QUALIFICATION FOR THE ASSEMBLY
[p. 121] QUALIFICATION FOR THE ASSEMBLY
Luke 24:13 - 48; John 19:25 - 42; John 20:1 - 23
PL Would you give us an idea as to what is in your mind?
JT I was remarking on certain having been said to have stood by the cross of Jesus, as a feature of John’s gospel. “Now there stood by the cross of Jesus”, it says. There is power to stand by the Lord in His death; and in chapter 20 the disciples are inside, conscious of the evil outside, but the doors are shut for fear of the Jews. John seems to call attention to the spiritual side in the saints — that which stands notwithstanding opposition, whereas Luke records that the people “beholding the things which were done, smote their breasts, and returned”, (Luke 23:48). Even those who knew Him stood afar off; and then two of them, although conversing about what had happened, were going away from the divine centre.
I thought that might furnish a subject for inquiry at this time, how that in Luke the interest of the Lord in going after them is evident, and that recovery is through their minds, or intelligences. It is not exactly a shepherd using external means to bring the sheep back, but He operates in a moral way, through the intelligence and the heart, the result of which was that they returned to Jerusalem “the same hour”, having recognised Him in the breaking of bread. So that material for the assembly in Luke has the public position in view; it is a gathered company, and the breaking of bread is a great feature of it.
In John it is not that they gathered or assembled, but that they are in a certain place, and recognising the evil outside they protect themselves against it; it is more instinctive, the doors were shut for fear of [p. 122] the Jews. According to John 20 there is nothing to reprimand in the company. In Luke 24 there is.
Rem In Luke 24 the two going to Emmaus had lost hope.
JT Yes; and yet they were deeply interested. They were conversing together; their remarks to each other were not casual. The Lord says, “What discourses are these which pass between you as ye walk, and are downcast?” showing they were really intent in what they were saying. I think it is to call attention to the possibility of our being interested in the things of God, and yet we may be going in a direction away from where these things are centred, and thus we see that mere intelligence about the things does not hold us.
HFN It is helpful to see the kind of people who stand in John; John brings before us four persons who stood by the cross.
JT These must have been distinguished in the testimony later, I suppose, this narrative having been written long after. Possibly the reference would be an explanation of what they were afterwards.
RB Is there any significance in the fact that it was women who were standing with John by the cross?
JT I think the women represent, as has often been remarked, the subjective side of the position and John, the disciple whom Jesus loved, represents throughout the gospel an element of trustworthiness, as one to whom the Lord could commit a charge, one who could be entrusted with something the Lord valued.
JHJ What had you particularly in mind in speaking of the two going away from Jerusalem in Luke?
JT There is a great deal of intelligence, and we can thank God for it, but then what effect has it on us? Is it attracting us towards the centre of God’s [p. 123] interest on earth, or have we our backs on that centre?
CCE The two knew the facts, but they did not know the spiritual meaning and import of them. They discoursed about the things that happened, but they did not understand them until they had their understandings opened.
JT Would that not be an index to the state of their souls?
PL Is Luke’s line connected with priesthood? He goes after the erring, but John’s line is connected with headship — the state of love amongst them that attracts Christ.
JT Yes; in Luke it is more the service of the priest than of the shepherd. The shepherd goes after the sheep and brings them back by external means. For instance, he carries the sheep. Here it is through their intelligence. But with regard to the remark that whilst they knew the things literally they were ignorant of their import, is not that the outcome of a state of soul?
CCE Yes; surely.
JT In John they do not go back; they stood by the cross in the presence of the fiercest opposition. I think it is to call attention to the length to which those who love Christ would go — the cross. Joseph of Arimathaea was a disciple, but secretly for fear of the Jews, that is mentioned; and Nicodemus, who came to Jesus by night; but there were those who stood by the cross (John 19:25), whereas the two in Luke, although conversing about the things that happened, are going away from the centre.
HFN Is it your thought that they were not prepared to accept the public shame connected with the cross?
JT That is what I thought. We might hang crosses about our necks, but to stand by the cross of Jesus whilst He was there brought them into complete identification with Him. In Luke, the crowds returned [p. 124] beating their breasts; all those who knew Him stood afar off, and then two of them moved away from the place.
JS Do you connect the position in John 20 with the intimacy of privilege?
JT Yes. They were there, and the Lord owned them in coming into their midst. They were conscious of the power against them and of the danger of it coming in amongst them, but they had shut the doors, showing that they had power. It is not a question of so many doors being in the building, but it is a spiritual allusion — power to shut the doors of our hearts against evil; it is a question of inward power with them in John.
Ques Is the inward power the result of accepting the reproach outwardly?
JT I think they go together. Luke would call attention to intelligence in the breaking of bread, and the place where they were gathered together, and that the eleven were there — the authority of Christ in His apostles. Luke makes much of what is public, whilst John deals with what is inward.
Ques Does Paul stand by the cross at Corinth?
JT Exactly. There were those of whom he speaks as enemies of the cross of Christ; (Philippians 3:18). They were nominal christians; they were not said to be enemies of Christ, but enemies of the cross. And so he stands firmly by it in his first letter to the Corinthians.
HFN With regard to the thought of that which the Lord valued being committed to one standing at the cross, does not that feature stand out in a peculiar way in John? The Lord committed His mother to the care of John, the light in regard to the brethren was committed to Mary Magdalene, and to Peter is committed the care of the sheep. Is it not a principle that the Lord commits to us whatever we are equal to?
JT That, I am sure, is very helpful; there is [p. 125] trustworthiness. And so He breathes into them and says, “Receive the Holy Spirit whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted to them; whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained” — a most important trust. As was remarked, we get the word of the cross in 1 Corinthians 1:18. Paul is standing by it. It is not a thing that I hang about my neck, it is the word of the cross in my heart, in my mind; I know what it means. To those who perish it is foolishness.
PL “Yea, a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also” (Luke 2:35); there is the searching character of the word, as in Hebrews 4.
JT Quite. The word of the cross is foolishness to the cultivated mind of this world; they may wear the cross around their necks, or carry it in their pockets, and yet the word of it not be in the mind at all. It is the word of the cross that is power.
ESH It means that you are prepared to die, would you say?
JT I think you not only die, but you are identified with the Lord. Paul says, “I am crucified with Christ”, (Galatians 2:20). “But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world”, (Galatians 6:14). It is real deliverance. The Lord’s supper brings all that vividly before us; it is His own device as a symbol, and is intended to bring vividly before us that He was actually dead. It is a dead Christ that is brought into view before us; the symbol is there to be seen.
Ques Does not that lie at the root of all true spiritual state?
JT Well, it does, if you are identified with that. It is Christ in these circumstances, and the circumstances are vividly before you.
CCE That is most helpful. It is a weekly remembrance of it. The Lord’s supper, as you say, in a most vivid way brings the thing before our souls.
PL [p. 126] It is the cross of Jesus; the Person is in evidence in His dying.
HFN Does John’s ministry produce the kind of people who stand by the cross, and Luke’s ministry prepare for John’s?
JT They go together. Luke would bring us back to that point, but through our intelligences. Although the two have their backs to the centre, yet they are conversing about the Lord, and such cannot but be of interest to heaven; and so the Lord drew near and went with them. He could do that. There would be some moral basis for His going with them but what He had in His mind the sequel shows. It says their eyes were holden so as not to know Him; this has allusion to their state of soul.
Rem They were “slow of heart”, the Lord says.
JT That is the explanation of it: “O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: ought not the Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?” They were foolish.
Rem Their affections did not correspond with their intelligence.
JT Just so. They had, however, hearts capable of burning when they heard Him conversing; that is important. If you hear people talking about the Lord and His things, although they may have turned their backs on the centre, yet they may have hearts capable of being touched. The Lord knew it was so in their case; He intended to touch their hearts.
Rem There was movement with them when they constrained Him, saying, “Abide with us”.
JT I think they were being gradually restored. There was something there different from what they had been accustomed to. Although apparently a stranger, so far as they knew, they were willing to invite Him in. “Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?” But then they invited Him in. But despite all the burning owing to the effect of His words, and despite the opening up of the Scriptures to them, they did not make a move to go back to Jerusalem until He had left them.
PL You must abide by the cross in order to have right thoughts of Christ or the brethren. “Certain of them which were with us” is different from “my brethren” of John 20. The former attaches the saints to ourselves. But is not “my brethren” finding them by way of Himself?
JT Quite.
PL You feel the need of John’s line to meet this in Luke.
HFN Their eyes being opened, the moment they get a sight of Himself, they are prepared to return to the centre.
JT That is a point to be noted. It is through their eyes they recognised Him. All this process has the moral state in view. It is through the mind and heart that He is operating; in other words, the assembly is to be formed of “intelligent persons”; persons who have gone through a moral process. They know where they are, and why they are there. That is a great thing to come to, and that is Luke’s point of view — to have a people who are intelligent, so that they are talking of the Scriptures first, and then when He would have gone further, constraining Him to stay with them. Then in the giving of thanks and breaking of bread He is made known. The point of view in Luke, I believe, is to affect you so that you are according to the assembly publicly. The breaking of bread is what they saw; it is what is presented to their eyes, and they are enabled to see the Lord in it: “and their eyes were opened”, it says, “and they recognised him”. It is a question of intelligence, and the power of discernment.
[p. 128] Ques The Corinthians did not recognise the Lord, did they?
JT They were defective in discerning the body; the apostle approaches the subject, “I speak as to intelligent persons do ye judge what I say” (1 Corinthians 10:15), that is, you have to judge what is said and discern what is meant by it.
Ques Does Luke, writing with method, arrive at that point?
JT Yes; it is to bring about the public body here, that in which the divine order is to be seen, so that the Scriptures are opened up, and they are to be His witnesses. John is dealing with the inner thing, which is in a sense the greater, because it is a question of power in your soul to stand where the opposition is, prevailing against it, so as to be independent of it. You are able to stand. They did not leave Jerusalem, but the doors are shut against the evil there.
Ques Would the Lord’s washing their feet have a moral bearing with this in view? That was a private matter, was it not?
JT I suppose all the instruction in John has this in view. You can see how it fits in to our own times. Power to stand against opposition, to stand where it is greatest.
PL Would you say it goes on to “part with me”? We can go on with all that He is going on with as drinking into His suffering spirit.
JT Quite.
Ques Referring to your remark in regard of the Lord’s supper as to everything being before our gaze there, would you say that Christ on the cross as the sin-bearer comes before us then?
JT It is Christ in those circumstances; the circumstances are vividly before us; we are brought back to the solemn fact that He was there. But I do not think the efficacy of His death comes before us so much, although, of course, we cannot ignore [p. 129] that, but He was there in those circumstances, and we are brought back to that, and we feed upon it.
Rem He was glorifying God in the place of sin.
JT Well, all that enters into it, but you are thinking of the Person in the Lord’s supper; it is a memorial. That He was actually there is a most solemn thing to be brought back to; you are thinking of Him. You know that He is now alive and that He is not in this world at all, but that He was in those circumstances. In occupation with Him in them He is brought to your attention by that in which love is fully expressed. He is always expressing love, you might say, in all His care for us; but this is that in which love was fully expressed; that is what you are brought to see, that it is Himself, but Himself in those circumstances. It is a question, not of remembering Him in those circumstances, but of remembering Him by them; the Person you are remembering is the One who went into those circumstances; it is the Lord in death.
Ques It has been said that we often start on too high a note. I suppose we might dwell on the Lord as the sin-offering at the commencement of the meeting?
JT The point is that you are occupied with the Person; it is a memorial. You face the fact that the One who is absent, who is to be remembered by the assembly, by the saints, was in death. There is no circumstance that brings Christ to you so vividly as this. If it were a question of remembering Him in His death, then you would expect the saints to have had the Lord’s supper during the forty days between His resurrection and His ascension; but they did not; there is not a word said about the Lord’s supper during the forty days. The incident at Emmaus was not the Lord’s supper; it was an ordinary meal. It was incidental; but directly He goes to heaven and the Spirit comes you have the breaking of [p. 130] bread.
FES In emphasising the fact that we recognise Him in the breaking of bread, what had you before you?
JT Their intelligence is appealed to; they recognised Him. That shows that the breaking of bread brought Him before them. They must have recalled what they had known earlier — they recalled His features.
HFN Would the Lord opening their understanding that they might understand the Scriptures have any connection with what you have been saying?
JT I think it would; the two returned from Emmaus, it says, the same hour, and they found the eleven — that was a mark of intelligence, because the eleven represented the Lord’s authority. And then, not only the eleven, but those with them — they found the company; and they were saying certain things — that the Lord was risen. In John there was not a word about anything they said. It shows that in Luke it is a question of their intelligence; they were saying, “The Lord is indeed risen and has appeared to Simon”. They had in their minds that the Lord was acting on the line of grace and that is in keeping with Luke. Then the two relate how He was made known to them in the breaking of bread. These remarks are full of intelligence, if you examine them and connect them with the Holy Spirit and the unfolding of the truth of christianity. They are able to see the meaning of the movements of the Lord as well as His words. “And has appeared to Simon” meant a good deal as exemplifying spiritual intelligence. So also that He was made known to the two in the breaking of bread; it means really the opening up of the truth of the Lord’s supper. That is what the Holy Spirit records in Luke. It shows that those who come into fellowship should be concerned about intelligence — to know what they are doing. They have love, of course, and love is the great thing;
[p. 131] John would emphasise that; but Luke would say there must be intelligence. The public body is formed of those who are intelligent, and who recognise authority. Then Luke goes on to tell us that the Lord came in as they were saying these things. It is not a question of what was in their hearts, as you would expect in John; it was the things they were saying — “And as they were saying these things, he himself stood in their midst, and says to them, Peace be unto you”. But they “supposed they beheld a spirit. And he said to them, Why are ye troubled? and why are thoughts rising in your hearts? behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself”. There again you have a touch of intelligence because it was His feet. In John it says that He shewed them His hands and His side, that is to say, it is more the love side in John. Then another thing is worthy of notice; in Luke we read He stood in their midst, that is in the midst of people of that kind; in John it is “in the midst”, to show the position which the Lord takes up.
Ques Does not that limit the thing rather to those who are intelligent?
JT I would not like to differentiate so much as that, because whoever were there, He was there in their midst. There are those who discern Him and those who do not, but I believe the Lord comes in in relation to all, that is, into the midst of a people who are thus gathered, and who are thus the subjects of His grace.
RB There are no absentees in that sense; they are all gathered.
JT Thomas is not said to be absent here.
Ques Why the unrest? why were they terrified and affrighted?
JT That is to bring out another feature. There may be intelligence but an inward state that requires adjustment. It is extraordinary that they should [p. 132] require adjustment in regard to the Lord Himself — that it should be Himself whom they supposed to be a spirit. His appearing here is the final touch to bring them to apprehend Himself.
JS You would say that the Lord would be greatly endeared to those two who had failed in affection; they would say, It was His faithful service that restored us.
Ques So that on the Lord’s day morning, if we are going in this direction, we should look for the Lord to come in and take the lead?
JT Well, He is absent, and the Lord’s supper is to bring vividly before us the circumstances in which love is set out; the facts of His death are there before us, and this has a very sobering, solemnising effect. That, I think, is what the apostle is pressing in 1 Corinthians 11:29; “not discerning the Lord’s body”, he says. And then in respect of misbehaviour, whether outward or inward state, it is in respect of the body and blood of the Lord, they are guilty. It is the solemnity of the thing. I have been impressed lately with this — the Lord is bringing before us vividly the circumstances in which love was shown, in which alone, indeed, it could be fully shown. Love may be shown in other ways, and is constantly being shown by the Lord, but these are the circumstances in which it could be fully shown.
Ques Would you emphasise the thought of a dead Christ in the memorials as showing the extent to which love went?
JT That is the way I look at it. It is a dead Christ before us, His blood separate from the body. These are the circumstances in which love is fully shown, and there never can be any increase in that; it is the full expression of love. That is where Christ was. The Christ that I am remembering was in these circumstances, so that the symbols of Him in those circumstances is the memorial.
[p. 133] Ques Is it in the light of the risen One that we cherish the death of Christ?
JT Oh, surely. You are remembering the Christ who is absent, who is gone into heaven. In Luke He is carried up into heaven. In Acts 1 a cloud received Him out of their sight. Here in Luke it is to call attention to heaven’s receiving Him, but in Acts it is the beginning of the faith period. The Lord’s supper looks on to the faith period when He is out of sight literally, and so we remember Him, and the symbols denote the circumstances in which love is known. It is in His death that love is fully shown.
PL Do you get the two lines in Joseph? He pleaded to be remembered by those to whom he had rendered a service in love; that would be Luke’s view — the explanation of the dream in prison; while the great sustainer of life would be more John — Joseph on the throne.
JT Quite.
Ques It says in Deuteronomy 21:23, “his body shall not remain all night upon the tree”; is that in any way connected with the Supper?
JT In the Supper it is not a question so much of the curse but of the circumstances in which love was shown. He laid down His life for His friends.
Pages 134 - 329 — “Nearness to Christ and Public Service”. Belfast, March and April, 1929 (Volume 95).