TOGETHER IN ASSEMBLY
[p. 437] TOGETHER IN ASSEMBLY
Luke 24: 29 - 49; John 20: 17 - 23
JT What is in mind is that we should consider together the assembly as convened, or saints as come together, to use scriptural language, “in assembly”. The subject is before the Lord’s people very much, and has been for many years, but we are all somewhat slow to follow what the Lord calls attention to. There is steady progress, I believe, in all the gatherings of the saints in the knowledge of the principles and customs that should govern us as together “in assembly”. What is to be observed in Luke 24 is that the saints as gathered were proceeding well, saying what was suitable, until the Lord came in and then they were confused, that is, I think they would set forth what often marks us in that part of the assembly service. The point at which the Lord enters is that which requires most attention; it is least understood. We get on fairly well with regard to the public side as the Colossians did. They were going on well as regards order, so much so that the apostle said he rejoiced in them, beholding their order and the firmness of their faith in Christ (Colossians 2: 5). As regards the spiritual side there was defectiveness and so in this chapter: the saints were saying the right things, and the Lord came in while they were saying them, as if to show His approval, yet when He came in there was confusion. Luke’s account in this chapter is lengthy and is occupied almost entirely with this matter, with the adjustment of the saints, and transferring them from what is visible, and from the state of unbelief, to the state not only of belief, but of spirituality. John, on the other hand, makes no allusion whatever to any confusion when the Lord stood in the midst of the company.
EBMcC That is to say, we can pick up order, what is outwardly seen, but when it comes to what is spiritual we break down — is that the [p. 438] thought?
JT That is manifest here; being confounded and being frightened, it says, they “supposed they beheld a spirit”. They were confused by the Lord coming in. There is nothing just like that today, for the Lord does not come in bodily, but still I believe what is seen here is the crux of the matter. There is very little discernment as to the Lord coming in and how matters stand when He comes in.
JCS When you speak of Him coming in, just what point in the meeting have you in your mind?
JT As the Supper is celebrated. The word used by Luke and Paul as to that suggests an action of mind in the saints, that their minds are engaged intently in remembering Him, and the Lord seizes the opportunity to come in. Not at any time is there a greater opportunity than at the Lord’s supper, because the intent of the Supper is to occupy us with Christ, to bring Him to our minds.
JCS For calling Him to mind.
JT Yes. It is a word used only four times in the New Testament and three refer to this incident. See Luke 22: 19; 1 Corinthians 11: 24, 25; Hebrews 10: 3.
EBMcC When the two returned they found the eleven gathered, and that is what you mean by order; they were gathered and said, “The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon”. They were speaking of a risen Lord.
JT The facts are recorded as if they were approved. They returned “the same hour” we are told. The Lord had appeared to them in the breaking of bread, and they returned the same hour to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together and others with them; and they were saying, “The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon”, which would mean they were occupied with what entered into the dispensation, that is, it was to be marked by grace. The Lord first appeared to an erring one, that is, grace is to reign, and then the breaking of bread was also to mark the dispensation, it brought the [p. 439] Lord in. The two related what had happened on the way and “how he was made known to them in the breaking of bread”. These seem to be two features of the dispensation, the one involving the gospel and the other the assembly; grace was going to reign, and the Lord was to come in, and hence it would not be a dead, but a living state of things. It would be marked by definite divine incomings, not something fixed, with the same service according to date for every Sunday of the year; but the Lord coming in, so as to impart fresh impressions. That was what was marking them, as it says, “as they were saying these things, he himself stood in their midst”, as if He approved; but now He is there they are not equal to the great privilege and opportunity.
WJH Does the forty days of the Lord’s sojourn in resurrection indicate that that kind of thing would go on during the whole period?
JT I think that is the thought. The idea of the forty days is thus educative for the saints. It is preparatory to the heavenly side, to our part in it — the intention being that we should be taught, that is, learn spiritually. There would be no need of the Lord staying here if it were not that education was needed, and the education now is in view of our spirituality. If spirituality is learned, there should be no confusion if the Lord comes in. We should be perfectly restful and responsive as He comes in.
Ques Would the reference in the beginning of the Acts, “to whom also he presented himself living, after he had suffered” (Acts 1: 3) be in line with what you are saying about the living state of things?
JT I think that is a good connection. He presented Himself as if to call attention to Himself as alive, and to intimate that christianity is to be a living state of things.
JCS Breaking bread would bring that consciously to our souls — He presents Himself alive.
JT That is the thought. John’s gospel fills out the spiritual side in chapter 14, making it continuous, not only the immediate period after the Lord ascended, but [p. 440] throughout the whole dispensation, even inclusive of remnant times, the last days. He makes it continuous that the Lord would find a way of coming in, even to one person, that is, if suitable conditions exist. If conditions for their presence exist, divine Persons will come in.
CFI They were confounded because the Lord was there in a new way, and they did not recognise Him.
JT They were not sufficiently spiritual, that is the lesson.
Ques Is the “fear of the Jews” in John 20 a different character of fear from that referred to in Luke 24?
JT It is. The “fear of the Jews” is a wholesome fear, whereas the fear here is an unwholesome one. The fear “of the Jews” means that we do not want the current Jewish element. The more spiritual we are the more we are in dread of the current and religious element.
AMH What would help us toward this spirituality?
JT I suppose the first thing is faith. We should cultivate faith. As we go back in the chapter there were those who loved the Lord and had observed outwardly what was right — that is the women. It says in the end of chapter 23, “having returned they prepared aromatic spices and ointments, and remained quiet on the sabbath, according to the commandment”. They observed what was outwardly right, but they were unbelieving in that they did not believe what the Lord had said about His resurrection. That is the first right thing, faith to believe what the Lord has said, to reckon what He says is true; that is, I think, the first part of our instruction. They observed the commandment in remaining quiet on the sabbath, but then, they came to look for a dead Christ instead of a living One, and the chapter is occupied with meeting that situation, until we come to these two. The instruction is brought down to these two who had their backs to Jerusalem and yet they could converse about the Lord. The Lord deals with them first by the Scriptures and makes their hearts burn, and then He deals with them on purely spiritual lines; that [p. 441] is to say, He entered in with them according to their constraint, and “as he was at table ... having taken the bread, he blessed, and having broken it, gave it to them. And their eyes were opened, and they recognised him. And he disappeared from them”. That is a spiritual manifestation and they were now equal to it, they were affected by the spiritual touch, for they returned to Jerusalem at once.
Ques Ought the fact that the Lord had appeared to the two going to Emmaus, and also to Simon, have been regarded by them not merely as evidence of the resurrection, but as calculated to awaken expectations in their hearts that He would appear to them collectively?
JT Just so. Taking up two particularly to teach them indicates how the Lord works; He takes up two or more so as to give a lead. The two He worked with here showed that they were taking in His way of teaching, for they were learning. They were not terrified and affrighted. It says, “He disappeared from them. And they said to one another, Was not our heart burning in us as he spoke to us?” They were learning and referred back to what happened before, but this spiritual touch with the Lord had led them further. “Rising up the same hour, they returned to Jerusalem”. The education had a perfect effect upon them, and it pointed to one thing, Jerusalem was the centre. They must go back there. They retraced their steps intelligently after the Lord had been manifested to them in a spiritual way. The progressive education is manifest.
Ques Have you in mind that this appearing to the two on the way to Emmaus is an individual appearing, indicating that the Lord would come to us as individuals, or is it something learned in the assembly?
JT The facts given point to the Lord’s way of recovery, involving spiritual instruction, and this is generally on individual lines. But I think we should keep clearly in mind the Lord’s way, that He would take up two as He took up twelve. He took up three for [p. 442] special purposes, and now He takes up two. He took up Peter in a negative way and allowed Satan to tempt him, for a purpose. Now He allows two to go this path for a purpose, and walks a long way — walks with them — with their backs turned to Jerusalem, so that we have His education in two — an important thing. The Lord takes up one or two or more for their own sakes, of course, but also to fit them for the education of others. These two proved to be a testimony in the assembly to the Lord’s way of teaching us spiritually.
Rem It is striking that they did not know Him, yet He walked a good way with them, but in the breaking of the bread they knew Him. That seems to be the point of their return to the company.
JT I think that is the lesson in it. The Lord uses the moment as if He knew they were aware of this feature of the instruction. They were impressionable spiritually. To make us spiritual is the most refined feature of God’s work in us.
PL It is “one of them” in verse 18, but in verse 29 it says, “they constrained him”, they have now drawn together in spiritual affinity in their determination to detain Christ. Is it a feature of spirituality that we must at all costs have the Lord — for His own sake?
JT Yes. In verse 29 “they constrained him, saying, Stay with us”. They have arrived at the mutual side which normally will always make room for the Lord.
Ques Would you say more about the two giving a lead, how would it work out in local assemblies?
JT It is testimony. In these two there was adequate testimony. I think that is one thing that enters into it. Matthew makes more of it than Luke, but still you have in Luke two men speaking with Jesus on the mount, two men at the sepulchre, two men at the ascension. This is to give full testimony. If two brothers have the same thought in this sense the thing is established. It is an immense advantage if there are two or more exercised in the same way as to the truth and the testimony generally.
[p. 443] They confirm each other and the saints as a whole. But this is very different from special friendships, which develop partisan feeling.
PL When he wrote his epistle to the Colossian saints in regard to the great subject of spirituality, the beloved apostle says, “Paul, apostle of Christ Jesus, by God’s will, and Timotheus”, Colossians 1: 1.
JT The principle of testimony is in two or three. Throughout Scripture God is pleased to give three, but two is adequate testimony. Abraham says to the man in hades, “They have Moses and the prophets”, Luke 16: 29. He did not say, “Moses and prophets and psalms”, as the Lord said. Moses and the prophets are adequate.
WJH As in our chapter two having experience livingly that Christ had risen would be a great asset to the company.
JCS “Made known to them in the breaking of bread” — is that where the spiritual side comes in?
JT Yes. “This do in remembrance of me”, 1 Corinthians 11: 24. The mind is intently occupied recalling Him and the Lord comes in. As He comes in, the position in the assembly changes. He is with us now, and becomes the Leader in the service. Of course this is all spiritual. It is a question of our spiritual ability to grasp it, and to be available to the Lord for what He has in mind.
CHH It says in verse 36 “as they were saying these things, he himself stood in their midst”. I wondered whether the testimony of the two, as it takes place in the assembly, brings in the Lord?
JT It tended to make conditions suitable; here there was no breaking of bread. Normally the breaking of bread occasions His coming in. Notice He is in their midst, not the midst, as in John; here it is in “their midst”, as in Matthew 18. Honour is paid to them. He is honouring them because of the conditions, as if He would say, That is acceptable [p. 444] to Me.
EWC Would you gather from this scripture that the experience at Emmaus being put into words for the benefit of all, was instrumental to the Lord coming in spiritually?
JT Yes; what the two were saying, combined with what others were saying, made the conditions suitable so far.
FHN If the hearts of two of the Lord’s people were burning towards Him before we come to the breaking of bread, would that help the whole company?
JT It would, and that raises the question as to how we behave preceding the great occasion, particularly how we are in our houses; whether the anointing has a place in them.
EBMcC We may be like these two from Emmaus — senseless and slow of heart. We have the word recorded which the apostle received from the glory, “I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you”, 1 Corinthians 11: 23. If we really held this in affection would it not move us to be in a suitable state?
JT I think we should come forth from “the dwellings of Jacob” for the great occasion, in dignity; the anointing attaching to us.
PL Is it like the wave loaves brought from Israel’s tents?
JT Yes; that was typically a testimony to the state of the people in their houses. In that sense no one is to appear before God empty. You can understand that these two did not come empty. They were full of the impression they had received.
AMH Why was it if these two persons were in line, there was confusion at the Lord’s coming in?
JT I suppose the general spirituality was low. They spoke as they were impressed, no doubt, but then we cannot be always sure that we are leading the saints. It is no small thing to give a lead that will give character to the assembly. Whilst a lead may be given it is a [p. 445] question whether the saints are leadable, or are merely members of a congregation.
JCS Speaking of the Lord coming in, is it the same occasion in Luke as in John?
JT In Luke He comes in in relation to them “gathered”, and what they were “saying” is mentioned. In John it is the persons that were there, and having received a message beforehand from the Lord by a qualified person, they were concerned lest a certain element should come in — that is the Jews. If the two records refer to the same occasion, John’s is abstract, connecting the disciples entirely with the work of God in them; and Luke gives their actual state.
EESL Is it significant that in Luke, who alone gives the commemorative side of the supper, we have this expression that the Lord “was made known to them in the breaking of bread”?
JT It is very significant as bearing on the Lord coming to us. The record is of what happened. He was at table. It was an ordinary meal, but He seized the opportunity of breaking the bread to show Himself, and then vanished. It is an example of how He takes advantage of opportunities.
Ques Would the apostle’s word, “let a man prove himself, and thus eat” (1 Corinthians 11: 28), be with a view to the adjustment necessary?
JT That is what it is intended to be. The apostle is dealing in 1 Corinthians 11 with public order, and he enjoins that each should examine himself and so eat. If there is that process there will be readiness for spiritual manifestations — the divine incomings.
EWC The instruction you have in mind is in view of the saints together in assembly, sisters being present, arriving at a spiritual state in the company which not merely includes the active part, but also those who are necessarily silent.
JT It is the state of the company that is the point. You may have two or more spiritual ones present, but [p. 446] the general state of the company may affect the position and cause confusion. So that you get, for instance, the Lord apprehended by some spiritual brother, and he proceeds on that line; we are now moving in association with Christ, and the brother speaks to the Father or God in the sense that the Spirit of adoption is active, yet another brother will follow and address the Lord as if He were in heaven. Such an intrusion would interfere with the order of the service of God which the Lord would conduct in His assembly.
Ques They supposed they saw a spirit. Do you think we sometimes fall back on supposition — for instance, giving out an unsuitable hymn?
JT I am sure that is true very often. The secret of that is that we come with a purpose to do something and think it must be done. It may be we have a hymn in our minds. What I observe is that the hymn book is not much utilised — certain hymns have an undue place in brothers’ minds. If a brother gives thanks or mentions a hymn to the Father in an intelligent way it is confusion for another to follow with a thanksgiving or hymn to the Lord.
CFI Where does room come in for the enjoyment of the thought of Christ personally?
JT In the Lord’s supper there certainly should be abundant scope for those who love Him to address Him. The Lord should have His part as present among the saints. “Christ ... loved the assembly, and has delivered himself up for it”, Ephesians 5: 25. He comes to us in those affections. The Song of Solomon helps greatly, but as to us it is “my assembly”. He will use it for God, and not for Himself only. John shows us throughout that Jesus was going “to the Father”, and what He did for His own had in view to draw them into the current of His own mind, and the Father was before Him.
JCS So if He comes in on our side as Head, from that point we would have the Father in view and not go back to covenant lines?
JT [p. 447] If the Spirit of adoption gives a lead in some brother, the thing is to follow that lead.
Ques Do you think we give sufficient place to the thought of Christ in the midst of His people? Are not our thoughts very often taken up with Christ in heaven?
JT I think that is largely where the difficulty lies. We fail to discern the Lord coming in. As He comes in it is not a corporeal action of His, but a spiritual one, which is quite understandable. “The last Adam a quickening spirit”, 1 Corinthians 15: 45. They thought they had seen a spirit, but “he opened their understanding”. He is the last Adam “a quickening spirit”, but this does not set aside the fact that He is a Man.
Rem The Lord’s coming in seems to involve leaving the covenant side.
JT He is there. It is a question of the lead that is given, the covenant is a great thought and He dwells upon it Himself. Mark says, “they all drank out of it” — out of the cup (Mark 14: 23); and then the Lord dwelt upon the covenant Himself, as if to impress them with it. This is one way we should be impressed. It is quite compatible with the Lord’s presence to speak about the covenant; He is the Mediator of it, and hence it is right — due to Him — that we should speak to Him of it, and also to speak to God about it. Room should be made for this, including hymns bearing on the covenant.
CFI This might continue after the Lord comes in.
JT Certainly.
EBMcC In giving to Him the broiled fish and a honeycomb, would they be ministering to Christ?
JT Yes. The Lord raises the question of what is there. Luke has the local company more in mind. He came into their midst, and asked “Have ye anything here to eat?” You cannot expect more than is in the local company. If brethren cannot go beyond the covenant the Lord will make the most of what they have. He is gracious and will help us according to our measure. Even if we are unable to go beyond the covenant, God [p. 448] and Christ and the Spirit too can have part with us and there would be a good season; but the full thought in assembly service would not be reached.
WHU Under these circumstances should we reach Christ as Head?
JT I think it is a question of a spiritual lead; if there are one or two there equal to it headship might be reached. These two from Emmaus had some spiritual understanding. They were there, and were speaking about a spiritual matter, and you would expect all would be ready for this, but apparently they were not. The general state occasioned the confusion; I do not think these two would lead in it.
WHU Would the Lord coming in as Head give us an impression to move with Him as Firstborn?
JT I think so. As with us He impresses us with what is in His mind. John specially brings that before us. He gives at length in chapters 13 - 17 what the Lord did and said immediately before His death; this shows how He draws us to His side to impress us with His mind. We must not assume that headship applies immediately as He comes in. Jesus Himself stood in their midst. It was priestly service rather than headship they needed. The Lord acts according to what He finds as amongst us.
JCS John 20 takes us outside the local setting onto the spiritual and eternal line.
JT Yes, it does.
EESL How far has what is historical a place in the breaking of bread?
JT The institution of the Lord’s supper is a historical matter, but it has a continuous bearing. The Lord’s death is a historical matter, but the love that is manifest in it remains in Him.
EESL I thought that what was historical had a place, but that the memorial leads to fresh manifestations.
JT The records are for us and furnish authority for what we do publicly, but there must be the spiritual [p. 449] condition. Luke shows how the spiritual education began and how it at least was seen in two persons; he shows that two persons were actually in the assembly, as spiritually educated. John says that the message was sent to the brethren by a qualified person, Mary, who herself was spiritually educated, and he shows that the spiritual element existed. I have no doubt it is to be taken abstractly, because Peter was not yet fully restored. God does speak abstractly, He is entitled to take account of His own work in us by itself, however small. That is John’s side; he mentions the evidence of spirituality by saying, “the doors were shut ... for fear of the Jews”, and that when the Lord came in they were glad — they were not perturbed.
SF Would it be inward feelings in John 20?
JT There is nothing said about their saying anything, whereas Luke makes a point of what they were saying before the Lord came in. John says they were glad, and the Lord said, “Peace be to you”. And moreover John says, “Jesus came and stood in the midst”. It is not their midst — it is the midst. The assembly viewed from the purely spiritual standpoint is not local at all, it is universal. Jesus is standing in relation to the whole assembly.
WHW Does the Lord in Luke’s gospel suggest in showing His hands and feet that there is a further distance to go: but in John’s gospel He shows them His hands and His side, suggesting perhaps what He has done and what is available for His people?
JT I think that is right. John conveys the love of Christ peculiarly. The hands are necessary to express affection, and His side testifies to His love shown in death. Spiritually the side suggests that the assembly came out of Christ — it is “of Christ”, as Eve was of Adam.
Rem In John they were together as the result of what Mary had brought to [p. 450] them.
JT Undoubtedly, and the Lord came in. He sent the message with a view to His coming in. The character of the message indicates that the Lord intended to come to them as in family relationship with them, that they were spiritual and heavenly.
JCS It has been said that the Lord does not come in until we leave the covenant.
JT I do not see what that is based on. He comes in, and is made known to us in the breaking of bread. I connect the Lord’s incoming with the breaking of bread. But the cup is also for remembrance, and hence His coming in should be connected with it also. The position is somewhat transitional until the Lord is apprehended as Head; all being available to Him. We are thus ready for any impulse He may give.
Ques Is the period after the breaking of bread a sensitive moment?
JT A most sensitive moment. The organism is in operation. We, being many, are one loaf. We need to be attentive. We are not to be restless as the emblems go round, but sitting in occupation with what is before us, including the saints in our affections, taking them all in. This gives occasion for spiritual power and enjoyment.
CFI There would then be a peaceful state manifest, instead of being confused.
JT That is exactly what we get in John. He says, “Peace be to you”, and then as they were glad He said, “Peace be to you” again, as if to consolidate the position.
EWC Would you distinguish between the covenant on the ground of His shed blood and the covenant in the hand of the living Mediator?
JT There is a distinction. “This is my blood, that of the new covenant” alludes to His death, that is, it is that by which the covenant is attested, but in 2 Corinthians 3 it is the covenant made good to us. The blood is in the first epistle — it is in the Lord’s supper — but in the second epistle the ministry is by “the Lord the Spirit”. The latter effects a change to us. “We all,
[p. 451] looking on the glory of the Lord, with unveiled face, are transformed according to the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Lord the Spirit”, 2 Corinthians 3: 18. It is not the blood there, it is the glory of the Lord, and the Lord effecting the thing. We are changed into the same image even as by the Lord the Spirit. It is important to distinguish between the blood as in the actual Supper, and the ministry of the covenant in the hands of the Mediator, but it is under the title “the Lord the Spirit”. There is authority in it, yet He is “the Spirit”.
EWC The instruction of Luke is important for developing a spiritual state ready to move on further.
JT The adjustment in Luke is essential; and if we recognise the Spirit in our midst, whether as the Holy Spirit in the beginning of the meeting, or as the Spirit of adoption later, we shall be able in some little degree to rise to what we are in God’s thought. It is in that way that we reach the assembly in the true spiritual sense.
JCS Quickened together with Christ, is that the point of view?
JT That has to be recognised if we are to be consciously in association with Christ. The quickening involves power; by it I am enabled to hold myself as God regards me, as before Him.
Ques Does “Peace be to you” help us to abstract ourselves?
JT Yes, to shut out extraneous thoughts, to help us fix our minds on one thing at a time.
JCS In addressing God as “Abba, Father”, what would be the subject matter of the address?
JT Well, I think God would like us to speak about Himself. As a rule we speak of Christ. Of course that is pleasing to God, but He would like us to speak about Himself also.
PL God is magnified and worshipped in the glory of His own counsels of [p. 452] love.
JT He would have us tell Him about Himself. When Nathan delivered Jehovah’s message to David about Solomon, saying, “I will be his father, and he shall be my son” (1 Chronicles 17: 13). David immediately goes into the house of the Lord and sits. Then he uses the most remarkable titles in speaking to God: Jehovah, Jehovah Elohim, God, Jehovah of Hosts, God of Israel, My God, that God, their God, God to Israel. All this shows how God Himself is regarded in the worship of the intelligent believer — one who knows sonship.
PL I was thinking of Paul’s prayer in that way — so full of God.
JT Quite so, especially in Ephesians. 1 Chronicles 17 shows the richness of David’s address, the variety of appellations he employed in his worship. As inside he speaks in the light of sonship, and he is restful in the presence of God.
Rem When David brought the ark to Zion, he delivered a psalm to give thanks to Jehovah, through Asaph and his brethren.
JT 1 Chronicles 16 shows his great skill in using the psalms in the service of God. The psalm is a selection from several.
Rem Magnifying what God Himself had done according to His own thoughts.
JCS Will you say a word as to “my God” and “your God”?
JT That seems to be the ultimate thought in the Lord’s mind in the message “my Father and your Father ... my God and your God”. I suppose the Spirit of adoption is urgent. It cries “Abba, Father” — a very remarkable thing. The Father is waiting for that cry. In Romans 8 it is, “whereby we cry, Abba, Father”. The two divine Persons who have so graciously come into a subservient position cry “Abba, Father”. And the christian is to cry “Abba, Father”. The Lord mentions the Father first to them in the message through Mary; and then “my God and your God”, as if that is the final
[p. 453] thought. In Revelation 3: 12, the Lord says to the overcomer in Philadelphia four times, “my God”, as if pointing to our own times, to the thought of God being brought to us as the great Ultimate of all things. “Of him, and through him, and for him are all things: to him be glory for ever”, Romans 11: 36.
WJH Does that signify the full knowledge of God?
JT It is God, as Christ knows Him. We touch the Absolute, at least in the sense that we are alongside the Lord as He says, “my God ... your God”. He maintained a significant distinction in not saying “our God”, but always “my God”, but we are drawn into the current of His thoughts, and, therefore, in relation with God in His absoluteness.
PL You referred to 1 Chronicles 17: 25, “For thou, my God, hast revealed to thy servant that thou wilt build him a house; therefore hath thy servant found in his heart to pray before thee. And now, Jehovah, thou art that God”. Is that the order we come in alongside Christ? First it is “my God”, and then we come to know Him as “that God”. So that the God of Israel is God to Israel. He is the God of, which is more the objective, and the God to, which is more what we are brought into.
JT Quite so. “That God” is an allusion to His absoluteness. In Solomon’s prayer he recognised that whilst God comes in in relation to the created sphere, yet he says, “the heavens and the heaven of heavens cannot contain thee”, 2 Chronicles 6: 18. He is beyond the heavens in His absoluteness.
PL The title “that God” means ‘The same’; see note to 2 Samuel 7: 28 in the New Translation.