THE DIVINE STANDARD OF SERVICE (6)
[p. 469] THE DIVINE STANDARD OF SERVICE (6)
JT I thought we might look at the intervening chapters — first chapter 7, in which the apostle urges his reception among the Corinthians, advancing in a humble and touching manner the grounds for the resumption of happy relations between them and himself. His first letter had grieved them to repentance, and he would have them know that in writing he was thinking not so much of the injured or the one who injured, but that his diligent zeal for them might be manifest before God. He did also think of the incestuous person who had been dealt with by them at Corinth with a view to his spirit being saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. Now the apostle is concerned that he should be restored, in other words, concerned about the work of God. The man, on account of his history, was under great pressure, as we see in chapter 2; but then he was to be reinstated as available in the fellowship. The true servant thus shows his concern for the work of God; discipline had the man’s salvation in view.
Then we have the subject of the collection, into which the apostle enters most heartily and lengthily, even taking part in the service to the extent of being a deacon, reminding us that the spirit of service renders us ready to take on any necessary work, any work that may tend to promote the interests of the Lord. Now he exalts the subject, as we might expect, to the level on which he was operating, viewing those who serve in it as Christ’s glory. The assembly is brought into the service of giving in a striking manner, its messengers being the glory of Christ. We are reminded that what apparently would be material, and thus relatively insignificant,
[p. 470] is to be put on the exalted basis on which the service of God is. The collection is not beneath that; it is the bounty of the saints.
HH There has been a good bit of exercise about the collection. Some think the box ought not to be on the table.
JT The suggestion in that is that it is beneath the dignity of what is on the table; that is, the love behind the giving is overlooked, whereas it is spiritually pure gold.
Rem I suppose it is entitled to a place as a sacrificial offering, an odour of a sweet-smelling savour.
JT It is brought on to that distinctive level here in its results — at the end of chapter 9. “Now he that supplies seed to the sower and bread for eating shall supply and make abundant your sowing, and increase the fruits of your righteousness: enriched in every way unto all free-hearted liberality, which works through us thanksgiving to God. Because the ministration of this service is not only filling up the measure of what is lacking to the saints, but also abounding by many thanksgivings to God; they glorifying God through the proof of this ministration, by reason of your subjection, by profession, to the glad tidings of the Christ, and your free-hearted liberality in communicating towards them and towards all; and in their supplication for you, full of ardent desire for you, on account of the exceeding grace of God which is upon you. Thanks be to God for his unspeakable free gift”, (2 Corinthians 9:10 - 15). There can be no doubt in the light of those words as to the spiritual significance of giving.
Rem So you suggest that the collection reaches up to the level of what we have had before us here, and takes its place commensurately with it.
JT Yes. It is on that plane, and it ought to appeal to us that the messengers of the assembly to minister to the need in Jerusalem were Christ’s [p. 471] glory. It is within our reach as according to our ability financially thus to serve; it is not only meeting need that may be current, but in doing so there is a yield for God.
AM When David gave six hundred shekels of gold for the threshing-floor of Ornan the Jebusite, would that illustrate the high level of the service?
JT He bought the place, showing that he had in mind the thought of enlargement, and he would have a free hand in his operations. The amount given in 1 Chronicles 21:22 is much larger than in 2 Samuel. David, according to the former, gave “full money” and the area secured was evidently larger than the threshing-floor.
HES Does it stand connected with the spirit and manner of giving of the children of Israel in regard of the tabernacle?
JT It does. There was a very remarkable result in Exodus. The giving exceeded the need, and so in David’s time the same thing happened — a wonderful supply appeared in view of the building.
Ques Do you not think in the early days the free-hearted liberality of the brethren amongst the nations to their brethren who were Jews had much to do with the breaking down of the middle wall of partition in a practical way, so that national and racial questions were melted down by it?
JT It is very remarkable as the testimony extended to Antioch that a prophetic ministry came down from Judaea — as if that was Judaea’s contribution (compare Romans 15:27) at that moment — announcing that there would be a great dearth, which took place under Claudius. That was God’s governmental action in view of what was proceeding at Antioch. The dearth took place in the days of Claudius, and that brought into view the need in Judaea, which certain who were “well off” (Acts 11:29) at Antioch were determined to meet; and it says they did it,
[p. 472] and sent it to the elders by the hand of Barnabas and Saul. God acted governmentally in the dearth to bring out the bounty of the gentiles, and thus increase the links between the brethren in Judaea and those at Antioch — a very remarkable illustration of what you say. The appeal there was to those who were “well off”; that has its own voice. Here it is not to such specially, but to the assembly, the saints as a whole; we should not therefore leave the thing to those who have means, for a man is accepted according to what he has, however little it may be or however much. It is in the acceptance that the gain is; it is in being accepted that one gains spiritually.
MWB Is it not important to see that the collection is an assembly act? It is the act of the church as you have pointed out, sent through the messengers of the assemblies, and then in Philippians it says, “No assembly communicated anything to me in the way of giving and receiving, save ye alone”. It is not merely an individual action, but the action of the assembly.
JT That is the point of view in these two epistles. In the first epistle the collection is brought in in relation to the first day of the week, which is very noteworthy. The breaking of bread is not even brought in in that connection in Corinthians. The Lord’s supper is dwelt upon without any mention of the day on which it was celebrated. But the day is mentioned in regard of the collection, as if it were a tangible way of reminding them of spirituality; that they could show it in that, laying by at home on the first day of the week as God prospered them. The mention of the first day of the week would carry a certain spiritual sentiment with it, which undoubtedly they would be capable of appreciating, and that sentiment is connected with the collection and not with the Lord’s supper in the first epistle.
The introduction of the Lord’s supper had to do with order, to meet a certain disorder that existed amongst them.
Ques Have we any warrant for a special collection?
JT I think we have. It is a special collection in this case, a collection for a specific purpose. The principle of a collection, as I understand it, is that it has to be relative to the need; the exercise must be the measure or extent of the need.
MWB Would wisdom come in in that respect, as directing the quantity — the heart being prepared to give, but wisdom directing the outlay?
JT Quite. You would consider everything. The saints are children of wisdom, and you would like to act on the principle of mutual expression of affection. So the collection should express that, hence it would not be the act of one rich person; he would act comelily in what he gives so as to be with the others in it; otherwise he is sure to exert undue influence.
ASL Is it not true that christianity, as we speak, is a system characterised by giving?
JT Indeed. If it emanates from God, as it does, it must be that.
ASL He is the great giver, and as His children we learn to give, and delight in giving, not necessarily money, but giving in some shape or form. Giving is the great characteristic.
JT You have it here at the end of chapter 9, “His unspeakable free gift”.
ASL “If thou knewest the gift of God”, (John 4:10).
HES Is your thought in regard of the Supper in 1 Corinthians that what is emphasised is the point of order, but in regard of giving the point of spirituality?
JT Exactly. It looks in the first epistle as if he could reach them on that point. I do not understand the introduction of the first day of the week in any [p. 474] other sense than that. It carries with it all that entered into that day when the Lord Jesus rose from among the dead. Paul had just been dilating at great length on the resurrection in chapter 15, and now he brings in the first day of the week in relation to the collection in chapter 16.
ASL “Not grievingly, or of necessity; for God loves a cheerful giver”. I venture to think there can be no spiritual enlargement or prosperity if there is not the spirit of giving in some shape or other. There is no such thing as hoarding things up, but it is our privilege, as we know the giving God, to communicate in some way or other.
JT Love always teaches us to think of others.
DLH Could you give us a word as to the right connection between the box or the basket on the table, and the bread and the wine there in connection with the Supper? The difficulty has been raised (not very universally) as to the box or basket being on the table at all.
JT It seems to me, as has often been remarked, to fit in very well with the Lord’s supper in that the latter is the love of Christ and the love of God. That is what the Lord’s supper presents. The bread sets forth the love of Christ and the cup the love of God. Well, if that is effective, the box should certainly testify to what is in our hearts. It is not all, of course, because there is the answer spiritually in praise and worship, but these chapters in 2 Corinthians link up the giving with that very thing, thanksgiving to God. So it seems to me to be in its place on the table with the emblems of the Lord’s supper. Do you think that?
DLH Yes; it has been suggested that if the love of Christ is presented to us and the love of God, there is room for the response in the love of the saints.
JT That is clear enough; and another thing, as has been remarked, is that the giving should have in [p. 475] view the extent of the need existing. Of course we may give, in view of potential need, but if need is known the full extent of it should be kept in view in the giving.
Rem Christianity is really like water, it rises to its own level; the principle in chapter 8 is that there should be equality. It is stated there indeed as a principle, so that one can contemplate the christian company as having every proper need met, and met in that company.
WW Would it be possible to have the spirit of blessing apart from the love of Christ and the love of God?
JT It springs from these. The spirit of blessing would arise from God giving — what God is to us; so that the cup, being the cup of blessing, should induce that spirit in us.
HD'AC But there are many meetings where there is no need, and if your giving has to be gauged by the need, that would rather stop saints giving. There are thousands of saints who do not know of need.
JT But then the need is not simply in your own locality. The need would be general. If we love the Lord, we are interested in what is general in the assembly at large; so you would get to know the current needs everywhere, and would think in that connection. Do you not think so?
HD'AC I understand that a hundred years ago, when the movement of recovery began, there was an immense amount of giving without knowing the need, but that led to abundance for those who were gifts, and great enlargement in the gospel.
JT But what I am alluding to in this is in most gatherings; as far as I know, there is no definite thought at all as to what is needed. If there is anything over, well and good, but if there is not, there is nothing to give. But that is not the way God gives. God measures the need, and He would have us to [p. 476] measure the requirements. I think the principle brought out at Antioch was just that; there was need and it was brought to the attention of the brethren — to those who were well off; and so, according to these epistles, a similar thing existed later, and the apostle is labouring to bring out as much as possible from the saints in view of it. When at Jerusalem the leading brethren urged him to remember the poor, “which same thing also”, he says, “I was diligent to do”, (Galatians 2:10).
MWB Would that not make us feel the necessity of bearing in mind the universal character of christian fellowship? It is not local.
JT It is general; and I believe that the existence of need in Judaea was in the government of God intended to establish this principle among the gentiles.
Rem There are many gatherings where they have no local need and the temptation is to sink into isolation and to become self-centred; but if they have this point before them, it will be an object to make themselves acquainted with what is existent in the house of God, and be prepared for it.
JT And if taken up in that way, every need would be met. “On the principle of equality” (2 Corinthians 8:14) there is plenty for all — there should be no want.
DLH Is it not interesting that it says of God that He has dispersed abroad? Does that not meet the whole point?
JT That is good. The other day a brother was remarking about a special collection that amounted to a considerable sum of money, that it was just the price of one motor car, and not a very expensive one at that! That puts the thing where it belongs. What are we giving for the interests of Christ, that is, in relation to what we have?
RB Then what is the thought of laying by at home?
JT It is “On the first of the week let each of you put by at home, laying up in whatever degree he may have prospered”. It suggests that you get with your family in the matter. That is what I have thought about it.
RB Yes, I think that.
JT God takes account of our households. The apostle referred to that earlier, that they should eat at home: “Have ye not then houses for eating and drinking?” (1 Corinthians 11:22). You have to consider how you are eating at home, what kind of table you set, and you have to consider whether others are eating like that. That is the way the thing works; it is very practical.
WL What is the significance that this came under the attention of the saints through prophetic ministry?
JT It brought in Judaea and Jerusalem as still a great spiritual centre to which the gentiles were greatly indebted. God would remind us of that, and there is a principle in it that we can never ignore — the locality in which God works in a special way. We are under obligation to it, for light radiates. It is alluded to formally in Acts 11 and Romans 15. Agabus came down and what he prophesied came to pass. It would be a temporal advantage at Antioch to know that the famine was coming and there would thus be additional indebtedness to Judaea.
MWB In the laying by in store, do you also see the fact of an actual store put by in addition to acting householdwise?
JT There was a special need in view, but the principle is there, that you are acting householdly.
MWB Is there an additional thought, not only acting householdly, but putting by a store, in the light of the assembly, on the first day of the week, in readiness in case of any need of a special kind?
JT [p. 478] Quite.
GJE Is not the response of the box gauged by the last verse? “Thanks be to God for his unspeakable free gift”.
JT That is the point — you are acting like God.
Ques Is there any reason why the apostle should speak of the giving of the Macedonians and that which prompted them? He speaks of them giving themselves to the Lord and then to the saints, and also speaks of their begging and entreating Paul and others to give effect to the service which was to be rendered to the saints.
JT I think it was brought in to stimulate those at Corinth; that seems to be the way of it.
WW If there is one loaf and one cup, are all these needs met out of one box?
JT If there is enough in it.
WW What I have in mind is, if there is not enough in the box, it should be made a special collection brought into the one box.
JT The one box ought to include everything. Only there is the principle of a special collection when the need is special, and it is employed by the Spirit to stimulate giving. It is not as if one is getting it out of you. We do not want to do that, to be beggars; that is not the point. The thing is to elevate it to its proper level. It is a question of privilege and of being like God. That is the idea here; not that a few well-to-do individuals bear all the expenses of the brethren, but that the saints give in a mutual way in love. That is what God loves. “Every beast of the forest is mine, the cattle upon a thousand hills”, He can say. “If I were hungry, I would not tell thee”, (Psalm 50:12). That is not what He wants. He wants to act upon our affections that we may give like Him, He creates the need to bring out our affections. “If I shall dole out all my goods in food ... but have not love, I profit nothing”, (1 Corinthians 13:3). The love which prompts the giving is what [p. 479] God values.
HD'AC He does not suggest that people should make known their need, but rather that saints should be near enough to God to find there is need.
JT Just so; and that is what Paul is dwelling on. He was perfectly conversant with the need. And it is remarkable how Titus is brought into it, how thoroughly sympathetic he was and ready to take on a service like this, because it bore on the spiritual conditions of the Corinthians.
JJ The apostle is seeking to secure their affections in this way; that the gentiles should collect for the Jews and the Jews receive from gentiles would be a proof of the working of the body.
JT That is what was remarked. God creates these conditions to promote general affection — love for all the saints; (Colossians 1:4). Another thing that enters into this is the need of ministry. Someone has alluded to the smaller gatherings that are rarely visited, but if we have an exercise like that, how are we meeting it? You say, God has not given gift, but then, supposing He does give the gift, the brothers who have it must travel to reach the saints. Ministers have to travel, and their gift will not pay their railway fares. The saints must see to this.
Rem And live.
JT Exactly.
DLH And be lodged.
EuR You include all that in the thought of need?
JT It certainly is a very notable obligation. If the work of God is to be carried on, what am I doing? Am I remiss in regard of it? Suppose God did give gifts; they have to live, and to travel, and be lodged, as was said. How is that going to come about? If God raised up fifty gifted men so that every meeting should be visited, how are they going to visit the meetings? Their gifts will not carry them.
EuR If we clothed them as ‘messengers of assemblies’, it would greatly stimulate us to help them on their way.
JT What they have got is, as Paul says, “this treasure in earthen vessels”, and they have to be cared for in a temporal way.
Ques Should not our giving be on sacrificial lines, costing us something to give?
JT That is what is worked out here. The Lord, though rich, became poor, that we through His poverty might be rich.
Rem “But of doing good and communicating of your substance be not forgetful, for with such sacrifices God is well pleased”, (Hebrews 13:16).
JT Just so, and “Let him that is taught in the word communicate to him that teaches in all good things”, (Galatians 6:6).
Ques An odour of sweet-smelling savour — is that the level?
JT Exactly. Now chapter 10:1 brings in “the meekness and gentleness of the Christ” — another beautiful touch as to the level of ministry — and then the weapons of warfare that are employed, for now things take a military turn, and conflict is included in the service, so that he beseeches them by the meekness and gentleness of Christ — a remarkable introduction to a military chapter. And then he speaks of the kind of weapons in the conflict. “For the arms of our warfare are not fleshly, but powerful according to God to the overthrow of strongholds; overthrowing reasonings and every high thing that lifts itself up against the knowledge of God, and leading captive every thought into the obedience of the Christ”, (verses 4,5). That is the first thing, and then, “Having in readiness to avenge all disobedience”, (verse 6). The general calculation in service is having the saints generally right and in order, every high thought brought down by spiritual weapons; and then, not sparing the guilty, for in all issues and conflicts there [p. 481] are some guilty ones, and these cannot be let go. We can never proclaim a general amnesty in the things of God. There must be the dealing with whatever there is that has given rise to the conflict. The general principle is to have order among the brethren; all brought into the obedience of the Christ, which is an immense thought to have in mind.
SJBC What is the character of this conflict? Is it in the wilderness, or does it touch the Canaan conflict? Pulling down strongholds seems to remind one of Jericho.
JT It does; but I think what is in view here is the state of things at Corinth. Will was at work, and Satan had got a footing and the whole meeting was affected; so it was a question of using skill — “the meekness and gentleness of Christ” marking the servant — and employing spiritual weapons to bring in obedience in a general way, so as to avoid a breach, or the possibility of any being carried off, but that all should be saved. But if there be the continuance of will and disobedience in certain ones, they have to be dealt with. “Having in readiness”, he says, “to avenge all disobedience”, (verse 6).
MWB Why does he add, “when your obedience shall have been fulfilled”?
JT He means that his aim was to save the whole assembly. Had he gone to Corinth with a rod, doubtless a large number would have been thrust into the camp of the opposers. But he is using the utmost skill in order to reach them all, and that the whole assembly should be brought into subjection. Then there were outstanding ones; he deals with them in chapter 11:13, calling them “false apostles”.
Ques Would the suggestion be that when their obedience was made manifest, what would be left would be leaven that would be dealt with? Is that why it brings in “when your obedience shall have been fulfilled”?
JT [p. 482] He would have the whole assembly with him; that in anything he would do, there should be no danger of a general rupture.
PL Do you get the thought of the meekness and gentleness of Christ in the scripture, “I drew them with cords of a man”, (Hosea 11:4)?
JT Just so. Then, another thing in this chapter is the principle of measure — that we do not go beyond our measure. God is the God of measure. It is remarkable how God is brought into every phase — God in Christ, here “the God of measure”. Those present at Corinth were not going on that principle at all; they really had no measure. Paul’s measure was a measure that reached “to you also”, as he says. These men — false apostles — were working in a ready-made state of things, made ready to hand by somebody else. That is not anything. They were measuring themselves by themselves, but then, that is no standard at all; it is a question of God’s measure.
Ques Is that why he brings in the suffering? Is a man’s measure according to the measure he can suffer?
JT The result of a man’s ministry, what he effects by ministry is his measure, as he says, “The measure ... to reach to you also”, (chapter 10:13). Then in the next chapter, among other things, you have a very beautiful thing, that is, the “simplicity as to the Christ”, (chapter 11:3).
ASL The expression, “God of measure”, which is a scriptural expression, is absent from the Authorised Version, which is a very great lack. The God of measure measures out in sovereignty to everybody as He thinks fit.
JT It shows the value of the New Translation. Then I was remarking on the next chapter, as to the “simplicity as to the Christ”. They were in danger of being corrupted from that, and he brings in Satan: “As the serpent deceived Eve by his craft, so your thoughts should be corrupted from simplicity as to the Christ”. Simplicity is another feature that should be noted in service, and I think it is beautifully illustrated in David as rejected by Saul. He comes to Nob and needs bread, and he says to the priest, “What is under thy hand?” (1 Samuel 21:3). Now that is the point, what is under your hand? As in a meeting you may complain that the gift is very little, that there is very little help, but the point is, what is under your hand; whatever there is, use that. Well, the priest said, there are these loaves, and there were five of them, but David says, Give me those. They were just coming off the table of shewbread. David is ready to explain to the priest that the simplicity that was in him was really priestly; he knew that the bread was really “in a manner common” (verse 5), showing that he is able to judge of a thing as well as the priest himself; but, as simple, he would use what was available.
ASL I suppose Eve herself is the very best possible illustration of the lack of “simplicity as to the Christ”, (chapter 11:3). She had only to attend to Adam, and she ought to have referred the serpent to her husband. But she was defective as to simplicity as to her head. So we cannot do without the book of Genesis.
JT Then she gave of the forbidden fruit to her husband with her.
ASL In passing, it is very interesting to note that the great attack of the enemy today is on the book of Genesis, but you find the New Testament is full of references to it.
JJT Have you in mind that in small meetings even, there is the possibility of stimulating what there is of God and making use of it?
JT You make use of what there is. You cannot expect God to give you more if you do not use what He has given you. Then David asks for a sword, and the priest says, I have not any save the sword of Goliath, and it is wrapped up behind the ephod;
[p. 484] that is, it was not being used. It was kept seemingly with priestly care, wrapped up behind the ephod, but it was not in use. David would make use of it, and he said, “There is none like that”.
HES In the gospels the Lord takes up what was under His hand from time to time.
JT It is a great lesson to be simple in regard to what there is; as used it will become larger and more effective.
Rem God said to Moses, “What is that in thy hand?” And Andrew says to the Lord, “There is a little boy here who has five barley loaves and two small fishes”, (John 6:9).
PG Have you anything in mind as to its being Goliath’s sword?
JT No; but it was there. The priest did not apparently think much of it. It is what is under your hand; that is the thing.
Now chapter 11 is full of details in regard of the wonderful life of Paul, a wonderful history of experience, but we can hardly touch on these. They are more to be looked at soberly, as the dear apostle is forced to disclose what he would have loved to have kept secret, and would rather not have spoken about. It must have been a real sorrow to him that he was forced to speak about these private matters that belonged to himself and the Lord. He would have infinitely preferred to have left them until the Lord would bring them out and accord to him what is due; but he was compelled to speak of them beforehand on account of the state of the Corinthians.
FWJ David with the lion and the bear was very similar. He would not have told about it had it not been drawn from him.
JT It was no question of honouring himself.
DLH We can thank God that Paul spoke “as a fool” (verse 16) on this occasion, and that David had that drawn out [p. 485] from him.
JT We are indeed profiting at their expense.
EuR What is the feature of Satan transformed into an angel of light?
JT It is the common habit of opposers of the truth pretending to represent God in some new feature, to put themselves forward as angels of light, but there ought to be some proof of it, and so the apostle challenges them here. He says, “If indeed he that comes preaches another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or ye get a different Spirit, which ye have not got, or a different glad tidings, which ye have not received, ye might well bear with it”, (verse 4). They could not. There was not anything different to be brought from God than what Paul presented, and so their professing to be angels of light was fictitious; they were liars, they were false apostles. Paul has come to the real crux of the matter now at Corinth, and he is exposing those men who were darkening and blinding the brethren.
PG Why should the apostle wish to keep this wonderful vision of his private?
JT It was like the hardships he endured, a private matter. The question is whether you or I could keep a wonderful thing like this for fourteen years without telling about it. I fear we should have retailed it at every fireside and every table! It is a question of being able to keep things. They do not lose by the keeping. No doubt Paul never expected to have to use it in this way, but God knew it would be needed. So he brought it out when it was needed.
HES He would not do anything for his own glory, because he had the glory of God always before him.
JT He was not after his own glory, but the visions and revelations he had in the third heaven had an immense effect upon his ministry. You want to let the brethren have the benefit of anything you have got, but not to enhance yourself. Ability to [p. 486] keep things, and use them when needed, is a matter of importance.
ASL Do you think that in that connection there was an intentional connection between being let down in a basket and then going on immediately to speak of being caught up?
JT There seems to be; it is very remarkable.
ASL The one was humiliating, the other tending very much to exalt.
JT He says, “[p. 487] Through a window in a basket I was let down by the wall”, (chapter 11:33) Those were the facts; that is, he presents the humiliating side, but the facts related elsewhere point to the love of the brethren. He was let down by them. That was another thing, but he does not bring that in here; to be let down by them would be no suffering to him, but that he was let down in this way was a humiliating thing.
Rem I am glad you speak of that, because we are often inclined to think the brethren let us down to humiliate us, but that is not the thing.
JT No. If you look at Acts 9:25 it says, “But the disciples took him by night and let him down through the wall, lowering him in a basket”. That was not to humiliate him, but to make it easy for him; that he should not strike the ground heavily; it was love.
ASL I have always heard of brethren letting him down in a basket in this way as an illustration of the gentle way of dealing with your brethren.
EG It is “through the wall”, in Acts 9, but here it is “through a window”. Is there any difference?
PL Would the going down promote the qualities with him in which heaven could acclaim him? Would there be some analogy? The one who could thus accept the humiliation is morally qualified for entrance into heaven. The Lord Himself was chosen to go up into heaven in answer to His humiliation.
JT There seems a relation between them.
“Through a window in a basket I was let down by the wall”. Think what that meant for a man who had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel!
EJM I thought the basket was a coffin generally used in the East in those days.
JT The translation says “basket”. Acting in simplicity, they used what was available. It was a question of letting the brother down with the least inconvenience or hurt to himself. It was a matter of love, but it was humiliating to him otherwise.
JHT He escaped from the Jews in Acts, but from the political sphere here. We need to escape from both in our service.
JT In Acts 9:23 it is from the Jews. It says, “When many days were fulfilled, the Jews consulted together to kill him”, but here it is the ethnarch of Aretas, the king of the city, that is, it is the political agent. Undoubtedly the Jews got him to do this.
HH Could we have a word on what “a man in Christ” is?
JT As has been remarked, the humiliation of the end of chapter 11 prepares us for the great exaltation of chapter 12. It is a man. Every true believer is in Christ, but here it is “a man in Christ”, that is, it is a developed or mature thought. It is such a one as Paul, “a man in Christ”, and he says, I know him; not, I knew him, but I know him. It is a present thing. He was consciously “a man in Christ”.
ASL Fourteen years made no difference as to this.
JT No; he was “a man in Christ” then, and also when he spoke. He brings the thing down to the present, to the time of writing.
HD'AC That is open to all of us to know consciously “a man in Christ”; and it is therefore an episode he can share in common with many others.
JT Exactly; and we lead up to the top note in this — to what is in the mind of God, “a man in Christ”. The Corinthians were not that; they were “babes in Christ”.
WCG Would you say the consciousness of what we are with God is according to the measure of the work of God effected in us?
JT Yes. In this sense “a man in Christ” presents the full thought of God. Of course, the word ‘man’ is used in many connections, but the context here shows that the full thought of God is in view — what we shall be in heaven. He could only speak to them as to babes in Christ. But here is a man, and that is brought in as the top note, as we might say, of his whole instruction. In chapter 5:17 there is new creation “If any one be in Christ, there is a new creation”. That is the general position; but here is “a man in Christ” singled out, and, as he says, “caught up to the third heaven”; first, to call attention to the elevation accorded to him, what was in the mind of God as to elevation, and then to paradise, which indicates the delightfulness of the place.
HWS Do you look upon that as specially the portion of the apostle, or is there any way in which it can apply to us?
JT I do not think for a moment it was common. It is mentioned as an extraordinary experience; but still it is not an apostle that is alluded to, but “a man in Christ”, and one should have that in view, as to whether one can consciously, as I may say, regard oneself as “a man in Christ”.
HD'AC It is open to such a one to be beside himself to God, is it not?
JT Quite; as is alluded to in chapter 5.
ASL Is it a personal experimental arrival in the soul at what is said in a general way in chapter 5? “If any man be in Christ”. Here is a man who can say, “I know a man in Christ”, that is, in his own soul.
[p. 489] He could not only quote the general principle, but he himself had the conscious knowledge of it.
JT Quite. He says, “If any one be in Christ”, in chapter 5; that is, it is not the idea of the man but any one, whoever he may be; but here what is in view is the divine thought of “a man in Christ” and what is available to him in the way of elevation.
MWB Would the being caught up to the third heaven be a question of divine pleasure?
JT It is what God may do for you in His sovereignty. Attention is called to the elevation and delightfulness of the heavenly region spoken of — the third heaven and paradise.