INDIANAPOLIS DECEMBER 1925, READING (2)
INDIANAPOLIS [p. 246] DECEMBER 1925, READING (2)
AFM Would you give the connecting link between the epistle to the Romans and that to the Colossians?
JT It lies in the Spirit. As we had it already, the Holy Spirit comes in administratively, that is, under the Lord, and sheds abroad the love of God in our hearts. That becomes a basis for formation. Souls usually never get on to the line of God’s purpose save as they understand spiritual formation, and that involves inward conflict.
GAT What do you mean by inward conflict?
JT What we had this morning. Satan operates in the flesh, and as we understand the provision made, as typified in Exodus 17, we shall overcome by the Spirit, and in the process formation begins to take place, so that there is the acquirement of territory. We have to dismiss material thoughts (geographical territory) from our minds, but we have to understand the acquirement of territory — not exactly final, not Canaan, but nevertheless territory in which we can dwell, which implies that we love God.
AFM Was there not more territory acquired than what we were looking at this morning?
JT Yes, a very large extent of territory, which the book of Judges in a very forcible way outlines as having been in possession of Israel for hundreds of years (Judges 11:12,13). The enemy was disputing it and seeking to recover it, but Jephthah outlines it as acquired by Israel and in their possession.
EHT Is there a distinction between formation and possession of divine territory?
JT Formation really involves that we have taken possession of certain territory in which we may [p. 247] dwell, and I think that the verses read this morning (Romans 8:1 - 17) indicate that territory, that is, we cry “Abba, Father”, by the Spirit. We are in conscious relationship with God as our Father.
Ques Is this territory past the wilderness?
JT No, it is at the confines of the land, but in the wilderness, because Romans does not take us out of the wilderness, but it is controlled from the land and never surrendered. Canaan is the final thought (inheritance), but this is territory which is of great importance to control. Young people come into it, so that in the early part of Numbers 21 they destroyed certain cities, but in the latter part they take possession of them and dwell in them, so they have a footing. They have a dwelling place, and then the Holy Spirit, having brought us to that point, where we have a dwelling-place spiritually, gives us in the three succeeding chapters (Numbers 22, Numbers 23 and Numbers 24) a divine view of the saints as possessing the Spirit and as possessing this dwelling-place. First, they are seen as dwelling alone, which is an important thing for young believers. They are to dwell alone; they are not to be numbered among the nations (Numbers 23:9). That is a point that comes in here, and then the shout of a king is amongst them (Numbers 23:21). There is power there. Their king is “higher than Agag” (Numbers 24:7), meaning that there is power subjectively greater than the power of Satan in the flesh. These are all spiritual thoughts that enter into the experience of the believer at this juncture, so that he becomes consciously superior to what is around him. He is separate and the shout of a king is there, and, mark, it is not God’s king here. Everything is from the standpoint of the people, because they have begun to exercise power, having become conscious of it; and this power gradually develops into what is superior and higher than the power of the flesh — Agag. And then the Star and the Sceptre in the last prophecy of [p. 248] Balaam (Numbers 24:17) stretches on to the millennial day. All that, I think, in these three chapters of Numbers, is of great moment as setting us up in conscious power, which I think corresponds with the second part of Romans 8. There is conscious victory not only from the standpoint of what God has done, but what we are conscious of in ourselves, and the epistle to the Colossians is based, I think, on that. It is based on the work of God in the saints. What Paul writes has reference to his knowledge of their love to all the saints, and their faith and their love in the Spirit, and that the gospel was fruitful in them. The gospel had borne fruit in them.
AFM According to Romans 8, we are in the enjoyment of the love of God, and now this is an advance — the Colossians loved all the saints. Is that the point?
JT Yes, they loved all saints, not merely those local to Colosse. They were not marked by localism. Many of our meetings are marked by extreme localism, which is not in keeping with the work of God, because the work of God is one whole and has relation to all. The apostle notes that they had love, not only for saints, but all saints, and furthermore, the love was in the Spirit. The only mention of the Spirit is with reference to the love they had — it was that kind of love.
WM I suppose the Spirit loves to hide Himself behind His work.
JT Therefore it is the work of God we have before us in the saints.
AFM Does that connect with the land somewhat — the thought of loving all the saints?
JT It leads up to it. It is a matter of great moment that we should be delivered from localism. One who loves all the saints is not more concerned about his own district than about other districts, because all are under the eye of the Lord, and this [p. 249] epistle is to lead up to that — to what is universal.
WM He has not the same responsibility toward others, but he has love for them all.
JT Yes, and he is concerned about them all. The nearer we get to the Lord the more we will love like the apostle. He was concerned about all the assemblies.
EHT But you would be concerned about your local assembly first?
JT You are, but as you advance in spiritual power and restrict yourself to a locality, you are apt to dominate it, whereas the whole assembly is the outlet for increased spiritual power. You gradually leave the local things with others, because it is the mind of the Lord that as we increase in spiritual power our responsibility should increase, and we should take on the whole assembly. This epistle is not so extensive as Ephesians. The spirit of Ephesians is universal; it is not a question of what is local. Colossians is local, but it is not local like Corinthians. The letter to Colosse was to be read at Laodicea, and the letter to Laodicea was to be read at Colosse (Colossians 4:16), meaning, I judge, that it had a bearing toward the district.
AFM We qualify in our own locality first, but with the idea of spreading out to the whole assembly.
JT I think that is the way the truth works with us.
EHT The evidence would come out in the prayer meeting.
JT Yes, and it comes out in the distribution of material means too. Where the saints were first called Christians (Antioch, Acts 11:26), there was a universal thought — they began to distribute for the need of the brethren elsewhere. The need at Jerusalem was brought to their attention. “Which also they did, and sent it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul” (Acts 11:30).
GAT [p. 250] I agree that what you say is perfectly right, but somehow I feel better over the prosperity of Chicago than I might over other places.
JT That is right, but if a man confines himself to a locality, as he increases in spiritual power, he is almost sure to exercise undue influence — an influence which should be exercised in a wider sphere.
AMH It is almost impossible to avoid that unless there is the embracing of what is wider. Would not love in the Spirit wipe away all sorts of distinctions, natural and social, for instance? There is a good deal of the social tie and appreciation of one another naturally, as well as of what is spiritual, but love in the Spirit would take us out of what is national as well as what is natural.
EAS At the Lord’s supper we have the loaf, and yet how often we prove at the prayer meeting that we are very local. It is not a piece of bread — it is a loaf.
JT And it specifically says “The bread which we break” (1 Corinthians 10:16), meaning all the saints — one loaf. “We being many are one bread, and one body” (1 Corinthians 10:17). It does not say the bread which ye break. That would be local, but “The bread which we break, ... we being many”.
Ques Does not your own local meeting come first?
JT No doubt you begin there. I was speaking particularly of the work of God in a man. Love to all the saints will lead to care for them all, and, as our brother remarked, we have the breaking of bread, which involves all the saints, that is, the whole assembly. The meeting for prayer should correspond with that — all should be embraced, and so also should the distribution of any means that we have. Anything that we have should be held in that way.
HD If we are formed by the Spirit of God in divine love, our hearts would take in what divine love has [p. 251] taken in.
EGMcA How would this undue influence be prevented by one who is making spiritual progress?
JT His increased energy would find scope and therefore he goes farther afield.
EHT Does not the Lord open up the way for the person who reaches that point, so that the influence he has accrued flows out?
JT Quite. Epaphras is an example of that enlargement. He carried the Colossians in his heart, but he was with the apostle Paul and laboured with him. He was a Colossian, but “a bondman of Christ”. Onesimus was also a Colossian — “a faithful and beloved brother”.
GWH-n Having heard of their faith and love, Paul now proceeds to pray for them, that they might be qualified for the position in which they were set.
JT Yes, that they should be, as he says, “Filled with the knowledge of his will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding, that ye might walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing”, and then “Strengthened with all might, according to his glorious power, unto all patience and longsuffering with joyfulness”. This is all with a view to the saints taking on what is distinctly heavenly.
AL Does it work up to Christ?
JT I think that is what he had on his mind. One great feature of Colossians is to bring us into correspondence with Christ.
AL In regard to formation, would you allow one to use the illustration of the lilies — how they grow? We should not be like little boys who are growing plants and who pull them up to look at them. In Colossians, one judges, the object is Christ in you and Christ everything; one has been struck with that scripture of the Lord’s, “Consider the lilies how they grow: they toil not, they spin not; and yet I say unto you, that Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these” (Luke 12:27). [p. 252] I have connected that thought with the growth and formation in Colossians.
JS You would put the subject of prayer alongside of that, and you might speak of meditation or rumination. The apostle turns to prayer relative to his ministry.
AL I was a little hindered in regard to what was really meant by formation until I saw that it is Christ that is to be everything, and if Christ is not everything I do not see how the lily would grow.
JT The word formation is a good one; it is distinct from creation. Creation is making something out of nothing, but formation is according to a model, I think. We have the two words in the beginning of Genesis. Creation is God acting of Himself to bring in something, but formation has reference to what is there, to what exists.
AL “The worlds were framed by the word of God” (Hebrews 11:3).
JT Well, that is “framed”, but the man was said to be formed. He was formed out of the clay, but the clay was there — the material was there. Of course, he was created too, because the word ‘created’ is used more in regard to man than it is in regard to anything else, but the word ‘formed’ is also used and I think that it has reference to a model.
GAT Would the model be “Let us make man in our image” (Genesis 1:26)?
JT Yes, God had Christ in His mind. Now His thought is to bring us into correspondence with Christ.
AFM Speaking of Genesis again, would the thought of likeness and image come in in this epistle, as in the opening of Genesis 5?
JT I think so. The idea of image now must depend on likeness — on our being formed like Christ.
RSS You get that in Romans 8:29. “For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the first born among many brethren”. Is that the thought of formation?
JT I think so. There is a model. There is that in the mind of God which He would bring us to, and so here the Lord is said to be “The image of the invisible God”. You have God perfectly represented.
AFM “Be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind” (Romans 12:2). Would that fit in here?
JT It precedes this really, but, of course, leads up to it.
WM We are not in the wilderness here.
JT No, we are over Jordan.
WM We are risen with Christ.
GWH-n Where do you bring in likeness here?
JT I think it would come in in chapter 3. These remarks are preliminary, showing what existed at Colosse and what existed in the mind of the apostle for them — his own exercises for them. It is to be observed that they were not, as far as the evidence goes, an apostolic church. They were not formed by his ministry, that is, directly. They were, I suppose, formed by it indirectly, but he had not been there apparently. He is going on a report that he had heard of them and so he has his own exercises about them, and he gives expression to these exercises in his prayer “Giving thanks unto the Father ... Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son”.
EHT Would you say that up to this point there has been a work in them to a certain extent, and now they were ready for something else?
JT Yes; and there must have been present in his thoughts the danger that exists at this point, because we are very apt to settle down in a certain state reached, but he wished them to go further; so, having arrived at the thought of the Father, who [p. 254] had made them meet to be partakers of the inheritance and who had translated them into the kingdom of His dear Son, he speaks of the Son; he presents the Person in all His greatness to us, so that we might have before us an object great enough to command us in mind and heart and draw us over to Himself.
AMH All this would suppose a certain capacity, which has now been reached; the Colossians were capable of apprehending what he was going to unfold. Do you not think that in Romans there is more the making room for growth? The apostle supposes that the Spirit has place with us and we have now sufficient capacity to apprehend Christ. I think that growth in its proper sense begins there — where we can begin to take hold of positive elements. One thought that is pressed very much is that of endurance, and the bringing in of the Person before their hearts would be really an incentive to them to move forward. Would you agree with that?
JT Yes, indeed, so you have [p. 256] the kingdom of the Son of the Father’s love. We might introduce the book of Proverbs here — for the education of believers (young believers particularly), it is a book of immense importance. The kingdom of the Son of the Father’s love is undoubtedly a reference to Solomon, who was nurtured in the affections of his father and his mother. We are nourished in an authoritative way and yet in an affectionate way, which brings about a condition that is befitting to all these great things that God intends to bring us into.
AMH So that we should appreciate the name that Jehovah gave Solomon. I suppose under David we perhaps find it a little irksome, but here all is fully appreciated and we see how beneficial it is; the king is the One who is loved of the Father. We delight in His kingdom.
JT What a kingdom [p. 255] it is!
EHT Would you say it is brought into view by conflict, where divine affections for one another are?
JT What is before us now is the kingdom of the Son of the Father’s love, that is to say, we are under a rule that is most benign. It is a rule of affection; but, nevertheless, there is authority. There is little or nothing about war in Solomon’s kingdom, but nevertheless the kingdom was there and all under him would enjoy the blessings of his kingdom, but they would never lose sight of the fact that Solomon was king.
WM It is significant, too, that Solomon had great largeness of heart and spiritual wisdom and understanding, and those are the things spoken of here that the apostle desires for these saints in connection with the kingdom.
AFM I think that what follows would be an incentive to be under this blessed rule of the Son of the Father’s love — the opening out of the greatness of His Person. It is prefaced by verse 14: “In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins”. Such an One died for us.
JT There is every incentive to recognise Him in whom we have these things. You can understand how every true Israelite would regard Solomon. What wealth Solomon had brought into the kingdom! Every one in the kingdom would benefit from that. It was a wonderful kingdom.
AL We get the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of God, but the form here is the kingdom of the Son of His love.
JT I think it comes in here thus because subjection is already effected. David had brought about subjection; he was a king against whom there was no rising up. That is the idea of the kingdom as in David, so in the genealogy in Matthew, as the Spirit arrives at David, it is “David the king” (Matthew 1:6); the point in the kingdom is subjection, but here it is the kingdom of the Son of the Father’s love. We are under His influence now, and things are brought in immediately which should form an immense incentive to us to love Him. We have redemption and the forgiveness of sins, and then he goes on to speak about the wonderful things that attach to Him. He is the Image of the invisible God, the Head of all principality and power, and Head of the body; that is to say, every dignity belongs to Christ.
EHT Would it be right to say that here it is a question of what Christ is to God, not so much what He is to us?
JT It is what He is Himself. The apostle is bringing forward the Person now and the things that attach to Him.
AMH I suppose we are really coming to headship. The Lord is Head to us and we delight to be guided by His affections, His love. Nevertheless there are the elements you were speaking of. It is still a kingdom, and authority is still to be recognised there.
JT It becomes, so to speak, easy for the soul to come in for headship when you see the wonderful things that attach to the Lord.
GAT I like what you said about loving Him. It takes me on farther in my thoughts.
JT Yes, it is the greatness of the Person here. When it is a question of going into Canaan, God would bring in every possible incentive so that we might go in by attraction, because that is really how we go in — we follow the ark.
HD “Partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light” — is that linked up with Romans 8:17, “Heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ”?
JT Yes, only here you are made fit; the emphasis here is on your being made meet for that in light.
Ques Is not the word ‘translated’ here unusual?
JT At this point you see the importance of being [p. 257] delivered from the authority of darkness. Many are held by darkness, it having authority in their consciences. Things that are antiquated and that have a great reputation among men have weight on the consciences of saints and they are held by them. Now, the Father delivers from all that, so that we can see how the thought is to set us free so that we might be entirely under the influence of the Son of His love.
EHT The dignity and greatness of the Person attracts us and leads us on.
JT There are two sides to the kingdom — that connected with the Lord, which has a bearing on the conscience, and that connected with the Son, which has a bearing on the affections. Colossians has reference to the affections — the Son of the Father’s love. As we remarked about Solomon, David brought in subjugation, but Solomon held sway by his influence, and so his teaching is addressed to us as in known relationship. He addresses us as sons in the book of Proverbs, so that in this teaching we become accustomed to family relationships and the things that belong to these relationships. Wisdom is entwined in all the instruction that you get and so we gradually come to take our places in that in which is to be displayed the all-various wisdom of God (Ephesians 3:10). That is what we are being led up to here.
Ques Why is it that we do not have much of the Spirit at this point?
JT Because it is His work that is in view. It is a question now of the work of God in you, having brought you to a point where the Person of Christ can be taken account of and where you are prepared to come under His influence and teaching.
AMH He supposes here that the teaching has become pleasant to us. It has entered into the heart and we are attracted by it. I think that what was said about the Proverbs is extremely attractive. He [p. 258] addresses us as sons with all the affection that a father would.
AFM Does the book of Proverbs bring about a son, is that the idea?
JT It assumes that you are a son, I think, and teaches you on that line. Therefore it is family instruction.
AL Would you not say it brings about a wise son? “A wise son maketh a glad father” (Proverbs 15:20). The wise son has, to use a human expression, taken colour from his father.
JT I think that we have in the gospel of Matthew the paternal side emphasised, and in the gospel of Luke we have the maternal side emphasised; and I think that Mark fits in as a sort of product of the two gospels. You have a Son in Mark — no genealogy of Christ, no royal line nor human line. In Matthew we have the royal line and in Luke the human line, but in Mark 1:1 it is not either, but “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God”. — “Jesus Christ, Son of God”; not as in John. — “In the beginning”. Applying it to us, Christ has in Mark a place as Model, as one comes to the age of service; and I think Proverbs, rightly understood, brings about such a man — it brings about in us a state of development and maturity that can be employed in the testimony.
AFM The idea of one being fully in the good of sonship, which I think what you have said beautifully explains.
JT Yes, no one really is efficient in the testimony unless he understands, I think, that the bearing of Mark in that sense is the instruction of one brought up under the paternal affections and the maternal affections. “For I was my father’s son, tender and only beloved in the sight of my mother” (Proverbs 4:3), so that he is qualified to bring forward the Father and the truth that is intended to develop us into [p. 259] sonship and maturity, so that we should be efficient in the testimony.
AFM To be associated with such an One as that.
JT The Lord selected certain ones (twelve) that they might be with Him and that He might send them forth to preach. You can understand that the influence of a “greater than Solomon” would be exercised over them as they were with Him.
WM The efficiency of the sons comes in in the last chapter of Proverbs.
JT In the “virtuous woman”?
WM Where the virtuous woman is magnified and the husband gets the credit.
JT So that the great problem of knowledge is by a man who pretends to know nothing, but he raises questions, “What is his name, and what is his son s name?” (Proverbs 30:4). That is Agur. He felt he knew less than anybody, but he could speak about what God could do. He could gather the wind in His fists and bind the waters in a garment. He knew that and he raises questions as to God — “What is his name, and what is his son’s name, if thou canst tell?” That is the thing, what can you tell about God and about His Son?
AMH At the beginning of this line Agur says, “I neither learned wisdom, nor have the knowledge of the Holy”. He had not the knowledge of putting things together on divine lines, but it is not the thought of a lawless man. He has come to the point in his soul that everything has to be of a different pattern and he wants to put things together on that line. The end of the chapter works it out.
GAT Would you say, in going out in service, that we go out in the highest character?
JT I think what has been noticed in Mark is very important. It is “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God”. We go out as sons. Do you agree with that?
AMH It is extremely attractive; how the thought of the Son of God holds the soul! It brings the Lord in in an altogether different line, an altogether different kind of Man, different affections, different way of speaking, different outlook. I was thinking of Him here as set above all principality and power — what a world you are introduced to! You immediately feel everything has to be done for another kind of world, not a pattern of things here.
GWH-n Is that why Christ is presented here in this light, to attract us and to move us and form us in relation to that world?
JT I think so. The greatest things are presented: “By him to reconcile all things unto himself”. All the fulness was pleased to dwell there. It is not simply His relation to the saints, but to all things; that is, you have the full presentation of Christ to the heart, and that surely is enough to control us. We can take Him to be Head. If He has created this great universe that runs on for thousands of years, surely we can take Him to be Head.
Rem Should we not try to know the Lord here from a priestly standpoint? We have Him to minister to us, as in Romans, but “The image of the invisible God” suggests something that God has waited for. Do we want to take character from Him?
JT You see how, having spoken of the divine thought to reconcile all things to Himself, things in heaven and things in earth, he had the state of the saints in Colosse particularly in view, and perhaps all Gentile believers, when he says “And you ... hath he reconciled”.
AMH It is put stronger here than in 2 Corinthians 5:18. There it is “reconciled us”. It is not quite so personal as ‘You ... hath He reconciled’. It suggests those who can appreciate it. You [p. 261] come to that side of the truth. As was remarked, the Christian position, would you say?
JT Yes. In Ephesians 2:16 you have reconciliation of both Jew and Gentile in one body, but here the apostle is evidently speaking either to a local company or a certain section of the saints, so that, as you said, it comes home to us — “You ... hath he reconciled”.
AFM It is already accomplished. What is the thought of bringing it in here?
JT I think because it is necessary to the truth in view, the truth in the mind of the Spirit to bring out. The great fact of reconciliation should have its place and the way it occurred — “In the body of his flesh through death”. Again you have, I think, an incentive to love Him. We are not told how all things are to be reconciled, but we know, of course, that it is through death, but when He is making a local application he brings in “The body of his flesh through death”.
GWH-n “To present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight” — marvellous setting of reconciliation, is it not?
JT It is indeed.
Rem If it is reconciliation in His body through death, it is something He does.
JT Oh, yes, it is what is effected in the death of Christ.
JB-t Is there not a great lack of desire to learn the things where Christ is, and these things are given so that we might be drawn in a wonderful way in our desires to enter there?
JT All through these statements it seems as if the Spirit of God would bring in incentives to affection.
AL And Christ is presented, in a sense, in a higher way in this epistle than in Ephesians, is it not so? There is more spoken of His own personal glory.
JT Yes, in that sense. What you will observe in [p. 262] these two epistles, that is, Colossians and Ephesians, is that God is presented as the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. In the gospels He is not spoken of as His God save on the cross and in the message through Mary, as far as I remember. He addresses God as “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46), but He usually refers — indeed always refers — to the Father, but in the message to Mary it is “My Father and your Father, my God and your God” (John 20:17). In these two epistles He is taken account of as Man. God is His God and Father, but nevertheless Deity is attributed to Him, particularly in this epistle. When it is a question of incentive to the saints to follow Christ, the Holy Spirit brings in divine attributes so that the Person should control the mind and heart.
EHT You made the remark that following Christ up to this point is formation.
JT It is a question of following Him over Jordan — not in the wilderness, but over Jordan, because you come now to the last great barrier between the soul and the divine territory, and many draw back at it, many do not go over. This epistle is to the end that we should go over.
AFM Follow the ark, as you were saying. This section presents the greatness and glory of Christ in every sphere, whether in heaven or on earth, or in death. He is pre-eminent in every respect. Is that the thought?
JT That is the idea, I think.
EGMcA If I do not follow the ark, Christ, I shall not know anything about the administration of this kind of kingdom, shall I?
JT No, but I think the administration of the kingdom of the Son of the Father’s love is largely to prepare you for what is beyond, for what is over Jordan; having brought the thing down to our being presented, as it says, “Holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight”, he comes to an ‘if’, so that you can see we are on corrective ground. The epistle is corrective and also preventive.
GAT Would you give the marks of a Christian who has not gone over after the ark?
JT He is occupied, if he has come up to this point, with his cattle, etc., would you say?
AMH I thought that was what detained us. If we go in for what is heavenly, it means giving up what is earthly. The earthly thing is so plausible that we are inclined to settle down after we have arrived at a certain point of deliverance, pious, but not going on to the divine thought.
JT Such believers have acquired certain territory and you have regard for them.
WM Three things deter people. They are mentioned by the woman at the well — “himself, and his children and his cattle” (John 4:12). That is also a description of Job at the beginning: himself, children and cattle, that describes man. That is what detains them on the wilderness side of the Jordan.
EGMcA “Who mind earthly things” (Philippians 3:19), is that it?
JT Quite so.
AL The woman at the well of Sychar discovered the right source. We are making no movement in any direction unless this is what we are absorbed by in our affections, and I am not prepared to go into death unless in the divinely prepared way — following the ark, Christ as Head. As the eunuch said, “Here is water” (Acts 8:36), he would follow the Lord through death.
JT The ‘if’ here becomes very solemn, because it shows you that God may have wrought with us, yet there is the possibility of not holding the truth in its entirety and in its full bearing. “If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have [p. 264] heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven”. There is the danger, you see, notwithstanding that we have come to this point, of not holding the thing in its entirety.
AMH Jonathan would illustrate that. He was moved greatly by David up to a point, but when it is a question of things appearing weak in the kingdom he falls away. Shimei enters into the kingdom of Solomon; his heart is not really there, and the result is he comes under the judicial dealings of Solomon.
GWH-n Then there is Barzillai.
JT Yes, I think he had affection for David, but would not go over. He was too old he thought, and this, of course, has a spiritual significance.
WM Was there a moral state at Colosse that gives rise to these statements?
JT There must have been. The exercises of Epaphras (chapter 4:12,13) indicate this. There was a danger of not holding the Head. That is what we will see, I think, in chapter 2. In this chapter we see the great correspondence there was in Paul to the Lord; that is, you have one known amongst the saints, ministering on earth, who corresponded to the Lord, even in regard to sufferings for the assembly. You have Christ brought in in that way in Paul as he goes on to say, “Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body’s sake”. You see how they were reconciled in the body of Christ through death, the body of His flesh, and Paul is following on, so that they had the thing brought near.
AMH How do you mean the thing was there?
JT What marked the Lord and His love for them, “Reconciled in the body of his flesh through death”. The apostle Paul was following on that line, he rejoiced in sufferings [p. 265] for them.
AMH Paul in that way would become an incentive to their love.
JT That is what I thought.
WM Do you think this goes as far as the acceptance of reconciliation by the Colossians, or simply the statement that it has been effected?
JT It is more that it has been effected, I think. It is what God had effected so that they might be presented before Him according to His nature.
AFM It has a present purpose in view that they perhaps, and ourselves, have not fully apprehended nor answered to.
AL Where does all this come in in connection with our subject — the present truth in connection with the assembly?
JT This chapter is from the divine side. Christ is presented in His personal greatness and work, and then what marked the great minister of the assembly. The thing is brought near to your view when it is seen in a man actually living amongst us.
AMH What form would this suffering take — “In my flesh for his body’s sake”?
JT I think the daily sufferings that he endured because of the saints, because of the assembly, Christ’s body. He had before him the assembly, so that the basis is laid here clearly for the truth which we have before us. Paul is simply bringing out what a place the body had in his affections, and how he suffered for it and for the truth referring to it.
RSS That is, the Lord as here in His flesh and blood condition suffered for the assembly, and now Paul, being in this condition, went through similar suffering, also for the assembly.
JT That is the idea.
WM The body is looked at here in a Gentile aspect, and the persecution was from the Jews.
JT The Acts would show historically what all this meant, but the point is that it is a further [p. 266] incentive for the saints to be interested, that the minister of the assembly is in accord with Christ Himself. He is filling out the sufferings for His body’s sake in his own flesh.
Rem The time for these sufferings is past, though.
JT Not at all, this is the time for them. Christ’s sufferings are past, but there is still suffering in the flesh, and every one of us is privileged to have part in these sufferings.
AMH That is the line upon which we would particularly experience suffering — furthering the body of Christ. If I understand it right, the body is something here pleasurable to God. He brings in Christ as Head of the body; all the glories he has spoken of show how great the body is in his mind.
JT One feature of His glory is that He is head of the body, the assembly.
RSS With Paul there was the daily care of all the assemblies.
JT That would show how much the body was to him, how much he endured, but sufferings are painful things, things that would come upon him. The enemy inspired hostility to him, positive bodily sufferings of which the Acts would give us a record to some extent.
WM He says, “I bear in my body the stigmata of the Lord Jesus” (Galatians 6:17).
EGMcA That rehearsal of his sufferings: shipwreck, thrice beaten, etc. (2 Corinthians 11:23). Is that it?
JT All that would enter into it.
JB-t “Why persecutest thou me?” (Acts 9:4) — would that be on that line? The apostle Paul had a great sense afterward of the sufferings of the members of the body of Christ.
JT Only it is not suffering as in the body. I think it is for His body. He regards himself as a vessel having the body in view. Suffering comes upon him on account of [p. 267] it.
JB-t One might say that he took up the persecution which was against the body of Christ.
JT Every member of the body of Christ suffers, but his was special; he suffered for it.
EHT Would you say that the body was the vessel where the expression of Christ was, and his whole heart was set for that?
JT That is it. And then he goes on to say, “Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God, which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God; even the mystery”. So he was a minister of it and in that way he comes in for special sufferings.
GAT In 2 Corinthians 1:5 he says, “The sufferings of Christ abound in us”. He connects the saints and himself with that.
JT It abounded in him so that life might abound in the saints. He stood out before them, as it were, and bore the brunt of things.
EHT To bring it down to a present application, if you are set for the care of the body, that is, if your interests are that way, you would suffer, too, in your measure.
JT You would indeed. Of course, the form of persecution is not what it used to be, persecution exists because any one who is set for Him whom Satan is against must suffer. Every one will suffer in the measure in which he has got the body before him.
Rem I would like that made clear about the sufferings of the apostle Paul. He has been beaten, picked up for dead — where are your sufferings in this way?
JT For instance, if you are standing out specially for the truth, you come in for opposition. Physical sufferings are sometimes much easier to bear than spiritual.
EAS “Present your bodies a living sacrifice” (Romans [p. 268] 12:1).
GAT Is this different from “All that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution” (2 Timothy 3:12)?
JT It is the same thing, only that he is there pointing out what the body is to one who shows correspondence with Christ; that is the point.
GWH-n He has great concern about the Colossians; it is not himself here. “If ye continue”. The danger with them was not to hold the Head and go all the way.
JT You see, in Romans we have the apostle saying that he was willing to be accursed from Christ for his brethren, the Jews (Romans 9:3). “I have wished”, it says. I do not think it was a constant wish; he had wished, but here it is a constant thing. He had gone to Jerusalem and suffered for his brethren, the Jews. He had them before him, but he is speaking here of what he endured for the Gentiles — “For you”, it says, for the body, showing that he was in accord with Christ. It would be an additional incentive so that we might be attracted to Christ.