NEARNESS TO CHRIST AND PUBLIC SERVICE (3)
[p. 171] NEARNESS TO CHRIST AND PUBLIC SERVICE (3)
JT It is proposed to read the chapters beginning with this one and ending with part of chapter 11 at these meetings, so that we may see how — the new order of things being introduced, seen in the beginning of this chapter — the assembly in its local setting is reached. We noticed this morning that the Lord went through the country city by city and village by village preaching and announcing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God; that having taken place, it says ‘afterward’, referring to what had gone before, particularly chapter 7. The Lord is no longer ministering in an individual way. The twelve are said to be with Him and certain women who ministered to Him of their substance; the woman in chapter 7, who is said to have loved much, representing the desired result in the preaching and announcing. But for this there must be sowing, and so the Lord introduced the parable of the sower. We noticed that the fruit on good ground is borne with patience; consequent on that we have a lamp which is to be set so as to give light to all that come in. It is assumed that some would come in. Following all this, in verses 19 - 21 we have the brethren, those whom the Lord regards as in relationship with Him, as His mother and His brethren; those who “hear the word of God and do it”.
HH That would be a new generation.
JT Quite so. You have more now than one lover of Christ. The woman loved much because she was forgiven much, but now you have a generation in relation to Christ marked off as hearing the word of God and doing it, a generation that would be morally [p. 172] after God. I think these early verses, therefore, introduce a set of principles which, taken together, may enter into the ship in which He crosses the sea with them.
Ques Would these be the product of the seed sown in the good ground?
JT Yes; they hear the word of God and do it.
JB You say these principles enter into the idea of the ship; what is the idea of it?
JT I think the principles that go through, taken together — what the Lord had set out. “He entered”, it says, “into a ship, himself and his disciples; and he said to them, Let us pass over to the other side of the lake; and they set off from shore”. The initiative was His; His disciples were with Him in it.
JB That is helpful, but could you open it out a little more?
JT I think the test was as to whether the ship was staunch enough to go through. The Lord falls asleep; it says, “as they sailed, he fell asleep” — they were doing the thing now. He had entered into the ship with them and given direction to move; then, as they sailed, He fell asleep. Therefore they are tested, not only as to whether He could save them even if the ship were sunk, but whether He would have entered into a ship unable to go through.
Ques Do you mean that the thought of the ship embodies the principles that you have spoken of, so that the disciples, if they maintained these principles, would go through?
JT That is it. If they had understood the principles they would have had no anxiety even if He went to sleep, for if He went to sleep He assumed that all was well, He had no uncertainty as to what would happen. He knew the ship would go through.
Ques Would the ship be something akin to the fellowship of God’s Son, which He inaugurated?
JT Quite so, the principles hold. In chapter 6 [p. 173] you have the bottles — the wine in good vessels. There are principles laid down in chapter 6, I think, but here you have the ship — another idea. There it is a question of the preservation of the wine — the Spirit of God; here it is a question of going through, whether you can go through to the other side of the lake.
Rem To go through, we need to be sure that we are standing by divine principles.
JT If the Lord entered into a ship, it was His own choice; He did not ask the disciples to provide it. Earlier He had asked Peter for the loan of his ship, but here He entered into a ship Himself. They sailed under His direction, but they do it, and now He sleeps, that was the test — it was to bring out what He could be for them in such circumstances. He entered into the ship knowingly.
Rem It looks as though they were not in the good of the kingdom; they were not prepared for a sudden squall.
Rem Divine principles are calculated to take them through.
JT Especially as the Lord is in them. It does not say here that the ship belonged to anyone; in chapter 5 it does; but He entered into it. They might be sure He foresaw all the contingencies of such a voyage. He was not ignorant of the conditions on this lake.
Ques Would “the other side” be till the time of testing is over?
JT I think so. “The other side of the lake” — the whole thing is taken into account. He knew the lake well.
HH Do you think this would have particular reference to Paul’s teaching? Would Luke have that in mind in setting things out in this way? So that the new order of things that Paul ministered would be in regard to that which is [p. 174] imperishable.
JT I think what was introduced at Pentecost proved itself quite staunch; it was quite capable of meeting a storm. But no doubt Luke has Paul in view.
Ques Do we get the principles that carry us through in 2 Timothy — righteousness, faith, love, peace?
JT Just so.
Ques Why do you emphasise “the lake”?
JT “The other side of the lake”, the Lord says; it is an area well known, and exposed to such things as this — these sudden attacks. The Lord knew that; we must not assume for a moment that He did not know; the disciples assumed that He may not have known or thought of the matter.
Ques Could the ship go down?
JT I should think not if the Lord were in it! He entered into it with His disciples, and directed them to pass over.
HD'AC They had not taken the initiative, or they might have blamed themselves; He did it.
Ques The ship is still sailing, is it not?
JT That is another matter. We are here at the initial thought of the thing. There is no break-up of the ship yet; in Paul’s day there was a break-up of the ship; that supposes unfaithfulness in those responsible — another side of the truth. Here we are dealing with the ship into which the Lord entered, and in which He directed the disciples to pass over to the other side of the lake. From this point of view there can be no disaster.
Rem As holding by the principles, the Lord is there, and we get through.
JT That is right. They sailed, and if they sail, that means there were equipments. They were not rowing, they sail — the equipments were there.
HD'AC I suppose it was an attempt of Satan to drown [p. 175] the Lord.
JT It was; but such an attempt as the Lord would expect. It was no surprise to Him; we can never assume any surprises in regard to the Lord. The enemy would come in, but He is aware of that beforehand.
Rem The enemy can never destroy or alter divine principles.
JT No; they are indestructible.
HH He would always make an attack on new features.
JT Yes; but what is of God cannot be overthrown.
HH I wondered whether it would illustrate how we often feel that though our principles are all right, we get into a great deal of distress through not counting on the Lord; for principles in themselves would not suffice without Him.
JT No. “As they sailed” — the ship was in motion, it was going, and then He went to sleep. As holding to the principles only, we shall not be with Him. But we shall be tested as to whether we can rely on Him.
Ques Is the “squall of wind” a sudden attack of the enemy on some principle?
JT It was the whole position here, as in Acts 5:3, “why has Satan filled thy heart that thou shouldest lie to the Holy Spirit?” That was an effort of Satan to upset the whole testimony. It was a question of the presence of the Spirit. Whatever God is putting forward is what Satan will attack.
Ques Why does it say “they were filled with water”, not ‘the ship’?
JT It was in their minds, I suppose — they were filled with it. Literally, it reads, “they were filled”.
Ques Have we anything to correspond with that in the present day?
JT Satan is always attacking. The thing is to hold to the principles, and to see that the Lord has [p. 176] committed Himself to them; they are His own and He has committed Himself to them. We must never assume that anything is lacking. Moses said to God, “Have I conceived all this people ... that thou sayest to me, Carry them?” It was as much as to say that God had not foreseen all the contingencies. Well, God tells him to select seventy others, and He says, “I will take of the Spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon them”, (Numbers 11:12; Numbers 11:16,17). There is no extra power provided, but there is instrumentality. So when we pray, it is not for increased power, but that what we have should be effective: “according to the power that worketh in us”, (Ephesians 3:20).
Ques Was it not faith that was lacking?
JT Yes, faith in what existed; faith in what was actually here. The principles in themselves have no power in them; it is the principles laid hold of in the hearts of the saints; that is what really matters. Of course, the power really lies in the presence of the Spirit in us.
HD'AC How gracious of the Lord to say to His disciples, “Let us” bringing them into a bond with Himself in that way. That ‘us’ could not be drowned. Do we not often find in our localities that we have these principles all right, but the difficulty comes in with the sailing, with the use we make of them and how we handle them, and things are often hindered by a sudden squall?
Ques Does it depend on faith in the presence of the Lord?
JT Exactly. He had been working with them, it was for them now to put into action what they had learned, but He takes the initiative and sets them going. It was well that it could be said of them, “they sailed” — they sailed and He fell asleep.
But now they get to the land, and you have Satan in another form, not as acting on the winds or the [p. 177] sea, but a man out of the city, possessed with demons, met the Lord. I think that this section of the chapter introduces you to potential material for the assembly, that is to say, the man, and the woman and the child. If we keep these in view, I think we shall see how the minister will be put to the test. The principles the Lord brought in are put to the test in the storm, and they come through; He is better known consequently. But now you see what the minister has to contend with. A man meets the Lord out of the city; the service of the gospel has to do with concentrated evil. We have to do with concentrated evil, and this is represented in the man who comes out of the city. It is said of him that he “had demons a long time, and put on no clothes, and did not abide in a house, but in the tombs”.
Ques What difference would there be between this man and the woman in chapter 7, for she is spoken of as “a woman in the city”, here it is “a ... man out of the city”?
JT I think she was delivered where the sin was — completely delivered where it was. She was a woman of the city, she would be well known, and known as a sinner — that was her reputation; but a change had come about, she loved Christ. This man is “out of” the city; he is a product of it; he represents the power of wickedness in the cities, extending beyond their limits — a very solemn thing. For we have to make up our minds, if we are to serve in the gospel, that these are the things to be contended with; concentrated evil, but evil that extends — the man came “out of the city”. But as delivered from the power of Satan he becomes material for the assembly. That is the idea, the composition of the assembly. It is the male side — he is sitting, clothed and in his right mind at the feet of the Lord. That is the element the Lord would use in the way of intelligence and order. Then you have the woman. The child is [p. 178] mentioned first, but she comes in last rightly. The woman is the second component part of the assembly, then there is the child, not a babe, but a child of twelve years old. These are what I should regard as the component parts of an assembly. But we must have them as passed through the hands of Christ; there is a complete change in every one of them as passing through His hands.
Ques Why do you make a distinction between a child and a girl of twelve?
JT I think this chapter contemplates the family order. She is not called ‘damsel’, but ‘child’. The man is the intelligence; the woman is an inner state of transparency (she tells all the truth), and the child is young, fresh life. If you have these features, you have the assembly.
You have intelligence, you have restfulness. There had been secretiveness with the woman, her trouble was a long one, it had lasted all the life of Jairus’ daughter; it was a secret matter, and she would have it healed secretly; but things must be open in the assembly of God, they must be transparent. The man would speak of a sound mind, a balanced mind. This is just one side of the assembly; there is intelligence, order, stability and restfulness — that, I think, is represented in the man.
HD'AC And there would be learning from Jesus, sitting at His feet.
JT Quite so. Instead of learning the defiling sophistication of the city, you have him sitting at the Lord’s feet.
FWW There should be the freshness of a child in the man and the woman.
JT Yes. I understand that the three represent three features that should mark us all.
Rem A balanced mind is of very great value in the things of God.
HH I thought what you said about the woman [p. 179] seeking to be healed secretly is an exercise we sometimes have to face in our local meetings. Things have got to come out, they cannot be dealt with secretly.
JT It is so, indeed. Not that you would cast any aspersion on the sisters, but the woman’s side is taken up, I think, to represent secretiveness, the disposition to hide. (See Genesis 31:34; Matthew 13:33.) In our chapter the woman would have the healing done secretly, but the Lord would not have it that way. He says, “Some one has touched me”; it was the touch of faith, true enough, but it was a secret touch, and the Lord would have things open. So that “she came trembling, and falling down before him, she declared unto him before all the people for what cause she had touched him, and how she was healed immediately”; she told Him all the truth.
Rem The Lord wanted His portion from her heart.
JT And He was thinking of her gain, too. She would be a very different sister afterwards. If God is working with us, we need not fear having the whole thing out.
FWW The man was sent back for testimony.
JT He wished to be with Him, but the Lord says, “Return to thine house and relate how great things God has done for thee”. He represents the element in the assembly that can be trusted.
SL Right-minded brothers conferring would lead to all speaking the same thing.
JT That shows the wisdom in having meetings for brethren to come together in a local way and take counsel, for in them you arrive at a right mind, the mind of the Lord; you are able to look at things from every point of view.
Ques Would you say a word as to the clothing?
JT It would allude to dignity, and also decency. “Let all things be done decently and in order”. A [p. 180] man clothed, who had been accustomed to nakedness, would show that he had come to a right sense of things, and he would exhibit it in himself; all his demeanour and circumstances would indicate that he had a right sense of things.
Ques You do not suggest that the man in the assembly is to have alone the prerogative of a sound mind?
JT We are speaking of features of the assembly; it is no question of individuals, but of all. The first is intelligence and balance and decency, comeliness and public order — such an one is trustworthy. This man wanted to be with the Lord, but He says, “Return to thine house”. That is necessary, or you could not have the public features; there would not be trustworthiness. Then the next thing is the feature of transparency, the opposite of secretiveness. The man, we are told, was possessed of demons “a long time”; but we are given the number of years in which the woman suffered; it was a known period to herself. I suppose the woman’s case is alluded to in Romans 7 — what do you say?
HD'AC Very good.
Rem It would appear, from what you are saying, that these three principles must be existent in connection with the local company before there can be building up, for it is not till these are settled that the food question comes into view.
JT It is in the child that you have the idea of food presented, because that is what is to be sustained, things are to be sustained in freshness. I believe the teaching connected with her carries the other two with it.
HD'AC In the power of Christ to heal them you would have the teaching of Romans 8.
JT The ‘virtue’ here would be the Spirit, as seen in Romans 8.
Ques With regard to the woman in chapter 7,
[p. 181] her faith is in connection with salvation, but in this chapter the woman’s faith is in regard to healing, is it not?
JT Yes, it was a question of bodily condition.
Ques Does everything being exposed call attention to Christ personally, as the woman said in John 4, “a man, which told me all things that ever I did”?
JT Quite so, she had everything exposed to herself; the exposure is to herself, “Come, see a man, which told me”. That is an important thing, to have the thing brought home to oneself. But this woman did not need that, the thing had been brought home to her for twelve years — her actual state. But she was not going to let it be known that she was healed by touching the hem of His garment. The Lord would not have that. If she had kept that secret, she would also want to keep other things secret that should be made known. Thus she would begin her spiritual history with a serious defect.
Rem It is very detrimental to the assembly that things should be kept secret.
JT If you have things concealed, you will not be fit for standing on the sea of glass. It is not that everything must be told, for there are things that are rightly concealed. “A prudent man concealeth knowledge”, (Proverbs 12:23).
Rem Things will come out, anyway.
JT Yes. How much better to let them come out at once. Then He owns her as daughter; there is a family touch, she is a daughter. Henceforth she will not be marked by a dark part.
Ques Would this include the confessing of our faults one to another?
JT I think it would. It is a great matter to have things dealt with — brought into the light. There are things that need not be made public, but the principle of transparency is very important.
Ques Is not this rather more than the confession [p. 182] of her faults? It is the confession of the thing, and how she got healed of it, and to whom she owed the healing.
JT That is it. “All denying, Peter and those with him said, Master, the crowds close thee in and press upon thee, and sayest thou, Who has touched me? And Jesus said, Someone has touched me, for I have known that power has gone out from me”. That was an extraordinary situation! The Lord knew that power had gone out, yet the disciples were questioning Him. You see the position the Lord is placed in through this. We do not want to place the Lord in a false position. To clear up the position everything hinged on this woman’s confession. You often see a situation like that arise, where everything hinges on one person making a statement or a confession. Here the Lord was under a cloud even with His disciples, and so the matter had to be cleared up; the Lord insists that it should, and the matter was cleared up by the woman’s confession. It says, “the woman, seeing that she was not hid” — she was made to feel that the thing must come out.
Ques Do you not think that Paul was in the spirit of the woman when he made confession that he was “a blasphemer and persecutor, and an insolent overbearing man”, (1 Timothy 1:13)? Does he not make a confession that is good for thousands?
JT Covering what is before us, Romans 7 is his confession. Very few of us are prepared to confess the terrible things that go on within us.
Ques Why is there this tendency to keep things secret?
Rem “The fear of man bringeth a snare”, (Proverbs 29:25).
JT Quite so, we are afraid. The woman was afraid. It is innate in us, from this point of view, to conceal [p. 183] a thing.
Rem Courage comes with knowing what was done in her.
JT Romans 7:24,25 is the statement of a man who is out of the experience depicted. I believe a multitude of christians are afraid to confess their inward difficulties, for the reason that they have not seen the way out. “Who shall deliver me? ... I thank God, through Jesus Christ our Lord”; you are brought into touch with a Person who becomes your Deliverer. This chapter speaks of touching the hem of His garment, but the Lord says, “Who touched me?” For deliverance the believer comes into contact with Himself.
Rem So in Romans 7 it is a question not only of deliverance, but of the Deliverer.
JT You come to know the Lord. “There is then now no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus ... God, having sent his own Son”, (Romans 8:1,3). There the heart is taken up with Christ; it is not simply God sending His Son, but His own Son; the heart is thus appealed to. God sending Him “in likeness of flesh of sin, and for sin, has condemned sin in the flesh”, (verse 3). As you are able to say that, you are not afraid to disclose what you have experienced.
Ques Would there not be a link formed with the company now?
JT Yes; so she is now a daughter. “Be of good courage, daughter; thy faith has healed thee; go in peace”. Now you are ennobled; instead of losing ground you have gained ground in being open about it. Think of the One who called her ‘daughter’, for it is not here a daughter of Abraham, as in chapter 13:16, but the Lord calls her ‘daughter’. Think what a sister this woman would be in after years!
Rem The Lord doubtless knew, but it was to bring the thing out in her.
[p. 184] Rem We suffer largely from not being ennobled in this manner.
JT I think we do, for the saints are brought together on the ground of ennoblement; we are not gathered on the ground of the littleness of the flesh, but as having received the Spirit of God. Romans prepares for Corinthians.
Rem It is the Lord’s own word here.
JT Yes. If the Lord calls this woman ‘daughter’, why need she mind if others call her anything else? Then He says, “Go in peace”; that is another word to be noticed. When the Lord says, ‘Go’, I think it means He has confidence in her, she is to be trusted.
Ques Does the Lord in that way bring her into the circle He speaks of as “my mother and my brethren”?
JT I think so; only ‘daughter’ is a distinct family touch.
Ques What do you understand by the Lord realising that power had gone out from Him?
JT I think it shows how conscious He is of what goes on spiritually. Every bit of power that goes out to you and to me, the Lord is quite cognisant of it, and He would have it disclosed, He would have it public.
Rem The great difficulty in a local assembly is often the lack of transparency which would bring about healing.
Ques Are you speaking of this question of transparency individually or collectively, or both?
JT It is a feature of the company; but of course the company is formed of individuals.
Rem So that, until everything is out, there can be no healing amongst the brethren.
JT Now what you see here is that “while he was yet speaking” there came some one from the ruler of the synagogue’s house, saying, “Thy daughter is dead; do not trouble the teacher”. Now we are linked on with the following case.
Rem So, while the question of freshness is raised first, it is solved after the inward question as seen in the woman has been solved.
JT You can understand that. The source of freshness is introduced in Romans 5 — the love of God shed abroad in the heart — but the state ensuring the continuance of it is not seen till chapter 8.
HH It is rather remarkable that, in connection with Marah, the word was, “I am Jehovah who healeth thee”, (Exodus 15:26). Does not that fit in with this?
JT Yes. In the gift of the Spirit. God has freshness in view, but before that freshness can be maintained permanently, the sin question has to be dealt with — not sins, but sin — the thing working within us. Romans 7 is the process; chapter 8 the result.
Rem And it is only solved by virtue from Him.
JT That means the Spirit. But now, the little girl becomes extremely interesting, because it is a question of young, fresh life. He said, “Do not weep, for she has not died, but sleeps. And they derided him”. He entered into the house, it says, with Peter and John and James, and the father and mother of the child. When we come to this case, it is not only a question of the Spirit, but of what is spiritual. I think the case of the woman involves the Spirit, the virtue involves the Spirit coming into the believer from Christ; but the girl’s case is not only that but what is spiritual. I refer to those whom the Lord would have in the house, having put others out. The Corinthians were not spiritual; they had the Spirit, but they were not spiritual. The Galatians, too, had the Spirit, but they were not spiritual. “Ye which are spiritual”, the apostle says; (Galatians 6:1).
[p. 186] It is not simply that virtue has come out to us for our relief, but that we are to become spiritual. So He puts everybody out, and suffers no one to go in save Peter and John and James, and the father and mother of the child. Those put out were persons who would act on the flesh. Colossians warns against those who would introduce philosophy and vain deceit and ceremonialism. All that has to be put out, it is a question of those who are living spiritually. The child is raised up into a spiritual environment. The Lord was there, and Peter and John and James, and the father of the child and the mother. She was raised up into that environment.
Ques What does ‘spiritual’ mean?
JT It is not only that I have the Spirit, but my mind and affections are brought under the influence of the Spirit.
Rem These features would mark the child.
JT Yes; it is the spiritual state in the saints that is to be nourished. Paul deplored that he could not minister to the Corinthians as spiritual, but he did to the Ephesians; it is the spiritual side that is introduced at Ephesus.
Ques How could anyone become spiritual?
JT I think you begin by recognising the Spirit, on the ground of His having come to us by the death of Christ, and you carry that out in everyday life; having the Spirit, you put to death the deeds of the body, and so you live. That is the negative side; He also acts on our minds and hearts, forming after Christ in intelligence, affection, etc.
Ques Does transparency come in there?
JT Quite so. The virtue that has come out of Christ becomes power in the soul, and by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body and live. This lays the basis for the ministry in Colossians and Ephesians.
[p. 187] Ques Does not receiving the Spirit from Christ put us immediately on the line of the Spirit’s energy?
JT Yes; and it could be only through His death.
HD'AC There must be no carnality; so the apostle in opening up the truth of the Spirit says, “If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit”, (Galatians 5:25). If we walk in the Spirit we shall not fulfil the lusts of the flesh. So the great thing is, if anything happens to cause the conscience to act, you judge it, it is the flesh, but then you get back immediately to the Spirit; you cannot be right except in the Spirit.
JT “For we, by the Spirit, on the principle of faith, await the hope of righteousness” (verse 5). Everything in a practical sense is by the Spirit.
GSG The apostle says in 1 Corinthians 2:4 that his speech was “not with enticing words of man’s wisdom”, but he brought before them Christ, and Him crucified, so that they might have experience of the demonstration of the Spirit. Would not our being occupied with Christ personally produce a state that is favourable to the Spirit working in us?
JT Yes; but you must have clearly in your soul the judicial basis of all, and that is, that “God having sent his own Son, in likeness of flesh of sin, and for sin, has condemned sin in the flesh”, (Romans 8:3).
Rem The woman touched Him, and then the issue was staunched.
JT Yes. Then as to Jairus’ daughter, the Lord clears the ground of all that is unspiritual. People were there playing the flute, and making a tumult and weeping, all to stultify the sense of death. There must be the clearance of all fleshly elements; we are entitled to put them all out, for God has put them out judicially in the death of Christ, He has shown His abhorrence of them there [p. 188] and we are entitled to condemn them. But you retain the spiritual elements — Peter and John and James, and the father and the mother of the child. The father and mother refer to responsibility — what I am responsibly. Then the Lord addresses the child: “he, having turned them all out, and taking hold of her hand, cried saying, Child, arise”. Now you have her formally named by the Lord; she is brought into life with that designation. The woman is called, ‘daughter’; she is called ‘child’, that is to say, it is a spiritual element that is under designation — youthfulness. He is identified with her (He takes her hand), and He cries — it is very urgent.
Ques Would that verse, “the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free from the law of sin and of death” (Romans 8:2), apply here?
JT Yes. So it is not that she was raised up, but “her spirit returned”, and then she rose up. The son of the woman of Zarephath (1 Kings 17) had a severe illness, that is to say, it produced feelings and patience; it was a severe illness, so that his life gradually ebbed out of him — the prophet correspondingly went through a severe exercise, and through this the boy’s soul came back again. So here, the Lord asserted that she had not died but fallen asleep. It is resuscitation rather than resurrection.
Ques Is that viewing it in its setting, because of what had occurred in regard to the woman? She was free through the Lord’s death; but He could say of this child, “she is not dead, but sleepeth”.
JT That is right, it is another side of the truth being developed — that you are brought to life in a spiritual sense, as it says in Romans 8:10, “the Spirit is life”, and “the mind of the Spirit life and peace”, (8:6). It is not here a question of resurrection exactly, but of the spirit coming again. It is more Romans 8 than Colossians. So it says, “her spirit returned, and immediately she rose up”; there was power in herself, she rose up; and then it says, “he commanded something to eat to be given to her”; that life is to be sustained.
Rem In the one case the woman touches the Lord Jesus, and in the other the Lord Jesus takes the child by the hand.
JT Yes, that is right; showing, in the latter case, that He links on with you now.
HD'AC Not only did He say, “Child, arise”, but He called; there was a voice, the voice that wakes the dead. We have all heard His voice. It was a distinct voice, which reached the dead.
FS Why were they to tell no one what had happened?
JT This is not for publication. “Our life is hid with Christ in God”; it is what is private in family relations. There is that which is hidden. It leads on to “the mystery ... in which are hid all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge”, (Colossians 2:3).
Rem The injunction not to tell was only for the time being, for the time came when Luke wrote about it.
JT It represents a principle. What is spiritual is not to be brought down to the range of the natural mind of man. By it the Lord was derided.