THE DIVINE STANDARD OF SERVICE (3)
[p. 392] THE DIVINE STANDARD OF SERVICE (3)
Ques Will you gather up in a few words the line upon which we have been, and connect it with what is before us this morning?
JT Our subject is really the relation of the ministry to the minister, and the relation of the minister to the ministry. This epistle interweaves those two thoughts in an exceptional way, that is, the personality or character of the minister as bearing on the ministry, and vice versa, the bearing of the ministry upon the minister himself; much was said, too, about personality hinging on sonship, whether in Christ or in us. We can understand that in coming in, God would come in relation to personality, that is in the Son, so that it is God who is brought to us, but in One great enough to represent Him. The evangelists introduce the Lord in that way, as greeted from heaven by the Father, “Thou art my beloved Son, in thee I have found my delight”, (Mark 1:11, Luke 3:22) and also, “This is my beloved Son” (Matthew 3:17), the one referring to His own consciousness of the Father’s pleasure in Him and the other, the attention of others being called to Him by the Father. On the mount of transfiguration it is, “This is my beloved Son: hear him”, (Mark 9:7, Luke 9:35) The same principle runs down to all ministers; as sons there is that consciousness of our relation with God and His pleasure in us; and then in some way God calls attention to us, so that we may be listened to. Hence Paul is “an elect vessel to me”, the Lord says, “to bear my name before both nations and kings and the sons of Israel”, (Acts 9:15).
We noted how the work of God is carried on in a mediatorial way on the high level of sonship, whether in Christ or in us. God in His Son is within [p. 393] our range, and He remains ever so; it is said, that having put down all rule and all authority He delivers up “the kingdom to him who is God and Father”, and the Son shall be Himself subject eternally, “that God may be all in all”, (1 Corinthians 15:24,28). That is how the matter is left in Scripture, so that God is within the range of our intelligence and affection in One known to us in manhood. We have always to bear in mind that God is God, and man is man, only God has come into manhood in Christ, who ever remains Man. We are in danger of having a conception in our minds of God, bringing Him down to our own level, but then what is made — the creation — is not compassable by us, how much less God Himself. Hence we are warned against intruding into what is not revealed, or into what “the form of God” (Philippians 2:6) is. Scripture says of Him, “dwelling in unapproachable light; whom no man has seen, nor is able to see”, (1 Timothy 6:16).
ASL Does that last scripture explain the word of the Lord, “No one knows the Son but the Father” (Matthew 11:27)? He, being God and having come into manhood, must be beyond the scope and grasp of the creature.
JT Quite so. That scripture protects His Person. We know how the enemy has taken advantage of the lowly circumstances into which He came in love to attack Him.
Ques What you have said is very helpful. Now, how do you link it up with what is immediately before us?
JT I was going to say we dwelt yesterday afternoon on the high plane of God’s operations which the apostle brings forward in meeting the petty feelings at Corinth in regard of himself. He was not going to descend into those petty feelings; he would maintain things on the level that God had set them; that is, the Son of God and the Spirit of God. The Son of God was preached, and the Spirit of God [p. 394] was here, so that we by Him might be anointed. God anoints us by Him, and seals us by Him, and gives us the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts; that is, we are maintained at the height of what God is doing. Then having said all that, Paul calls God to witness on his soul that it was to spare them he had not come to Corinth; he would not rule over their faith, but be a fellow-workman of their joy. Then he goes on to speak about judging with himself as to what should be done; it was the calculation of love. “I have judged this with myself”, showing how free and conscious he was of ability to judge in the light of what he had been saying; he would not come to them again in grief. “Not to come back to you in grief”, he says (chapter 2:1). If he had grieved them, he would look to them to make him glad — this would be so as his letter was fully effective. Then he brings out the two important thoughts — that forgiveness was in the Person of Christ, and that he, whatever had happened, was a sweet savour to God “in the saved and in those that perish”, (chapter 2:15). Things are thus kept on their proper level. If he had forgiven, it was for their sakes in “the Person of Christ”.
HH How would you explain that scripture, that the savour of Christ is in “the saved and in those that perish”?
JT Well, I think the apostle is alluding to the sense of liberty he had as sustained of God in those very trying circumstances, and he was aiming at re-establishing the Corinthians in relation to himself. But there was a matter at Corinth that the enemy might use to widen the breach, that is, it might be said he forgave the man but they did not, or that they forgave him but he did not. He seeks to work with them and not independently of them, so that Satan should not get an advantage and widen the breach, which would be a great disadvantage to the testimony. So he brings in the Person of Christ, that [p. 395] forgiveness was in Him. It was no matter of discussing with them about the man; he had his own mind about him, and forgave him in the Person of Christ.
FHB In the Person of Christ — does that mean he represented Christ?
JT He puts the thing on its proper level. The expression, “the Person of Christ”, implies the adjustment of the thing. The important point is to see that things are maintained on the level on which God has placed them, so that we may not drop down to wrangling or empty discussion.
Ques Will you now refer to our brother’s question as to verse 15, “For we are a sweet odour of Christ to God in the saved and in those that perish”?
JT I was going to say that we ought to see the link between the Person of Christ and that; the apostle himself was on that level, and so in the sense of what God is, that whatever happened — he alludes to his having left the work at Troas — he could say, “Thanks be to God, who always leads us in triumph in the Christ, and makes manifest the odour of his knowledge through us in every place. For we are a sweet odour of Christ to God, in the saved and in those that perish”. You see how in keeping he was with the sense of what God is in Christ, according to what he had been saying. He was a sweet odour of Christ to God. The odour is what is so important. There is the light and the truth, but the odour is brought in — what he was to God.
Ques So that whatever the apparent effect of the preaching in our eyes as the witness to Christ, there goes up to God, in that way, a constant sweet savour that is never lost. Is that the idea?
JT It supposes that one is moving on this level, the level on which things are set here. The apostle was not coming down to their level to discuss things in detail; he maintained things in the Person of Christ.
JJ Did it mean that it was a very serious thing [p. 396] to come in touch with the apostle seeing he was on that high level? It was like coming in touch with Christ Himself.
JT Quite. He says, “If also our gospel is veiled, it is veiled in those that are lost”, (chapter 4:3).
HD'AC He could not have said to the Corinthians, Who always leads you in triumph, because of their moral state.
JT That helps. He is really speaking of himself, and doubtless of Silvanus and Timotheus.
HES Would you say that the only way in which maturity is really reached is when things are maintained on this divine level?
JT That is what I thought. Lest “Satan get an advantage against us”, (chapter 2:11). If he can drag us down to the level of man’s way of doing things, he will; but you decline. As you are maintaining things in the Person of Christ, you are a savour of Christ to God.
HH It is of vast importance in regard of the assembly that things should move on this plane amongst us as saints.
JT That is the thing; we learn from the passage to keep things on God’s level.
Rem In the world around us there is a great deal which is really degrading in connection with the name of Christ and the testimony of God, but this would safeguard us from lowering things to meet man’s perverted level.
JT You see it in Nehemiah. The proposal of Sanballat was to drop down from the plane on which Nehemiah was operating. He was operating according to God, building and constructing the walls, but the proposal of Sanballat was that he should come down to the plain and take counsel with him and his associates. That would have been giving the enemy an advantage. God is operating on a certain line and we do not want to leave that line. That is what it is [p. 397] here, and on that level we are in our measure a sweet odour of Christ to God.
EuR Would the spirit of thanksgiving be maintained in that way?
JT Quite; God has His portion whatever happens. An offensive odour arises as you come down to the level of man’s petty feelings and empty wrangling about matters, but if you take things up in the Person of Christ, they become solved and there is an odour there of Christ.
JJ Is that seen in Colossians 3:12,13? “Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of compassion, kindness, lowliness, meekness, long-suffering; forbearing one another, and forgiving one another”. Is not the odour maintained there?
JT That is right. Corruption is soon apparent where we might drop down to man’s way, and meet in the plain of Ono with such men as Sanballat, men with whom we cannot walk in righteousness. What can you expect but an odour that is not of Christ?
MWB Would you make the principle of verses 15,16, as applicable to assembly dealings, the issue of any particular case?
JT It ought to apply in all service, in all that we are doing. We do not want to leave God out; we want to have something for God.
SJBC It is very comforting to the one who ministers, though he may not see any apparent results, to know that if Christ is ministered, there is a sweet savour that goes up to God.
JT “Thanks be to God”, he says, “who always leads us in triumph in the Christ, and makes manifest the odour of his knowledge through us in every place”. That is what God is doing; and then he adds, “For we are a sweet odour of Christ to God, in the saved and in those that perish”. The first is God is doing it; He “leads us in triumph in the Christ, and makes manifest the odour of his knowledge through us in every place”. Think of the range of things under that head — His knowledge. And then the apostle says, “We are a sweet odour of Christ to God, in the saved and in those that perish”, but then God was making manifest the odour of His knowledge in every place. The fact was, wherever Paul went, the odour of His knowledge was there; God was making it manifest.
EJM “His knowledge”; would that anticipate the millennial day?
JT Yes, the knowledge of God will cover the earth. When one contemplates the corruption there is and the odour of this world, what refreshing there is in the odour of His knowledge in every place. God is doing that in Paul, and then Paul adds that he was that to God. The odour of God’s knowledge was not only for God Himself, it was for others. God made it manifest in every place, and Paul was an odour of Christ to God. The first is the knowledge of God in the apostle’s ministry. God manifested an odour in every place through that, but the next statement is what the apostle was personally to God in his ministry: “We are a sweet odour”. The first is the ministry. God made His knowledge manifest as a sweet odour in every place; that would be for any one who had that sense of smell; it would be a testimony. But then, what the apostle and his associates were to God is stated afterwards — a sweet odour of Christ to God.
HFN Is it the same thought as in Psalm 45 in regard of the Lord? “All thy garments smell of myrrh, and aloes, and cassia”.
JT That is the idea, and no doubt the same smell could be found with Paul. We see what persons they were to be a sweet odour to God.
JJ I suppose the odour manifested in every place remained in the various assemblies that were established.
JT The thing was to continue locally, I am [p. 399] sure,
and no doubt it did as the testimony was rightly received.
JHT Is that seen at Philippi?
JT Very especially. Philippi would correspond in conserving what had been there in the apostle. Much stress is laid on the sufferings he and Silas endured in the prison. It was no small matter that such an odour of Christ was brought into Philippi. I have no doubt that Lydia would retain it. After the sufferings it is said that Paul, being released, went to Lydia; (Acts 16:40). She had received him into her house earlier, as the Lord had opened her heart “to attend to the things spoken by Paul”. She, as faithful to the Lord, had received him into her house, and now after the sufferings, he goes to her. It reminds us of the Lord who appeared to His own “after he had suffered”; the holy anointing oil, so to say, would be passed on to those to whom He appeared; and so I think Lydia would value and conserve the impression of sufferings which Paul would convey. He speaks much of suffering in his epistle to the saints there.
JHT Did the apostle secure that collectively from the saints in the last chapter, “an odour of sweet savour, an acceptable sacrifice, agreeable to God” (Philippians 4:18)?
JT The connection is in the “odour of sweet savour”.
Rem With regard to Mary of Bethany we get the same suggestion. The odour of the ointment filled the house. One has the sense that the odour is still in the house.
Ques Do we get it again in Mark 14:9 with the woman who anointed the Lord’s head? “Wheresoever these glad tidings may be preached in the whole world, what this woman has done shall be also spoken of for a memorial of her”.
JT Quite. What she did alluded to the sufferings of Christ.
Rem There were those who made a trade of the word of God.
JT That raises another question, whether we love our Lord Jesus Christ in incorruption. There has to be freedom from corruption, and making a trade of the word of God would be an ill-savour certainly. “We do not, as the many, make a trade of the word of God; but as of sincerity, but as of God, before God, we speak in Christ”, (2 Corinthians 2:17). What was in your mind about the trading?
Rem Well, it struck me the expression, “the many”, as connected with making a trade of the word of God, thus showing the tendency.
JT Men go in for theology as they do for law or medicine, as a mere lucrative profession. That is what has developed throughout the christian profession now. The word of God is thus discredited. Christendom has become a hireling institution, to say the least, in which the Lord has no place; the hireling fleeth when the wolf comes.
Rem Making “my Father’s house an house of merchandise”. (John 2:16).
JT Exactly. In service we need to keep near the Lord and to be in constant dependence on Him or we shall become mercenary.
WL Is that why in the gospel of Mark, to which you have referred, they left the hired servants as well as the father?
JT That is good. In Luke they left all; in Matthew they left their nets, the ship, and their father.
WL What is the thought of speaking “in Christ” (verse 17)?
JT It is in keeping with what we have been saying — the elevation of God’s operations. I think one speaking in Christ would have no reliance on fleshly [p. 401] ability. I believe it refers to the sense the apostle had of the utter uselessness of natural ability and glory in the service of the Lord. The Corinthian leaders were relying on natural ability and education and human wisdom, whereas Paul’s speaking was “in Christ”. It corresponded with the Lord’s speaking in the gospels.
WL Would it be in the power of the anointing? Is that the thought?
JT Exactly; and it is “in Christ”, taking you out of the status of the flesh in any sense.
EG Is “in Christ” a sort of climax to that sentence, because you might be sincere and you might speak as of God and for God, yet if it is not in Christ, it is not enough?
JT That is the standard for God; Christ is the standard of everything. Paul’s speaking was not in human wisdom but “in demonstration of the Spirit and of power”, (1 Corinthians 2:4).
HD'AC If christian speaking and conduct were always in Christ, what a marvellous influence we should have.
JT It would have brought in here the kind of way that prevails in heaven, the character of speaking in heaven.
Rem So there is set up here a spiritual gauge or standard by which we are capable of measuring everything among us.
HH Paul heard the language of another world in chapter 12, things not lawful for a man to utter.
JT Quite. One sometimes thinks if one were lifted up into heaven and heard what is said, and saw what is there, one would have the mind of God as to what pleases Him. As soon as Jesus is born, heaven comes down in volume to the shepherds, not only one angel, but “a multitude of the heavenly host”. Note, a multitude was brought down and we are told what they were saying. They were “[p. 402] praising God and saying, Glory to God”, (Luke 2:13,14) and the shepherds heard all that. They would get an inkling at the outset of what was in the mind of God. Gabriel came down — a great dignitary — and spoke to Zacharias and Mary, and an angel came to the shepherds and spoke to them and then a multitude of the heavenly host came down. It does not say these spoke to the shepherds; that is not the point. The point was that heaven was brought down for the shepherds to see and hear. They were “praising God and saying, Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good pleasure in men”. That was heaven brought down to them. Luke, who always confirms Paul, would emphasise what is in heaven, and that there should be a reflection of it here on earth.
Ques Is that suggested in Hebrews 13:2: “Some have unawares entertained angels”.
JT Quite; angels bring in what is heavenly. Now chapter 3 brings in another thing of great importance, and that is what the Corinthians were as the fruit of Paul’s ministry, that is, what they were as representative of Christ in this world, and what they were in his heart. What they were as a testimony and fruit of his ministry they were in his heart — no more, no less.
CEB I should like to ask one question on the close of chapter 2. It says there, “Who is sufficient for these things?” What is the force of that?
JT It is to remind you of the greatness of God and His work. You challenge your own heart as to this — one challenges one’s own heart. In chapter 3 it says, “Our competency is of God; who has also made us competent, as ministers of the new covenant”. So it is clear that our sufficiency, whatever the measure must be of God.
HES Are you suggesting that what the Corinthians were to the heart of the servant is connected with what they were to the heart of Christ?
JT The apostle says, “Ye are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read of all men, being manifested to be Christ’s epistle ministered by us, written, not with ink, but the Spirit of the living God; not on stone tables, but on fleshy tables of the heart”. First what they were in his heart; they did not have a mere passing place in his affection; they were written there and brought out wherever he went. Such a place had they that he brought them out as his letter. But then they were the epistle of Christ because of what the ministry had effected in their hearts.
WRP Do you think he could have said that in the first epistle?
JT In view of the existing state I do not think he could; anyway he does not, although he alludes here to his ministry when among them.
WRP The thought would take in the ministry of the first epistle as well.
JT No doubt, but I think he alludes to his ministry among them and how effective it was. He challenges them later (chapter 13) as to their very conversion, that it was through him.
Ques In what measure could this be true now? Paul had an exclusive ministry in Corinth. How far is the spirit of the thing available in this day?
JT Well, it is the spirit of the thing that is available, because no one can assume now to have any definite ministry to the assembly. As a matter of fact what marks our day is each one doing the best he can under the Lord, and He helps wonderfully; it is “here a little, there a little”, and the fruit of the whole is something for God. But in this instance we have “ministers of the new covenant”. God had made them competent — it was definite. The Lord had told Paul that He had much people in that city; the Lord knew well the limits of it, and who were there, and no one was to set upon him to hurt [p. 404] him. Those people were to be impressed with Christ, and they were; there was a wonderful result. Paul stayed there eighteen months and they were affected, not only by the light, but by the “Spirit of the living God”.
Ques Were they in that way in the good of the anointing?
JT That would be included, but it is writing on the heart — alluding to the tables. There would be something of Christ written. The writing is very interesting because it is there at all times.
FHB The writing could not be effaced.
JT That is what I thought, nor could the tables of their hearts be broken like the first tables of the covenant. The first tables were, I am sure, wonderful workmanship; God Himself apparently made them, and yet they were destroyed. There is nothing like that suggested here; “Not on stone tables, but on fleshy tables of the heart”. The human heart as wrought upon by the Spirit of God is now the divine writing material.
Ques What can we look for now that answers to the spirit of the thing?
JT I think the presentation of Christ in such wise that He is impressed on the hearts of those whom you serve. Each one should calculate how much Christ is presented. You bring the thing, not only the words, but the thing itself which you intend to be produced, that is, if I am not like Christ I cannot hope to produce Christ, not that God cannot work sovereignly, but the principle with Paul was to bring the thing he intended to produce. He was the representative of Christ in himself, and what he said was the mind of God, which would impress the Corinthians so that there was a writing.
JJ Do you think the work of the apostle in Corinth was very much like the hewing out of the [p. 405] second two tables, preparing material for the Spirit to write upon as set forth in himself?
JT Quite; but the Lord, of course, is the anti-type of Moses. What was done was done by the Lord; they were the epistle of Christ really. The Lord said, “I have much people in this city”, and they were potentially the tables, so to speak. Paul was a competent minister; God had made him that, but Christ is the minister answering to Moses; the work is His; they were the “epistle of Christ”.
ER Is that like saying, “Ye are unleavened”, in the first epistle (1 Corinthians 5:7)?
JT Exactly; he took them up abstractly, but there was a work by the Spirit of God, as he says, “Being manifested to be Christ’s epistle ministered by us, written, not with ink, but the Spirit of the living God”. That gives you the position. The Lord had said He had much people in that city; He did not say so of Athens or others. He had much people in Corinth, and the epistle to be written there was to be Christ’s, “ministered by us”, but “manifested to be Christ’s epistle”, not Paul’s, but Christ’s.
Ques Christ’s epistle and Christ’s glory; would one follow the other?
JT Just so. What a conception it is to have in Corinth, or any other place, the epistle of Christ, actually written by the Spirit of the living God!
JJ Would the second two tables suggest the new covenant? The old ones are broken.
JT I think they do; Moses is more brought into the work. He has to hew them out himself and to make an ark of wood. The humanity of Christ is more emphasised, and it is expressly stated that no one was to be with him on going up the second time. It was intimated at the beginning that Joshua was with him. I suppose it alludes to Christ as having died; for that is really what came out in Exodus 32. Moses could not make atonement, but that was the [p. 406] principle of the thing, so in going up the second time it would be Christ going up into heaven. No one else went up; He went up alone, and there it is the glory shines. The covenant that is in the mind of God is now seen; and as in heaven He is “the Lord, the Spirit”. This chapter brings out that whilst the epistle is Christ’s, the minister is as of the Lord, as the Spirit of the covenant. “Now the Lord is the Spirit”.
Ques Would that be the line of Exodus 34, where the covenant is brought up again?
JT It is a direct allusion to that. So Christ has gone up and He comes down here now in ministry, through such as Paul, and the veil is gone. “Not of letter, but of spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit quickens ... Now the Lord is the Spirit, but where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty”. That is what marked Paul. There was authority, but it was the authority of love, and it was to introduce and enforce the most blessed thing — the love of God.
FHB Why does it say, “The Lord is the Spirit”, and not Christ?
JT It is the Lord exercising His authority to enforce the love of God. You can hardly conceive of a more important service than this, and He resorts to His authority to make the love of God effective in our hearts. It is so important it should be, and He uses His authority to make it so. Liberty marked the service, for it was in the Spirit of the Lord.
FHB Do you think it might be He represented the glory of Jehovah?
JT I have no doubt Exodus 34 helps as to the kind of thing. The Lord Jehovah passed before him; Moses was to be impressed with God, with what Jehovah was in grace and mercy. Well, that is only a type of what is now in Christ. God Himself is there; all that God is, is in Christ, and all that God [p. 407] is enters into this ministry. What God is in Christ must be brought into our hearts.
FHB It is God represented in Christ.
JT That is right, and the authority is in the Lord, not Christ. “The Lord is the Spirit”.
EM Is it that the essence and substance of it all is in Christ, but the administration of it is in the hands of the Lord?
JT Yes; and so it is Moses, not Aaron. Moses represented the authority of God, and how important it is that the authority of God is available in such a One as Christ, to make this knowledge of God effective in our hearts.
Ques How beautifully touching in that connection is the Lord’s supper; the cup is the “new covenant in my blood”. What could affect us more than that? Would the glory of the Lord be at all analogous to that? “Ye do shew the Lord’s death” (1 Corinthians 11:25,26), that is, the new covenant is sealed in His blood.
JT Just so, and the Spirit of the Lord enters into the Supper. There is authority, but the sense, too, of holy liberty. John 13 affords the atmosphere, so to speak, for the Lord’s supper.
EG Does it say, “The Lord direct your hearts into the love of God”?
JT The Lord does that, “and into the patience of the Christ”, (2 Thessalonians 3:5).
JJ What underlies the point about the letters of commendation here?
JT The place that the saints have in your heart; that is, if you carry a letter of commendation, if the saints commend you, do you commend them? That is the way it is. If they commend you, you should commend them. So, if you carry a letter of commendation from the saints, you are not likely to speak ill of them. Paul brought out on every occasion what the Corinthians were. The place the Corinthians had in his heart being made so public, would show [p. 408] that he regarded the work of God there as of special importance. It was a leading event in the testimony.
CB Was the question of being Christ’s epistle universal?
JT The effect of the ministry in Corinth was known far and wide. The way the work is referred to in Acts shows the great significance of it. The Lord announced that He had much people there and the apostle’s service was unusually extended.
CB Is there any possible way in which it has an application today?
JT There surely is, only we take things up in the principle of them. You would be concerned about being an epistle of Christ in your city, and so should each of us, without assuming to be anything, for the bearing of it is toward the whole assembly in the locality or on the earth. That is in the mind of God, but surely the ministry of God today is to produce some reflection of Christ, something to remind people of Christ. Of what value are we in our localities unless we represent Christ, and there is something written that people can read, or that can be spoken of generally as an encouragement for the saints?
Rem It gives a wonderfully exalted position, even if we think of the whole assembly in any place.
JT It does indeed, and your desire is to correspond with it as far as you can.
HES Does the thought in writing suggest subjective work in the saints?
JT It does. And it conveys what the Lord would present in this way — writing.
HWS Then what place does Paul’s gift have in connection with the writing?
JT It entered into it. He was made a competent minister, he says, of the new covenant. Competency would include all he was as made of God.
Ques Turning to such a thing as letters of commendation [p. 409] do you not think the letters should be measured according to the stature and the confidence we have in those commended?
JT Quite. There should be an agreement between the person who bears the letter, and the persons who write it.
Rem Quite; but often it is not the case.
JT If they commend him, he ought to commend them.
Rem If every saint, however insignificant, can be a character in the letter — that is to say, whatever we are, we ought to be legible — there ought to be a little bit of Christ coming out in every believer. A letter is composed of characters, and each saint can be a character or letter in that wonderful epistle.
HD'AC However deeply Christ was written in the hearts of the Corinthians, were they not also deeply written on the apostle’s heart?
JT That is what I thought; there was a correspondence between them. They were his letter, but they were also Christ’s letter. They would be Christ’s letter at Corinth, but his letter wherever he was; he spoke of them.
WCG Does verse 8 show that we come in the power of the Spirit to that which is called the ministration of the Spirit?
JT Quite. It is that which subsists; it is not to be done away.
PW What a wonderful vessel Paul was, for this was not the only church, and the care of all the churches came upon him!
CB Would the connection be seen between “mine anointed ones” and “my prophets”?
JT Exactly. Paul would answer to both.
CB Would you say again how the authority of the Lord is exercised in leading us into the good of the new covenant?
JT Well, the Lord exercises discipline in view of [p. 410] this. He is in supreme control, and are we stronger than He? If we refuse to hearken, and pull away the shoulder from coming under the writing, He will not leave a stone unturned to bring us into subjection, hence the importance of hearkening to the Lord. He uses His authority in discipline, and otherwise, to bring this wonderful thing into our hearts and to write on us. That is the importance of recognising the Lord in this service.
WRP Do you see lordship in that verse?
JT Yes.
WRP I daresay you have noticed in the introduction to the New Translation J.N.D. seems to think it is Jehovah rather than lordship.
JT It must be all that passed before Moses in Exodus 34. Jehovah passed before him in all His greatness and authority. Well, that is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty, and so we behold the face of the Lord. It is what He is, but it is “the Lord” in the beginning of verse 17.
DLH The article appears before “Lord” when it says, “The Lord is that Spirit”, but when it says, “Where the Spirit of the Lord is”, that is, Jehovah, there is no article.
JT “Now the Lord is the Spirit”. I am sure that involves what we have been saying — the authority of Christ.
Ques You have referred to chapter 10 of the first epistle in connection with the authority of Christ. Will you say a word as to chapter 11, the Supper, where the new covenant and lordship seem rather connected with affection?
JT Well, I think it is all to bring in subjection. There can be no writing without subjection. The assembly is subjected, it says, to Christ, that is, it is the mind of God for her that she is to be subjected to Christ, and as such she is available for the purpose of [p. 411] His love in testimony, and as we are subject, He writes.
JS Is it like Ezekiel, which answers to our day? “I will cause you to pass under the rod, and I will bring you into the bond of the covenant”, (Ezekiel 20:37).
JT That is right. “Whom the Lord loves he chastens”, (Hebrews 12:6) that is, the chastening is all to this end. What He has in view is to bring the love of God into our hearts. Coming under the rod in Ezekiel indicates being taken account of or counted, but authority in discipline is also implied.
FSM Does the apostle refer to that when he says, “But the Lord direct your hearts into the love of God”, (2 Thessalonians 3:5)?
JT That is the thought; He directs your heart into the love of God.
Ques In Exodus 34 when Moses came down from the mount, Aaron and the people of Israel were afraid, but then he calls to them and they turned to him, and then he talked with them. Does that speak of the Lord’s activities but through the servants?
JT They turned to him and Moses talked with them; it is the suggestion of confidence and liberty. There was glory in it, too, but it is done away. It was no glory as compared with what was in Christ, and so the veil is gone. “We all, looking on the glory of the Lord, with unveiled face”. What marvellous liberty that one can look up into that face and be perfectly free in doing it. There is authority there, but it is the authority of love.
WL Does verse 18 suggest the way the vessel is formed, the personality you mentioned? “Changed ... from glory to glory”.
JT It is a complete change.
WL Would that be [p. 412] the personality, the individual?
JT Just so.
WCG Why is it called “the ministry of righteousness”?
JT It is what man needs, not what is expected of him; it is ministered to him. It thus “abounds in glory”.
JJ What a wonderful thing that Paul should liken himself to Moses coming down from heaven with no veil.
EuR Would Joseph’s administration be like it? He brought his brethren to the point where they could tell his father of all his glory.
JT Just so. They could represent him in that way.
WC What is the distinction between what is written and the transformation?
JT What is written is to convey the mind of the writer. You trace it out letter by letter, a very interesting testimony presented; but the change is the person himself. There is a complete change brought about in beholding the glory of the Lord. “We all”; we are all made alike, I apprehend, and that is like the Lord — like Him. So there is no difference in the saints; we are made similar. It has a wonderful effect in producing similarity amongst us, but a similarity in glory.
MWB Is there a suggestion that the Corinthians’ minds and Paul’s should be brought into unison in that way?
JT No doubt he had that in view. I think it brings in similarity among us, similarity in glory. We may be different in other respects, but there is a general similarity in the saints here, as we behold the glory of the Lord. “We all, 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”. The change [p. 413] is complete.
HD'AC That is not a cursory look, but it involves penetrating into the glory of the Lord. There is a glory we may look right into; and so it gives great power and substance in its effect.
SJBC Is the veil on the face of the mediator or on the heart?
JT It is on the Jews’ heart now. The apostle transfers it, and then it says, “When it shall turn to the Lord”, referring to Moses going in to the Lord when he took the veil off. It is not on our hearts; that is the thing he is emphasising.
Rem “We all, looking on the glory of the Lord, with unveiled face” conveys that there is no veil on the face of Jesus.
JT Quite.
ER It is interesting to note that the word for ‘changed’ here is the same word used for transfiguration on the mount and for transformation in Romans 12.