LIFE (2)
LIFE (2)
JT For the benefit of those who were not present at our last meeting, it might be remarked that we would do well to consider the subject of Life in this series of readings; particularly because of the cases of sickness and weakness amongst us at the present time, and on account of many falling asleep; so that in spite of these afflictions, and the pressure occasioned by them, we might be in victory. As it says, “but thanks to God, who gives us the victory by our Lord Jesus Christ”, 1 Corinthians 15: 57. Victory is life out of death. I thought that the subject is appropriately introduced in this gospel by the statement that, “In him was life, and the life was the light of men”, (John 1: 4); so that we meet with the subject immediately in this gospel, not in an abstract way, but in a concrete way in Christ. In Him was life, and it was so presented to men that it affected their lives. It was pointed out that chapter 1 dwells on the movement of Christ; the radiation of light is seen in movement. The word for light denotes life in movement and energy; and we noticed how the Lord was introduced by John. It says, “he sees Jesus coming to him”. John saw the Lord coming to him, and he said, “Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world”, as if he discerned that form of life. Coming to John implied that the Lord was going to die. He said later that the Father loved Him because He laid down His life that He might take it again, that is in another condition; so that the Father has a free hand in Christ having taken up life again; then the next thing John sees is the Lord walking, and says, “Behold the Lamb of God”. Walking is another feature, and two of his disciples [p. 298] hearing John speaking leave John and follow Jesus, and then when the Lord turned He saw them following, and asked them what they sought, and they said to Him, “Rabbi ... where abidest thou?” So that it remains perhaps to see the further witness in the way of movement in chapter 1, for the life is thus brought in in a very active way before it is introduced as the gift of God.
AFM Would Jesus coming, walking, and abiding be the three features of life?
JT I thought that.
WB-w Does the coming involve the revelation of God?
JT Coming to John would indicate that the Lord was going to die, because John was baptising. He was administering death figuratively; so that the suggestion in his mind was that the Lord would take away the sin of the world by His death. God was declared by Christ’s presence here in all He said and did, including His death (John 1: 18).
AFM Would you say the death of Christ includes both the declaration and the revelation of God?
JT Yes. I think God was declared in creation at the outset. Without creation there could be no declaration of God, but it began in this new and full way, I judge, as the Lord commenced to be in movement and to minister.
HSD Is revelation more intimate than declaration?
JT I think so.
BTF The Lamb of God would imply his death.
JT Quite. The Lamb of God takes away the sin of the world. The reference, you mean, is to the sacrifice?
BTF Yes.
AFM Does the second clause of that verse involve a further work by which sin is taken away from [p. 299] the universe?
JT Not only sacrificially, but by power. In the Revelation the Lord is seen as the Lamb prevailing. The suggestion of a lamb is of one who suffers passively. The Lamb is the Sufferer, but the Sufferer is also the Lion of the tribe of Juda. John sees the Lamb as having seven horns, that is to say, in the perfection of power; so that in both the Lamb and the Lion there is power to remove all ungodliness from the earth: to remove sin actually, not only sacrificially; the Lamb does that, but it is as the Lion of the tribe of Judah that He prevails.
ARS Would taking away the sin of the world involve the abolition of death, because death follows sin?
JT Quite. The last enemy annulled is death, for death is regarded as an enemy. For faith, the Lord has abolished death and brought life and incorruptibility to light.
WB-w Do you think that John gave expression to these things in what he said?
JT One’s mind is turned back to Genesis 2, because all Scripture hangs together. Genesis 2 brings out the movements of life. The creatures of life are named by Adam. He is able to tell by their movements what names to give them; but here is a kind of movement never seen before, and John is enabled to name it.
ARS Did the Lord come to John because of who John was, as His forerunner?
JT I rather thought it was because he was figuratively administering God’s judgment as baptising, that the Lord came to him; it was when he saw Him coming to him, not simply moving, that he named the action. John could discern by the movement that there was life in it.
ARS Is this coming to John the same as in Matthew, alluding to His [p. 300] baptism?
JT The Lord came and was baptised, according to the other gospels, but none of them speak of His coming in this way except John.
ANW What suggests the Lamb to John at this juncture? In Matthew 3 he is baptising and those baptised are confessing their sins; would it suggest the Lamb to John?
JT I think it is the intelligence that John had; he was a marvellous vessel, for he was filled with the Holy Spirit from his birth. He was doubtless prepared for this, so that he could discern what was there. I judge it was plain to John that the light was in the movement, and he named Him the Lamb of God because of the light that shone.
JS Discerning Him as God’s provision.
JT As compared with other lambs, which were types. He was the Lamb of God.
AFM Why is the same expression, “Behold the Lamb of God” used by John when he sees Jesus walking?
JT I think the allusion is possibly to Nathan’s parable in 2 Samuel 12. The lamb was cherished in Uriah’s house, and David had ignored what Bathsheba (the lamb) was to her husband. It suggests what is pleasing as ministering to the affections. The first expression, ‘Lamb of God’, would refer to the lamb of Exodus 12.
AFM That is helpful and makes the two thoughts intelligible.
JT The first reference is to the Lamb viewed sacrificially; the second to the Lamb as an Object of affection.
BTF Would you say that John in baptising entered in a remarkable way into his work? Was his baptising really a figure of the death of Christ?
JT Well, I think it was a figure of God’s judgment. He represented that, and this movement of Jesus, in coming to him, suggested to John the [p. 301] sacrificial idea of Exodus 12. Now we have the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, not only sacrificially, but in power, I think.
BTF So that John is glad to announce that in connection with what was a figure of the judgment of God, that there was the One there who would bear that judgment in order that the sin of the world might be taken away.
JT Just so. And then it says he did not know Him, which I think is a tribute to John, as stated before the Holy Spirit came on Christ; because he goes on to say, that the One who sent him said, “Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending and abiding on him, he it is who baptises with the Holy Spirit”, John 1: 33. He takes away the sin of the world as the Lamb of God; that is a negative thing although it is an act of power including His sacrifice, but then He brings in the positive thing, that is the baptism of the Spirit, so that sin is replaced positively by the Spirit.
CAM Would it be right to say that in his testimony of this Person John had an apprehension of how great the Person was, and on that account he recognises He is the Son of God?
JT John says, he saw and bare record that this is the Son of God. That is a tribute to the greatness of His Person; he discerned in the Spirit coming down and abiding upon Christ, that He was the Son of God.
AFM When you speak of the greatness of the Person in John’s view, do you include other thoughts that come out in respect of the Son of God. His living voice and resurrection power, for example, or just the Person Himself?
JT This is as far as John goes. He could hardly be expected to convey the full thought of the Son of God; he simply bare record that He was the Son of God; but other things came out to enhance this [p. 302] record of John. The Lord says, in speaking of the sickness of Lazarus, “This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified by it”, John 11: 4. Then in Romans 1: 4 it says, “marked out Son of God in power, ... by resurrection of the dead”. That is another view of the thing; He is declared Son of God by resurrection of the dead, including His own resurrection.
AAT Was this a revelation to John?
JT Yes, so far as it went.
WB-w John would know the limitation of the lamb in Egypt.
JT Yes. It did not take away the sin of the world. When you come to the Son of God, there is finality, whatever He did was finished, not partially so. That is the great thing to arrive at in the knowledge of Christ: things are completed in Him. His great service goes on and is carried right through until He gives up the kingdom to God, and then He Himself is subject, but everything is finished before He gives up the kingdom. Not that the idea of the kingdom is lost, because He carries it through in the feature that He Himself is subject. It thus remains in a beautiful and touching way!
Ques You were speaking of the power side as well as the sacrificial. Is that represented in the Red Sea?
JT That is right. The Red Sea and the Jordan represent the power of God in Christ going through death. In the first chapter it is said of John that he stood; he is no longer moving, for his work is finished. The movement is now in those who heard him speak; introducing, as it does, a new thing in principle, namely, christianity. The Lord turns and sees them following and asks what they sought, and they say, “Rabbi ... . where abidest thou?” That is to say, they enquire for the home where they may be taught. This teaching is very different from teaching in a college. These disciples came and saw [p. 303] where the Lord abode, and abode with Him. It is no longer the schoolmaster of the Old Testament, but teaching in the home by One who has liberty in it, and who is in the house for ever. That is what we are introduced into: teaching in the home by the One in whom all the fulness of the Godhead dwells.
BTF Where is the example of that?
JT In chapter 8 the Lord tells the Jews who believed on Him that if they abode in His word they were truly His disciples; they should know the truth, and the truth should set them free. Then He speaks of the Son abiding in the house for ever, and if the Son set them free they should be really free. Galatians shows that the law was a tutor up to Christ, but that was not in the home; those under law were in the place of minors, as children; but now you have persons who desire to be taught, and they wish to know where He abides.
AFM So that in Galatians you get, in contrast to the law as teacher, the Spirit of God’s Son sent into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father. In John 1 the same result would be reached.
JT Yes. You have things just touched on in John’s gospel without their being named. You are to discern them.
Ques How do you account for the intelligence of their question?
JT It shows how they profited by John’s ministry, but they see a better. They get into the current of it, and in that current they are carried along and remain there.
TA Nicodemus recognises in the Lord a teacher different from himself.
JT That will help us in considering chapter 3. It introduces the same idea of teaching. Nicodemus does not ask about the home; he says, “we know that thou art come a teacher from God”, but this thought of the home in chapter 1 and the marriage of [p. 304] chapter 2, form an introduction, showing what is in the mind of God to be reached in this gospel.
TA Do you think there was a glimpse in Nicodemus’ soul of the Person who gives life?
JT He came to Jesus: there was movement on his part, and that is what the Lord honours, I believe, with life.
AFM These men are set in movement for the home, and what follows is, Simon is found, and the Lord names him Cephas — stone.
JT We might see, before we pass on, that movement of life in the assembly is touched on in this introduction so that you may be prepared for God’s design. Then you have the movement of God in the Jewish remnant: the Lord would go into Galilee, and He finds Philip; we are told Philip was of Bethsaida, of the city of Andrew and Peter, to make it clear that he was of that place. That is to say, the Jewish remnant is linked on with the whole work of God; and then Philip finds Nathanael, and Nathanael is shown as representing a lower form of spiritual life. Cephas is the definite name given to a higher form, which points to the assembly. Then the Lord calls Nathanael an Israelite indeed, which is also definite, but not so definite as the name Cephas, nor does it involve a change to a new thing, a living stone. A living stone is material for the assembly.
JS Do we have in Nathanael the taking up of the remnant in type?
JT I think so, he represents that.
JS Cephas would represent the assembly.
JT The Lord looked on him, as if the thing brought before Him is very specific, and said, “Thou shalt be called Cephas”. It was not an optional name.
AFM So you get in this chapter the setting forth of the purpose of God in the assembly, and the ways of God with Israel culminating in millennial blessing.
[p. 305] JT That is the introduction. In the next chapter you have the third day. Millennial joy is introduced and the complete end reached.
BTF When the two disciples followed Jesus they abode with Him that day. Is not this a figure of family affections found in the assembly?
JT I think that is right.
JS In connection with what you have been saying, how do you fit in the last paragraph of chapter 1?
JT It introduces the millennial scene, as on the third day you start with that. At Cana we have the beginning of signs, which means there are other signs to follow: “This beginning of signs did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, ... and his disciples believed on him”, John 2: 11. It is also a time of believing.
HSD So that John saw the first sign of life.
JT Here it is a sign bringing in the millennial joy. The Lord did it for them; He will yet do it for all.
AFM Do you make the morrow of chapter 1: 43, a kind of introduction to chapter 2?
JT Yes.
AAT Did I understand you to say that movement was the evidence of life?
JT Yes, as John presents it here.
AAT There seems to be movement on both sides.
JT Well, that is the idea. Life in Christ as in movement was the light of men. The light that shines into your hearts becomes life. That is to say, light according to God is not an abstract thing; it is the result of what is concrete, of life. This is basic right through in respect of life. It is a question of how much is radiating from us.
JS It is only as we move according to God that light radiates from us.
JT Quite. All other movements are in lawlessness. In John the idea is that God sets things in [p. 306] movement in that way. The Son is life, and everything is to move in relation to Him.
CAM I suppose light is movement in itself.
JT That is right.
HSD Does headship come in here in relation to movement?
JT I think we take character from whatever we see expressed in Christ. I suppose headship in Colossians, for example, is intended to show that Christ is not appointed Head, but that He is Head. It is undeniable.
JS In John life and love are made very much of.
JT Indeed, more in John than in all the rest of the New Testament.
TA At the close of this gospel the Lord said to Peter, “Follow me”. There is the suggestion of movement right through.
WB-w Nathanael gets the light through Philip.
JT And then the solution of Nathanael’s enquiry was found in responding to Philip’s invitation to “Come and see”. There must be movement.
AFM That word on movement is helpful: there may be those present who are exercised and desirous of help; but what the Lord looks for is response to the word, “Come and see”.
BTF As reaching that point, no doubt souls receive light from the Lord, and the light which shines into them radiates from them.
JT That is to say, it extends. The thought is that the life is the light, and reciprocally the light is the life; an apposition, as we might call it, for the two things are equal. The light becomes life, and correspondingly it becomes light, and so radiates and extends.
CAM The movement is astronomical in figure and, I suppose, somewhat difficult to explain, but it seems to be more the nature of the [p. 307] thing.
JT A movement may be guided by a star; that is you get the advantage of some unit in the moral system, or of “the ordinances of the heavens”, as they are spoken of in Job, implying that they are for man’s benefit. It is to the credit of the Magi that they saw His star: they were able to discern whose it was, whereas John is dealing, not with an isolated unit such as His star, but with Christ as moving everything, and everything as moving in relation to Him.
AFM He is the “Sun”.
JT Whereas the star points you to the Sun.
AFM Will you say a word about the temple?
JT In regard to His Father’s house; I think the passage shows that whilst He is bringing in the wine of joy for men. He is thinking of what is due to the Father; He says, “My Father’s house”; therefore we must never leave the Father out. Whilst life is the great thing to be exercised about, we must never leave out the rights of God; hence Jesus says, “My Father’s house”. Also it was written of Him: “The zeal of thy house devours me”, showing what a Levite He was. Then the next thing is the temple the material house is to be replaced by the temple of His body. He says, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up”. The Lord selected the word for temple in wisdom; it denoted the inner shrine of the house of God, and is suggestive of the body of Christ.
Ques How does that stand in relation to former teaching?
JT It is a development of what is suggested in the name Peter and includes the mystery. It is essential to understand that the teaching we are brought into is private in character, like the ‘within’ of Matthew 13: 36. Here the true temple is the Lord’s body, the continuation of which is seen in the [p. 308] saints as the assembly of God. That is what we find at the end of chapter 2.
CAM You would say we do not need what is material to understand this?
JT Many do not understand it, and the effort is made to reduce everything to the level of the natural mind: to deny what is esoteric teaching. There is this inside teaching of which the Jews were ignorant, for they did not understand the Lord’s challenge “Destroy this temple”. They thought He spoke about the material temple. Nor did His disciples know, till after He rose from the dead.
WB-w Do we get in Ephesians 2 the house, and in chapter 3 the mystery?
HSD The temple is where the light of God resides.
JT That is right. It is only by the light of the temple that either Colossians or Ephesians are understood; but we need to be initiated in the truth.
AFM Do you think that, in a certain sense. Nicodemus became initiated by what the Lord presented?
JT He represents the kind of thing that is initial in christianity. “There was a man from among the Pharisees”. He is different in kind from what had gone before. He does not go all the way, but represents the initial idea.
WB-w What do you say about Andrew not leaving Simon till he got him to the Lord?
JT He finds, not simply Simon, but his own brother Simon, meaning that you begin with those near to you.
WB-w He did not stop until the work was finished.
JT The whole point is bringing persons to the Lord.
JS Does not chapter 3 give us the new beginning?
JT Chapters 1 and 2 are introductory, and now [p. 309] we are starting at the bottom. We have got the kind of man who comes by night, but he comes to the Lord. He says, “we know that thou art come a teacher from God”. He recognises that He is a Teacher and is from God. Then he connects what Jesus did with God. He says, “None can do these signs that thou doest unless God be with him”. He gets the benefit of the miracles by connecting them with God.
HSD The Rabbis of Jerusalem could not do such works.
AFM They saw the signs of the previous chapter, but did not connect them with God. The Lord did not commit Himself to them.
ARS When Nicodemus left he was enlightened; he came in darkness but the Lord’s presence dispelled it.
JT You would hope that he did not leave. I should judge he never left the Lord in principle. He was in the wrong position in chapter 7, but in a right and suitable one in chapter 19.
Rem The situation was like the sun shining on vegetation: it would cause it to grow.
JT The same principle that is in the earth was in Nicodemus. In Genesis 1 you have a certain principle of the earth, so that in it God has His place. The principle is that of fertility; but for that there would be no fruit. In Genesis 1 God said, “Let the earth cause grass to spring up”: He caused it to do so. I think Nicodemus represents that here, i.e., the subjective thing, so that life becomes effective in you. The Lord begins to speak to him and in doing so sows right seed.
AFM Could the word “cause” of Genesis 1, be applied to Nicodemus? There was the element there that could be affected by the light.
JT Yes. Unless God gets a response there will be no movement.
CB [p. 310] What are the earthly things of chapter 3?
JT The earthly things are those which refer to new birth and the kingdom. The point of importance is the soil, and the Lord is dealing with that. He is referring really to Ezekiel 36, having in mind the fertility of the soil. If you have not that you get no crop.
ARS How do you get that?
JT God gives it; He puts it there, or the soil, so to speak, would not bring forth.
BTF You were speaking of Nicodemus as one in whom there was a work of God.
JT I think the earth of Genesis 1 represents him, in view of fruit for God. There must be fertility in the soil.
ARS It is God who puts fertility there; that is His work, and then the servant can follow with his work.
JT Otherwise the seed would be sown on the rocky places.
ARS I suppose in the case of the eunuch there was fertile soil, and then Philip was sent; and so with Cornelius.
ANW The word is, “It is needful that ye should be born anew”. It was not within the province of man to do this. It must be of God.
JT I have heard of men preaching as if they could effect it in men; whereas it is presented as a necessity, which only God can bring about.
WGT Does Genesis 1 represent the negative side first, in order that God might bring in what is positive?
JT That is right. So that on the third day the dry land appeared, and what follows is the idea of fertility, for God made it so.
AFM New birth in man is really the result of a divine communication, it is not simply an operation but [p. 311] a communication.
JT Quite. The work of God takes a certain form in man and lays a basis for family relationships. It is not a vegetable figure, but the idea of a family that God has before Him in it.
BTF Would you connect earthly things more with the kingdom, and heavenly things with heavenly light?
JT That is chapter 3. The Lord is preparing in that chapter for christianity. It takes the epistles to Colossians and Ephesians to develop the heavenly side; the Lord in His teaching does not go that length, but the basis of it is laid here. It takes Paul’s ministry to develop it, showing that christians have to be prepared for heavenly things. This heavenly light is introduced to us in relation to heavenly things.
JEH What had the Lord in mind? Did He connect the thought of new birth with christianity?
JT Yes, and also eternal life. Christianity is presented to whosoever and received by all who would be wise; but the teaching of Paul from Romans onward would be: Everything must lead up to what is heavenly.
CAM The Lord says, “If I have said the earthly things to you, and ye believe not, how, if I say the heavenly things to you, will ye believe?”
JT The development of those heavenly things awaited Paul’s ministry; what is evidenced here is the wisdom and skill in the way the Lord met Nicodemus.
ARS Does fertility imply life?
JT Well, from a vegetation viewpoint it does, so that grass, herbs and trees are the first witness to fertility in creation.
Rem Paul speaks of God shining into his heart.
JT “It is the God who spoke that out of darkness light should shine who has shone in our hearts”, 2 Corinthians 4: 6. It is the same God who spoke in Genesis 1 [p. 312] that shines in the gospel. The shining is now in the face of Jesus Christ. It shows how Scripture is bound together.
AFM You were saying that it was reserved to Paul to advance upon the heavenly things, but in John’s gospel itself, was there not some development of the heavenly?
JT The germ of everything is found in this gospel, and that is of particular interest. The Lord intimates what was there, and would have Nicodemus to be ready for it. His object is to bring the earth into accord with heaven.
ARS Must you have light before you have life?
JT That is, light becomes life as you receive it.
Ques Is there a difference between the heavenlies in Ephesians and heavenly things here?
JT Heavenly things are the things that relate to heaven, but the heavenlies are not only the things that relate to heaven, they are the sphere of the heavenly things as well.
WB-w Why is the brazen serpent introduced here?
JT It shows how this great subject has entered into it: the Lord speaks not only of it in an introductory way, but He shows that we should participate in the thing. Nicodemus was the kind of man He could deal with, so that He begins at the bottom, and brings in the necessity of new birth; then we have His own part in it: “as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, thus must the Son of man be lifted up, that every one who believes on him may not perish, but have life eternal”. The Lord immediately touches your heart by that statement, for you are not going to enter into it carelessly, but as touched by the sufferings of Christ; and the serpent lifted up is representative of the thing that caused the damage.
CAM It is the giving of Himself here, but in chapter 12 it is as “lifted up out of the earth” that He draws all to Himself.
JT I think so. In chapter 12 it says, “this he said signifying by what death he was about to die”.
JS Introducing the serpent here is to trace sin to its source.
JT So that the passage brings together the source of the evil and the source of the blessing, the one having its origin in Satan, the other in the heart of God.
BTF Would His being lifted up imply that He is the Object of faith?
JT Yes, but as lifted up in chapter 12, He is the centre of attraction; it is for the world to see that. In chapter 3 the lifting up is in view of man’s sinful state: “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 This lifting up causes movement: “And I, if I be lifted up out of the earth, will draw all to me”.
JT Here it is that you might enter into the thing with feeling; it is the Son of man that is lifted up. It was a question of the sin of man; for, as Son of man, He is on man’s side, so that He has opened the door for all men.
TA For whosoever.
JT Yes.
AFM The great end is eternal life. The brazen serpent was introduced by God in view of the land of Canaan. How do you regard eternal life? Is it enjoyed individually as well as collectively?
JT I think the general thought of eternal life is collective, only you must have life individually first.
AFM In the gift of the Spirit we have life potentially, you would say, answering to the springing well.
JT That is the way it is taken up in Romans 8: 10. “The Spirit life on account of righteousness”.
AFM Then in regard of testimony, if the light becomes life in us, and this radiates from us, would you connect it with the individual or with the company, as the sphere of life?
JT I think with the individual as part of the company. The Lord is not showing how the thing works out here. Nicodemus was not clear, but was listening to Christ, and we need to listen to Him more and more. The introduction includes the whole thing as in His mind, but we have to come to that in the chapters which follow, in order to reach the full thought.
Ques Does chapter 3 introduce us into eternal life?
JT It shows what is the great thought of God for us, and is what the love of God has devised for all believers, that we should not perish but have eternal life; and the land is the place of it. The brazen serpent is the beginning of the thing, but is rather the negative side of it; the positive thing is the land, as it says in Proverbs 15: 24: “The path of life is upwards for the wise ...” I am not yet there in body, but can be in soul and spirit. It is important to see that you belong to the land and have part in eternal life. It is presented in chapter 3 from the divine side. In the chapters that follow we learn how we come into the gain of it.
BTF It is a definite blessing that God has in His mind for the believer.
ARS Do you think that the man that fell among thieves was in the good of eternal life when he got into the inn?
JT No, he was on the way to it. The home of chapter 1 is more where you get it.
AFM The Father’s house of Luke 15 would be more the sphere of it than Luke 10.
ANW Verse 16 of chapter 3 shows us that [p. 315] those who believe have eternal life, rather than how they get it.
JT Quite so. Of course, there is the thought of his not perishing, and of being led into the full blessing of eternal life.
WB-w Do you think we ever get it without experiencing death morally?
JT No. Chapter 3 gives us the full thought of what is in the mind of God for us.
JEH Would you enlarge upon it a little?
JT It is quite clear that eternal life applies to a certain class, that is, to believers, but the chapters following chapter 3 show in what way we do not perish but have everlasting life.
JEH Are all believers within the promised land?
JT Those who believe on Him, according to John’s gospel, are.
ANW In chapter 3 the Lord is presented for faith as the Son of man lifted up, in the first instance, and then as God’s only-begotten Son.
JC Does not believing imply continuity?
JT It does. The whole gospel has our advancement in faith in view, so that the believer has these things and is characterised by them.
WB-w Would you say that a person might believe certain things and not have eternal life?
JT Every genuine believer has it.
WB-w But young believers might not be in the gain of it.
JT Life here is viewed from the gift side: God is speaking to you about what He is giving you.
Rem The last verse of chapter 3 has the same idea: “He that believes on the Son has life eternal”.
JT It is the kind of person that has it. The first thing to see is the love of God. It is not the great love of God yet, but it lays the basis for it. It was left for Paul to bring out the great love of God as in Ephesians. We were perishing, and God brought [p. 316] eternal life in that we should not perish. The Lord had heavenly things in mind, and was fully competent to speak of those things. Neither Moses, nor Elijah, nor Isaiah could do so. The Lord announces what was now on hand; it awaited Paul’s ministry to develop it fully, but the Lord was laying the basis for that. In this gospel the basis is laid, so that you come from the love of God to the great love of God; God has given us eternal life and made us sit down together in the heavenlies.
ANW What does the word ‘so’ of verse 16 convey to you?
JT Not only the gift, great as that is, but the result of it. It would not be sufficient to express the love of God in the way of gift alone.
JS Is it more on the mercy side in verse 16?
JT Well, you have the love of God: “God so loved”. It is the same Speaker, whether it be through John here, or Paul later. The Lord is bringing all this out; who was in heaven while on earth. The thing is to be great enough in our souls to take in the heavenly things of which He was speaking.
WB-w The 603,550 men of war, whom Moses and Aaron numbered, perished in the wilderness.
JT Yes. It helps us to see the necessity of having the thing on the principle of gift.
AFM This chapter is a wonderful unfolding of light to Nicodemus.
JT Yes. You are now in the presence of One who is in heaven, but who is the Son of man; as such He is One to whom you can get near and hear, for He is ready to unfold the thoughts of God. Stephen sees Him through the opened heaven, and testifies to Him there; hence you have the riches of God’s mercy and the greatness of His love.
WB-w Do you refer to His present place in heaven? He was on earth at the time of this [p. 317] chapter.
JT O! He was, but He was morally in heaven, and as Son of man. It is as the Son of man that He is available for us. God has secured everything for us in One who was perfectly subject and obedient. The speaking is now from heaven, and of heavenly things.
JS What do you say regarding verse 35: “The Father loves the Son, and has given all things to be in his hand”?
JT I think it is to bring out His great position in administration. All things are now in His hand, which supposes subjection on our part. The administration today is toward christendom, later it will be toward Israel and the nations blessed with them.
JS “The Father loves the Son” would involve His manhood.
JT Quite.
AFM The Father loved the Son because He was perfectly subject, and obedient to Him, as you stated earlier in a similar connection.
JEH It is remarkable that the Lord says, “He that is not subject to the Son”, showing that unbelief is really insubordination to Him, and that the insubject shall not see life.
WB-w How far does the mediatorial side go?
JT It goes on even in eternity; for the Lord ever remains in the position of Mediator between God and men, otherwise we could not have maintained relations with God.
WB-w Will it not be given up when the Son delivers up the kingdom?
JT No, I think not.
JS What has been entrusted to Him by the Father is not subject to recall: “The Father loves the Son, and has given all things to be in his hand”.
JT In verse 21 we see how the work of God comes to light; the subject of it practises truth and comes to the light. Wherever the truth is practised [p. 318] by one, that one comes to the light that his deeds might be made manifest that they are wrought in God.
ARS How do you reconcile our brother’s remark that, what has been entrusted to Christ is not subject to recall, with the Son giving up the kingdom that God may be all in all?
JT The kingdom is given up, but that is because the end for which it had been established will have been reached. It will take place when the Lord shall have put down all rule; but the principle of it is retained in that He Himself is subject.
JEH One of the greatest lessons to learn is subjection.
JT The whole scene is yet to be marked by subjection, and it is a great feature which will characterise the eternal state of things.
WB-w Is not the mediatorial work of Christ exercised more in time rather than in eternity?
JT Suppose His mediatorial work ceased when we got to heaven; that would not do. We shall need Him as much there as here; and we shall find Him equally available for us as Mediator when we get there.
TA ‘The Lamb is there, my soul’.
JT Quite so, but He is also the one Mediator between God and men.
WB-w Will the necessity for that position continue?
JT Of course it will; God is infinitely beyond us, hence we shall always need the Mediator, the Man Christ Jesus; we could not take divine things in apart from Him, they are too great for us.
AFM His mediatorial work began even before He became incarnate, and goes on in eternity.
JT That is, in creating the universe He acted mediatorially, but He had to become man in order to be the one Mediator between God and men.
AFM [p. 319] Is the thought of the Mediator kindred to the Head?
JT The former is Godward to man, the latter manward to God. Divine wisdom is all there.
AFM So that whilst the Lord will be subject to God eternally. He will occupy the unique positions of Mediator and Head?
JT Quite so. What a delight to know that He will always be there!