they come together, and He comes in, it is the assembly in principle. The Lord graciously pays attention to what we are saying, even though it may not be characterising us. Their speaking of these things is honoured, but the passage is to bring before my soul that I may be exact doctrinally in my speaking, and yet the truth of it does not characterise me. These were speaking very appropriately, saying, “The Lord is indeed risen and has appeared to Simon”. They had taken in the principle of grace, the gospel; “and how he was made known to them in the breaking of bread”. That is the public position — the breaking of bread and the gospel. In the gospel it is a question of grace, but though they were saying these things they were not equal to the coming in of the Lord.
LW “They yet did not believe for joy”. Does this suggest that apart from the Spirit we cannot know or believe?
JT That may be so, but it also bears on this, that while having the Spirit, we might be unduly affected, or emotional, so that that very thing hinders the truth from [p. 187] being made good in us. Joy is right, but think of joy hindering me from believing! What kind of joy is that? Romans teaches us to be analytical, and we never get on until we do analyse. There are, for instance, different kinds of love, different kinds of joy, and here is a joy that hinders faith. Over against this we have, “Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing”, Romans 15: 13. “I know that I shall remain and abide along with you all, for your progress and joy in faith”, Philippians 1: 25. There is joy in faith. The apostle says “the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, ...”, Galatians 5: 22. Yet see what alloy there may be in our joy! Joy should not hinder my faith. I must analyse and see if there is some alloy in my joy, some natural sentiment; let us be afraid of that.
CCE In John’s account of the Lord’s coming in chapter 20 there was no natural sentiment or fear — they were glad when they saw the Lord.
JT There the Lord says twice, “Peace be to you”, John 20: 19, 21. “The disciples rejoiced therefore, having seen the Lord. Jesus said therefore again to them, Peace be to you”. There was nothing to rebuke there.
FJF They were spiritually equal to the visitation.
JT The Spirit of God there presents the one side. The Holy Spirit is entitled to speak abstractly. Nothing is out of order in John 20 save that “Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came”.
Here Luke is presenting the actual facts; and there is admixture. But the Lord shows Himself as ready to adjust, and to remove the alloy. He would have them in a pure, holy, intelligent attitude before Him. “Then he opened their understanding to understand the scriptures” (verse 45). The Lord reminded them then of what He had already presented to them. In John 20, it is what they are in the abstract, no scriptures are quoted, there is no alloy noted, though Peter had not yet been restored.
[p. 188] Ques Why do those in Luke expressly state “and has appeared to Simon”?
JT Because he had been a great sinner; nevertheless, grace was reigning. If those gathered together had been hard of heart, they would have said they could not believe the Lord would have appeared to such as Simon, but they are equal to this grace. Yet they are not equal to the Lord coming in; they are affrighted and confounded when He comes to them. In Mark it was “in another form” that He appeared. Not so here, yet they were affrighted. It was the Lord Himself just as He ought to be understood; this was as though to emphasise that the difficulty is not with Him, but with themselves.
JR The Lord ate the Passover with His disciples before instituting the Supper. Do the two still go together to produce in us the right spirit? Is it not dangerous to neglect to keep the Passover? The Lord kept it.
JT Quite so. It is the means viewed in its typical significance that would help us to discern Him in the Supper; “For also our passover, Christ, has been sacrificed”, 1 Corinthians 5: 7. It is introduced there, and then much intervenes, chapters 5 to 11, before we get the Supper brought in. We need to keep the feast continually. It gives us good eyesight, not a blurred vision. It keeps us in self-judgment and thus in trim for the assembly; “the spiritual discerns all things”, 1 Corinthians 2: 15. Those meeting at Corinth were not spiritually-minded. Our reading today is in order that we might be spiritual. We should see how ready the Lord is to make us spiritual, but we must judge what is in the way.
Rem He is ever ready to adjust.
JT But He looks for our acceptance of the fact that we are all prone to this. In our acceptance of that He will come in. But we will never get rid of that which hinders without judging it before the Lord. It is then, and then only, that the [p. 189] Lord helps us further.
FJF Self-judgment would counteract ebullitions of joy.
JT In 1 Corinthians 12 Paul indicates that an emulous spirit had been manifested. The Corinthians liked to have gifts in order to make a show with them, but Paul brings in the thought of manhood; “in your minds be grown men”. The human mind is a wonderful faculty. It is treated of in Romans — the renewing of the mind (chapter 12: 2), “I myself with the mind serve God’s law” (chapter 7: 25). In 1 Corinthians it is brought in informally but forcibly. “I will pray with the spirit, but I will pray also with the understanding”, 1 Corinthians 14: 15. “But we have the mind of Christ”, 1 Corinthians 2: 16. This is in order to bring us into manhood. Mark’s presentation of the man that had been possessed with the devil is that he was found sitting and clothed and sensible (Mark 5: 15). In our minds we are to be mature, grown men.
WS To have minds according to God is what we need.
JT The mind according to God is a faculty. “We have the mind of Christ”, able to think as He does. If we have not, we are unable to discern the Lord. How shall we know Christ in heaven? Shall we each be introduced? I think not. We shall be able there to pick out the Lord, to know Him as we see Him. As spiritual, our vision will be unclouded, and that is the point in Christianity. The blind man, in Mark 8: 25, was constituted able by the second touch of the Lord, to see “all things clearly”. And we are to see all things clearly, not only to apprehend the Lord in assembly, but all else too. The whole position is to be clear to us. Hence, if there are spiritual men, I observe them, I wait on them. They are to be taken account of.
HWR There is to be a recognition of the Lord by what He does.
JT In the breaking of bread, the symbols suggest Him to us. Then a moment comes when it is “I myself”.
[p. 190] The spiritual discern it, then it is a question of what He will do, what He has in mind to do.
Ques Would that be the remedy for thoughts arising in our hearts?
JT Why should they arise? If I am acquainted with the Lord, if I am spiritual, I discern Him, I see at once He is there; then I defer to Him. He must take the lead, He must be Head.
HWR It is a question of personal acquaintance.
JT As when John discerned the Lord on the lake. Peter did not, yet he was ready to move when John spoke. He accepted John’s word and threw himself into the water. John represents the spiritual element there. Some brother may discern the Lord, and by what he says others discern Him also.
LW It is possible, is it not, for the Lord to be present at the Supper, and we individually not to realise it? To discern Him, we must be spiritual.
JT That is so. That is the point, and that is what we are seeking to make clear.
BHT It is a question of state.
JT That is included in what is opened up to us in Romans 8, particularly, what the Holy Spirit is to the believer. I have found my feet in chapter 7, then chapter 8 shows what the Spirit is to me, so I see all things clearly and am able to discern that it is the Lord Himself, as Man risen, “behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself”.
Ques “Handle me and see” (verse 39). How does that apply to us?
JT It applies spiritually; there is a means of testing as to whether He is present or not. This incident where the Lord appeared is a pattern; they were to see the import of it. He would accustom them to the idea of a spiritual body. “God is a spirit”, John 4: 24. It is not that thought here, but that Christ was in a body that is spiritual. It was the condition in which He was during [p. 191] the forty days; they are educational in order to teach us how to be spiritual.
Rem “That which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes; that which we contemplated, and our hands handled”, 1 John 1: 1.
JT That alludes to the Lord in the flesh; but it would run on into this thought. There was substance before them, not what was imaginary, but He was a real Man as risen.
BHT They “supposed they beheld a spirit”.
JT But He was a Man. This is christianity. It is incarnation, but in the final condition in heaven it is “his body of glory”. First that which is natural, then that which is spiritual. The natural, of course, applies to us, not to Christ. “And as we have borne the image of the one made of dust, we shall bear also the image of the heavenly one”, 1 Corinthians 15: 49. The spiritual body becomes in result a heavenly one.
FJF They were not familiar with the Lord in this condition.
JT But they ought to have been expecting it. Though in new condition Christ is the same as in the old. The spiritual grasp the idea of a spiritual body, it indicates the kind of Man in the counsels of God. The position in Luke 24: 37 was Christ risen. Now that we have the Spirit we should have a state suitable. We await Christ from heaven as Saviour, to change our bodies of humiliation and transform them into the image of His glorious body. How important then, to become conversant with Him now! Our bodies need to be saved, though now it is a time of soul salvation. The great lesson of the forty days was spirituality, to become accustomed to the Lord coming in through closed doors.
JR What is your thought as to the Lord having asked for food?
JT That was for educative purposes. The emphasis the Lord gave was on the word “here”, for example,
Cape Town, “Have ye anything here to eat?” (verse 41). And they were able to provide exactly what was suitable. They gave Him part of a “broiled fish” — symbolising the sovereignty of God — and “of a honeycomb” — expressing the mutual state of things existent, for a comb is the combined work of many bees. In grace, the Lord stoops to do things. It is not that in heaven He eats; but the incident is to show the lengths to which His love will go for our education. Fish are peculiarly in the divine knowledge, beyond human knowledge. They must have come through the deluge. There are three blessings in Genesis 1 and as to the fifth day on which fish and fowl were created, “God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply on the earth”. There must be something in the fish and fowl which peculiarly belongs to God, and so the Lord uses a fish in connection with the tribute money. In that He showed how He had control of the fish of the sea. But see how the Lord comes down to educate His disciples! “And he took it and ate before them”, to show them how real a Man He was. The question is not how could He, in a spiritual body, eat it? This is a question that might stir in the natural mind, but that is leaving God out. What can God not do? The nearer we come to God, the more we learn to refuse the infidel suggestion that our puny minds can compass Him. In faith, we accept what is before us.
CCE Jehovah appeared to Abraham by the oaks of Mamre (Genesis 18: 1). There was no necessity for the three men to have eaten, but they did. It was God in grace coming into Abraham’s circumstances.
JT It is beautiful to see God coming down and staying under the tree, giving Abraham time to get a meal ready. The preparation of the calf, the making of the cakes, must have occupied a considerable time. It is wonderful to see God coming down and remaining within our range that we may understand Him a little better.
ND We should be expectant of such a visitation as [p. 193] Abraham had in Genesis 18 on the part of God, should we not?
JT If the disciples had believed that He would rise again from the dead, they would have said, The Lord used to come to us before to Bethany. Surely, love would claim that He would come again. In Luke 24: 44 we read that “he said to them, These are the words which I spoke to you while I was yet with you, that all that is written concerning me in the law of Moses and prophets and psalms must be fulfilled”. He throws them back on what He said. The Lord had already spoken of these things to them. It seemed as though adjustment had been secured and that there would be no more difficulty. The Lord had descended to eat before them, so as to educate them further. What will He not do for us? The better we know Him, the more we expect Him to do.
LW What the Lord did for the disciples, the Holy Spirit would do for us.
JT He forces it on them that they had been remiss. He goes back with them over the ground. Why had they not understood? Why had they not believed? Why had they not made use of what they had heard? Then having accomplished His thought in their adjustment. He proceeds to something further — that for which they were not responsible. He takes them on to higher ground, having “opened their understanding to understand the scriptures”. Let us judge ourselves in relation to things that have blurred our sight. Up to that moment there had been a moral issue, but now He acts creationally, anticipating their arriving at the knowledge which is characteristic of the new man, as in Colossians 3: 10. It is what every one of us who looks back on our history can witness to.
Ques How does that work out today?
JT It is what the Lord can do, it involves His sovereign rights as Creator. The new man is created according to God (Ephesians 4: 24), and renewed into full knowledge according to the image of the Creator (Colossians 3: 10.)
[p. 194] It is the One who is the Creator who has to do with our understandings. The disciples had to judge themselves before they received the benefit of creational action, the time for which had now arrived. First, there has to be the moral question settled if you want Him to come in sovereignly. They had to judge the defect. The Lord will not do that for us, but then when that is settled, He comes in. We shall be in heaven as the product of God’s sovereign work as Creator.
FJF We shall be sadly hindered if there be not this self-judgment with us.
JT The Lord says, as it were, I am operating in you, but you are a moral being, you are responsible and your own moral state is at fault. This in you is not a creational defect, but your own state. As soon as I see and judge that, He comes in for us, and does exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think.
Rem This leads to the truth of the body (Colossians 3). Each of us has to look on the saints as one body.
JT You look around and see them all, not Christ alone. We need to look around and “see all things clearly”, including the saints, in order to apprehend what they are as the result of God’s work — the new man.
This matter of what is creational is very fine, for what will the Lord not do for us? My side is the moral issue. That has to be taken up first.
ND From our side, our spiritual state or experience is subject to limitations. Is that any different from passing into the presence of the Lord when we depart this life?
JT There is correspondence, but the saint with the Lord has no body, so he is limited there also.
ND Then he is not subject to limitations in relation to the body.
JT If he has no body, that in itself is a limitation. The spirit is only part of a man, not the full man. Paul says, “whether in the body I know not, or out of the body I know not, God knows”, 2 Corinthians 12: 2.
[p. 195] Nevertheless he had heard wonderful things, indicating that departed saints do know things and can hear things, but they are limited. Thus our bodies, even such as they are, are better than none. And the Lord cares for them and He also enables us to enter into the spiritual and heavenly order of things opened to us while in them.
HWR In writing to the Corinthians Paul says, “For indeed we who are in the tabernacle groan, being burdened; while yet we do not wish to be unclothed, but clothed”, 2 Corinthians 5: 4.
JT After their adjustment the Lord proceeded to the preaching (verse 45 - 49). “That all that is written concerning me in the law of Moses and prophets and psalms must be fulfilled”. This is that which was written, the public side of things. He had spoken to the two going to Emmaus, of Moses and the prophets, and He says here, “ye are witnesses of these things”, that is, they had seen them. In Acts, Luke records that the Lord told the disciples “ye shall be my witnesses”. You cannot be a witness of Christ unless you are a witness of the things.
FJF The Lord’s reference to the Scriptures in Luke shows that He had the public position in view. They were recognised by the Lord, as also in the synagogue, Luke 4.
JT Yes. The Scriptures are authoritative in this position. After saying that they are witnesses, He says, “And behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you; but do ye remain in the city till ye be clothed with power from on high”. We should notice that it is all what the Lord is doing now. Their adjustment has taken place, and so the Lord brings in great things as regards the preaching. And it is to be remarked that they were to remain in the city till they were clothed with power. The Lord would say, You will get the message as you are on your feet. The Spirit will come in. Matthew would make it more testing in his presentation, but here the Lord is making it somewhat easier for the sake of the preaching. It is a question of what the Scriptures [p. 196] require, that the preaching goes forth from Jerusalem, and so they are to be clothed with power from on high.
JS And they are to wait upon the Lord until they are clothed with such power.
JT They are “my witnesses” in Acts; here they are witnesses as seeing things.
FJF What necessity there is for repentance! It involves a man’s moral being. He is responsible to move in relation to what God is saying.
JT The moral point is most important. Every man must accept responsibility for his sins, but God says, I open a door of repentance. And then remission is added. What is the good of repentance if there be no remission? What a fortifying gospel it is! It begins in the very place where Christ was put to death, and it is to be spread amongst all the nations. “Preached in his name to all the nations beginning at Jerusalem” (verse 47). It was not that the Lord put that upon them, but the Scriptures required it. And they were witnesses, and were to remain there until clothed with power from on high.
Rem Is the word “thus it behoved” also connected with the preaching?
JT Yes.
WT Are these the main features of the preaching of the gospel — repentance and remission?
JT The gospel goes further. There is no mention of the word “gospel” here. This concerns the preaching; it meets man’s need, but we have further thoughts in the gospel, in fact the mystery is included in it. It is called the gospel of the glory of the blessed God. In Luke the thought is that men might get relief and God would open a door for them to repent, and in doing so, would have forgiveness in view.
JHH When you are preaching, do you get your message as you are on your feet?
J.T. How do you find it?
JHH I like to have my scriptures before me.
JT So do I. I like to have an outline; for this I go [p. 197] to Galilee. There has to be that exercise before the preaching; but what the Lord says here indicates that power comes in as you are preaching. Of course what He directly alludes to is the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. It is as you are preaching that power comes in. The whole person is affected. All should look to experience it. What the Lord will do for us as we are ministering!
BHT And the message, might that also come as you are on your feet?
JT I never come to speak without having something, as watching at wisdom’s gates and waiting at the posts of its doors. These things are worth getting, but in delivering them we need to be clothed with power from on high.
CCE We often say a great deal more than ever we meant to say.
JT It is usually something distinctive that you get on your feet, when you receive this touch from the Holy Spirit as you are speaking.
BS His name is to be mentioned, I notice, as though it is that which is the effective power.
JT The preaching is to be in His name. That is the position in which the gospel is set. Peter makes much of it in his preaching as recorded in Acts. “And it shall be that whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved”, Acts 2: 21. “By faith in his name, his name has made this man strong”, Acts 3: 16. Everything is in that name, it gives authority to the gospel. The whole power of God is behind it; it involves His authority in heaven. “Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and granted him a name, that which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow”, Philippians 2: 9, 10. “And salvation is in none other, for neither is there another name under heaven which is given among men by which we must be saved”, Acts 4: 12.
DS Peter’s preaching in Acts 2 had reference to the Lord in resurrection.
JT And in heaven too. “Know assuredly that God has made him, this Jesus whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ”. That applies personally and officially. The official side is stressed. “Having therefore been exalted by the right hand of God, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this which ye behold and hear”, Acts 2: 33. Thus the preaching went on in His name.