THE ASSEMBLY AS SEEN IN THE CLOSE OF THE GOSPELS (3)
[p. 39] THE ASSEMBLY AS SEEN IN THE CLOSE OF THE GOSPELS (3)
JT I believe we shall see that Luke contemplates a system governed by intelligence in man; lines of truth run through it showing that this intelligence is developed. It is a growth; hence angelic services are in such evidence here, but this chapter contemplates that there was want of intelligence. There ought to have been intelligence, meaning that the possibility of it was there. These women, for instance, are seen as acting unintelligently, but they are reminded of certain things that the Lord had said to them that they should have known, and indeed they had known but had forgotten. It says in verse 6, “He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spoke to you, being yet in Galilee, saying, The Son of man must be delivered up into the hands of sinners, and be crucified, and rise the third day. And they remembered his words”. That is to say, they had the intelligence, but had forgotten. There can be no doubt the Lord’s supper is intended to keep us rightly intelligent, because there is a tendency to forget. Then another thing that helps on this line is the presence of men toward the end. Angelic service is in order at the beginning, but we have in Luke 9, for instance, two men who were Moses and Elias appearing on the mount, and here in chapter 24, verse 4, we have two men. In the Acts, we also find two men, as if God had in mind in His counsels to make much of men, giving them pre-eminence even over angels; so although these are doubtless angels, they are not called angels. The idea of men is kept in mind both here and in Acts 1. Then in this chapter we have two men, one of whom is not named, but they are called senseless which [p. 40] is a very humbling thought. They should have known and they did not know, so that it would seem as if the idea of remembrance needs to be kept in view. The Lord’s supper is a memorial, to be kept rightly and intelligently; we are all so apt to forget.
JTJr The first two in Luke 24:4, would have in a way, I suppose, a mutuality between them in what they were saying, and an intelligent link, too.
JT They recall what the women had done. There is power to recall things in us.
AR Do the two men represent the system of which you are speaking?
JT Well, I suppose systematic operations are in mind, and grace is in mind, not judgment. The human side is stressed. I suppose a man loves because he is forgiven according to chapter 7, but then the Lord has in mind that there should be systematic forgiveness and continuous, not to limit it, seventy times seven.
ANW Did you say you have the Lord’s supper in mind in this matter of remembrance you are pressing?
JT Yes, I am thinking of that. The incident at Emmaus was not the Lord’s supper, but was very like it, something that was to become established as a memorial. It is not to establish what the Roman Catholics speak of as the Eucharist, which is one kind, and is false, of course. The idea of one kind is to make way for the two kinds, that is, the bread and cup.
FSC The Corinthians had forgotten this, had they not? Paul said, “For I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you”.
JT The word translated ‘remembrance’ has an active signification of recalling or ‘calling to mind’, as a memorial — ‘for the calling me to mind’. This reference has greatly clarified the Lord’s supper. Paul said that he had received the truth of the Lord’s [p. 41] supper from the Lord, which only confirms what we are saying, that it was necessary to have it at Corinth. There was a remarkable work of God at Corinth but there was apparent shallowness and that is usually accompanied by forgetfulness, so the apostle evidently uses great care in recording the matter in the first letter. The fact that it was needed is clearly shown in the conduct that arose in the assembly, most scandalous conditions really. They ate the Lord’s supper and called it the Lord’s supper, but Paul says it is not really that at all. They were despising the assembly in what they were doing. Evidently it furnishes the occasion for him to give the thing clearly, as we often have it in our meetings on Lord’s day morning. We never tire of it because it is so accurate; the wording is only found in 1 Corinthians 11. Much as to it is found in the gospels, but it is carefully worded in this first epistle to the Corinthians in order to stress the idea of the memorial: “In like manner also the cup, after having supped, saying. This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye shall drink it, in remembrance of me” 1 Corinthians 11:25. That is added in this epistle to enlarge the idea of a memorial.
AEH Is there any connection in your mind between this memorial in the Lord’s supper, and what Jehovah says to Moses at the burning bush in regard to His name? “This is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations. Go and gather the elders of Israel together, and say unto them, Jehovah the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, hath appeared to me, saying, I have indeed visited you” (Exodus 3:15,16).
JT I believe there is. I would connect that with later communications to Moses, what is said in the giving of the law in Exodus 20. After the law is given, Jehovah mentions the altars that they were to set up, not the ones that were formally established in [p. 42] the tabernacle, but first an altar of earth and secondly an altar of stone, and in that connection, “Where I shall make my name to be remembered, I will come unto thee, and bless thee” (Exodus 20:24). It looks as if it is intended to be linked on in the New Testament, as in the Lord’s supper, but linked on with the service of God even as in the Old Testament.
AEH So that following that this suggestive idea comes in in verse 25 of chapter 20, “And if thou make me an altar of stone, thou shalt not build it of hewn stone” (Exodus 20:25). That links on with the permanency and eternal character of the service of God.
JT Yes, and we sometimes find ourselves unable to go on to the heavenly side of things. The meeting is sometimes shallow and it is well to admit our weakness and God accepts us accordingly. So it says, “And if thou make me an altar of stone”(Exodus 20:25) as if the Lord has left open whether we are equal to it. The ‘if’ is not attached to the idea of the altar of earth, because there can be no service at all without it.
AEH If we find ourselves deficient or weak in regard to going on to the glorious aspects in the service of God, it may be traceable to our failure in this matter of memorial or remembrance.
JT Therefore, the memorial in Exodus 3, you remember, is on a very high level. It is a question of the name of Jehovah involving really the mysterious name of Jah. That is the highest level in the Old Testament, I would think, where the service of God is introduced; that name is to be before them, and it is to be before them as a memorial. “This is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations” (Exodus 3:15).
AR Do the two men standing with white robes suggest the idea of intelligence in their standing ready for the service?
JT They stood in white clothing. You will notice that it is the same form of expression that we [p. 43] get in chapter 2 where we have an angel standing by suddenly there. Here it is two men. It is the same expression only the angelic idea is dropped, showing it is the idea of humanity that is developed in this gospel. Angels have the first place in the service, for Gabriel, a leading angel, is very prominent in the first chapter, but the angelic idea is dropped apparently for the human idea because it is a question of counsel. Man is in the divine counsels.
ABP It says, “They found not the body of the Lord Jesus”. That is repeated later. Does that enter into the matter you are speaking about? At Corinth the question of discerning the body comes in.
JT They were really not in the right way. It was not to be found. There is some relation here, I would believe, with the conduct at Corinth. The Lord’s supper could not be found in what they were doing, nor can it be found in the many religious systems of Christendom, where it is professed to be celebrated. You can hardly discern it. The Lord carefully gave it accurately to Paul. The Lord knew well what would occur in the history of the assembly in the way of controversy in regard to the Lord’s supper.
AEM This matter of bringing to remembrance seems to be very important. “The Comforter, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, He shall teach you all things, and will bring to your remembrance all the things which I have said to you” (John 14:26).
JT That is good; there is no inaccuracy there. The Lord is pleased, I suppose you would say, to put into our hands a precious memorial in accurate wording, the wording entrusted to a trusted man, to Paul. We have accurate wording doubtless in John 20, too, in the message through Mary, but it was not verbatim. Paul spoke, I would think, in the actual words [p. 44] the Lord communicated.
HGH Is the fact that we need to have our memories refreshed a natural weakness or a spiritual weakness?
JT We are reminded that it is a natural weakness of the mind, but I would think that in general it involves that the mental power a brother may have by the Spirit is essential to all that relates to the service of God, the Spirit acting on our minds. Hence we have the remarkable expression in 1 Corinthians 2:16, “We have the mind of Christ”, which is an allusion to the thinking faculty. It is the spiritual faculty, our own natural minds of course, but the spiritual idea is the thing we have to rely on. So even when the natural powers fail the Lord helps us on the spiritual line, and so Moses was able to carry on at one hundred and twenty years of age. He would retain the idea of a memorial that Jehovah expected. “This is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations” (Exodus 3:15).
HH The memorial seems to be connected with holiness. This reference to the burning bush is on that line. There are several references from Psalm 30:4 to Psalm 135:13. They seem to stand very closely in relation to holiness which I thought connected with the Supper.
CN What is to be understood by not distinguishing the body in 1 Corinthians 11:29?
JT Well, it would mean the body of Christ. It involved the physical body of Christ, but then the spiritual body, I would say, was in mind, too. That is to be discerned. It is a question of discernment. They were failing in that regard — not discerning the body.
CN This memorial rightly understood helps us then in the discerning of the body, and the mystical body, as you say.
JT It does, and it is most important that we should keep it in mind in the ministry. We have [p. 45] been helped as to the kingdom of God, how it stands in relation to the assembly. The assembly is in mind in 1 Corinthians, in fact, “so also is the Christ” 1 Corinthians 12:12 alludes to it, to the mystical, or spirituality of the body of Christ, the assembly. It is discerned there — in the assembly.
CAM The Lord reserved the Supper to give it from heaven to Paul. Would there be in using Paul some thought as to a man’s feelings so as to touch us in a special way? What brought it to my mind was the fact that you are noting that there are services angels do and then it changes to services men do.
JT I think so. It is not said angels are made in the image and likeness of God. It is man. “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (Genesis 1:26) and that is intended to be in the mind from the start, from Genesis 1. It is intended to be in the mind of the learner, because the Bible was written for learners; for persons who would learn by discipline as well as by experience, and so the idea of man came right down until we come to Christ. And there it is that we have the Man; and Luke is the man, the minister, who is taken up to set out the Christ as Man. There can be no doubt that the books of Chronicles are intended to link on with Luke’s account; that is, his gospel and the Acts. Hence in the first book of Chronicles the first word is “Adam”. It was intended to be that and so it runs down until we come to Luke, and he says he wrote with method. He makes a good deal of angels at first, but he drops the thought and stresses the idea of man. I have no doubt that the apostle Paul is intended to represent manhood in the ministry; hence he is taken up in the ministry of the gospel, and the assembly and, of course, the Lord’s supper enters into that. It has its place there. The beginning of the service of God involves the Lord’s supper, but the idea of manhood is there. Paul makes much of the idea of manhood.
“Quit yourselves like men; be strong” (1 Corinthians 16:13). “Until we all arrive at the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, at then full-grown man, at the measure of the stature of the fulness of the Christ” (Ephesians 4:13). That is in mind in the mystery, the truth of the assembly. It is a question of man, man and woman, of course, but the word ‘man’ covers both in Genesis.
DP Would it be right to say the angels were used by God to hold the ground until men were formed to take it on?
JT Well, I think that is good, even in the sense of sonship. The idea of sonship was held by them and applied to them. The sons of God shouted for joy, and undoubtedly it was until man should appear, and hence wisdom says, “My delights were with the sons of men” (Proverbs 8:31), not angels. Angels are evidently in a subordinate position in the Scriptures. “Are they not all ministering spirits, sent out for service on account of those who shall inherit salvation?” (Hebrews 1:14). Hebrews says man is made a little lower than the angels but crowned with glory and honour. That is beyond angels and above them.
RWS Can Luke afford to bring in failure in men because of the system of grace to meet the failure?
JT And particularly to bring out the capability of recovery in man, the peculiar capability in Luke of recovery, particularly in Peter, for instance, and now in these two, one of whom is not named. How quickly they recover themselves, and surely that is a point for us at the present time, recovering ourselves and getting ourselves right; the Lord’s supper has much to do with that.
AEH Does it not seem that the Supper in this light as a memorial takes full account of the fact that we have been affected by the entrance and history of sin? It would seem that Adam, although [p. 47] not in the knowledge of God in the same exalted way as we, perhaps must have had a conscious sense of God until sin came in. The workings of the devil were active in him and there was a void in his soul in regard of God.
JT Quite so; although Adam was really honoured in a sense — he was not in the transgression. The second person made was not equal to the first; she is equal in material, and more than equal because she is made of man’s flesh, a bone out of Adam, but at the same time she is deliberately inferior. That is to say, God had that in His mind. She can never be the first. It says, man and woman, and so Adam was not in the transgression. Timothy makes a point of that, saying that the woman was in the transgression; the man was brought into it, but Satan attacked the woman. All this is in mind in the Lord’s supper; manhood suited to the assembly, because the assembly is in mind. The Lord’s supper belongs to the assembly and it is necessary too, because of the recovering power of it coming round every week, the great recovering, restoring power of it.
JKP This expression, “Why seek ye the living one among the dead?”: should we not keep that before us in view of the memorial? I am thinking of the great preparation of the aromatic spices that took place, running along with certain customs, whereas it is the living One.
JT You can see how the light would be perpetuated by certain things added, these spices. It says, “They came to the tomb, bringing the aromatic spices which they had prepared. And they found the stone rolled away”. That would be light dawning in the rolling away of the stone, but there was no light in the spices; it was a human thought. Then again, “When they had entered they found not the body of the Lord Jesus”. It was not there. Light was dawning,
[p. 48] but what formation was there? It does not seem that there was any until we have these two men. The angels were men and they were shining. There was light there, as it were. “And as they were filled with fear and bowed their faces to the ground, they said to them. Why seek ye the living one among the dead?”.
AEH Is Luke supporting Paul’s idea of all this wonderful system of things operating in a locality in that he speaks of “two men” here? It is not now “a multitude of the heavenly host” (Luke 2:13), but the smallest number you could have, but supported, showing Paul’s assembly idea.
JT It is right, I suppose, adequate witness. The Lord said the testimony of two men is true and the Lord applies that to the Father and the Son which is remarkable, as if the idea of two men as witnesses is intended to be impressed upon us.
JAP Is that why Paul confirms the resurrection also? There must have been a defect in Corinth. “For I delivered to you, in the first place, what also I had received, that Christ died for our sins, according to the scriptures; and that he was buried; and that he was raised the third day, according to the scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:3,4). That established the matter to the Corinthians.
JT Just so. It is important. The apostle reserved that until chapter 15. He intended to speak about the resurrection of Christ and the testimony to it, but chapter 11 is the death of Christ as a memorial. Christ is not presented as a memorial in the resurrection; it is Christ as in death so as to touch our affections.
HGH It says of Peter that he went home and wondered at what had happened. The women received intelligence when it was called to their remembrance. Is that a suggestion for us, that we [p. 49] acquire spiritual knowledge through memorial or remembrance, and by it we grow?
JT That is a good point. “And they remembered his words; and, returning from the sepulchre, related all these things to the eleven and to all the rest. Now it was Mary of Magdala, and Johanna, and Mary the mother of James, and the others with them, who told these things to the apostles”. Notice the fact that the apostles are mentioned. Luke says as to the institution of the Supper that the twelve apostles were with Him. When the Lord took His seat He placed Himself at table, the twelve apostles with Him, as if the idea of the twelve was to be there as a witness. It has the idea that witness or testimony has come down as a refutation of all human innovations in regard to the Supper. The persons there were reliable, and especially in Luke you have things rightly attested. Hence we have two men which were Moses and Elias, and two men here, and two men in Acts 1. Now what was the effect on Peter here? It says, “And their words appeared in their eyes as an idle tale, and they disbelieved them. But Peter, rising up, ran to the sepulchre, and stooping down he sees the linen clothes lying there alone, and went away home, wondering at what had happened”. “But Peter” — there was something there that touched him although not yet fully confirmed. If we look at John’s account we shall see that Peter believed already, when he saw how the clothes were laid. He believed and so the other disciple, which was John, also believed, showing that there is recoverability in a man if God is working in him although he may go very far. We may be sure he will come back.
JB So that Peter in his second epistle speaks of remembrance, but not in connection with the Supper. “I already write to you, in both which I stir up, in the way of putting you in remembrance” 2 [p. 50] Peter 3:1.
JT That is a good word, I am sure.
FNW Isaiah, in chapter 26, refers to “the mind stayed on thee” Isaiah 26:3. Then in verse 8, “the desire of our soul is to thy name, and to thy memorial” Isaiah 26:8. Then there is reference to other lords having dominion; then he says, “Thy dead shall live, my dead bodies shall arise” Isaiah 26:19, alluding to the resurrection of Christ too.
JT That is all very interesting, because it points to what is current today, the things that are happening, and the great names that are mentioned every-day, whereas the Lord’s people are going on with Him and His memorial. These great men will all perish as the passage says; they will not arise. Their names will not be handed down divinely, but the name of the Lord Jesus shall remain. The word in Psalm 41:5 is, “When will he die, and his name perish?”, but His name is to endure for ever. That only emphasises what has been before us in these meetings. There is what is about to die and disappear for ever, however great men may be; not that God is not using these great men at the present time in governmental matters, but what the saints are going on with is centred in the Lord’s supper, in the Lord Himself, who is risen from among the dead. We recall Him as One who died. He says Himself, “I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore. Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death” (Revelation 1:18). His going into death was His own act. That is the One to remember.
JH-tt Is there a connection then in the end of 2 Timothy with the idea of the two? All forsook Paul, Luke alone is with him, as though recovery and continuance are in mind.
JT Quite so, “Demas has forsaken me” (2 Timothy 4:10).
AR Do you think the system of grace was working very slowly at Corinth? The man in the first letter was withdrawn from, but he was recovered and the brethren were slow to receive him [p. 51] back.
JT That is good. I believe that anyone who is the subject of the work of God may be regarded as recoverable and we must have great patience. The first illustrations of recovery are notable, especially Peter; what a good and quick recovery he made!
ABP Do you have in mind that the bringing in of the Supper in relation to cases of this kind helps in recovery? Do you have in mind experience in relation to the Supper, or the Supper used as a means to recovery?
JT It looks as if induction into the assembly is almost identical with the acknowledgment of the Lord and His supper. Fellowship is a common and right word among us. Fellowship is in mind in persons seeking induction among us, and the fellowship is expressed in the Lord’s supper, the fellowship of the Lord’s death. It is remarkable that the cup is the first mentioned in regard to fellowship. The Roman Catholics say there is only one kind, that is, the bread; but the cup is the first thing mentioned in regard to fellowship in 1 Corinthians 10.
EAL Is the Cleopas mentioned in verse 18 the same as the one mentioned in John 19:25, “And by the cross of Jesus stood his mother, and the sister of his mother, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary of Magdala”. Luke says he was astonished, and in John he is noticeable by his absence. Standing by the cross of Christ is necessary, is it not?
JT There is a good deal of instruction in all that and I suppose we ought to connect this Cleopas with the one in John 19 where it is a question of the women, the place of women in the testimony; they stand out peculiarly at times!
RWS I want to ask as to the adjustment of the women which appears to be more rapid than the adjustment of the “two of them”. It was a different case with the two, requiring more time and more [p. 52] skill.
JT Yes, and it would appear that these were two brothers. You might think it would be a man and his wife, but there is no evidence that they were really. It would be a question of the persons, the plural, two of them. “And behold, two of them were going on the same day to a village distant sixty stadia from Jerusalem, called Emmaus; and they conversed with one another about all these things which had taken place. And it came to pass as they conversed and reasoned, that Jesus himself drawing nigh, went with them; but their eyes were holden so as not to know him”. I suppose the idea is that they are “two of them”, two brothers with wholesome, profitable conversation although marked by unbelief. But they are recoverable, and there is more even than what appears on the surface; their hearts burned. “Was not our heart burning in us ... ?” They are recoverable and in a very real way. They are capable of being affected by what is simple and somewhat of the character of the Lord’s supper. It is to remind us that the Lord’s supper is the great point if we are to be recovered and maintained, because it is not only a memorial but it is food by which we are kept going.
ANW 1 Corinthians 11:26 says, “Eat this bread, and drink the cup”, striking words; it is not merely to taste or sip.
JT Quite so, I was thinking of that. The bread and cup are food, not only a memorial. In fact, we would not have the memorial if we were limited to Matthew and Mark. Food is the idea there, whereas the memorial is especially spoken of by Luke and by Paul in Corinthians.
ABP Is there stimulation also, as well as sustenance?
JT Stimulation, I should think, in the cup. It is not mentioned in the wording of the Supper that it [p. 53] was wine, but there is no doubt it was that, and it would suggest stimulation.
CN What is to be learned by these two communications being given to women in both John and Luke?
JT Well, Mary’s communication, as we had yesterday, is more specific and involves more instruction, the most precious instruction; indeed, corresponding to the epistle to the Ephesians, I would say. Here in Luke, “they remembered his words”. What are these words? The words are, “He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spoke to you, being yet in Galilee, saying, The Son of man must be delivered up into the hands of sinners, and be crucified, and rise the third day. And they remembered his words”. Now the words are not equal in bearing or quality with those that Mary of Magdala carried to the disciples according to John’s gospel. Therefore, I would say we are on somewhat lower though important ground. It is a question of recovery. The message given to Mary was not for recovery; she was fit for the message. She understood how to mention it to the apostles. She went to them and said that she had seen the Lord and He had said these things to her and among them, “I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God” (John 20:17). These women in Luke are not up to that, but these are important words if it is a question of recovery; the idea of the Lord’s supper is therefore all the more important; it stands in relation to the recovery of the saints, and then their maintenance through food in the power of testimony.
AP What are we to learn from the different ways in which the Lord comports Himself with His disciples, evidently allowing time to hear what they had to say and then opening up slowly and awaiting the development of the work in their souls so as to understand His service toward them? What would [p. 54] be involved in that service now, the way in which the Lord appears? First of all their eyes are holden and then later He listens to them as to the matter of what they had learned. “And some of those with us went to the sepulchre, and found it so, as the women also had said, but him they saw not”.
JT We ought to spend a little time on it if we are to get the full truth but I am not sure that we have the time. It is just as well to get this because it is a very important matter, the idea of the resumption of teaching and the severe rebuke that is attached to it. “O senseless and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken!”. Well, now we are told here in verse 13 of “two of them”. They were going in the wrong direction, into the country, to a village sixty stadia away. We have to bear all that in mind in view of what the Lord has to say to them to recover them. “And some of those with us went to the sepulchre, and found it so, as the women also had said, but him they saw not. And he said to them, O senseless and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into his glory?”. Now we are coming to the truth from the lips of the Lord Jesus. Here are two persons setting out to travel seven miles in unbelief, and, of course, if they went further they would be further in unbelief, but the Lord stops them. He checks the movement of unbelief in this way with this rebuke. We ought to notice that. We are not to read certain books only, but all the books, all the prophets. “Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into his glory?”. How beautiful that is; the Lord spoke of His own glory. It is very like Luke to speak in this methodical way, “And having begun from Moses and from all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself”. You wonder how He could have done that [p. 55] in such a short time, because it was a comparatively short time in which to go over all these books. “He interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself”. A beautiful word, not simply going over things in a sort of educational way, but the Lord Himself. It is the Lord Himself who touches us if we are to be recovered. What a time they must have had! We can well understand when they said their hearts were burning. It is after He had left them, had vanished, and they set out for Jerusalem. The Lord Jesus had given the most wonderful exposition of Scripture, perhaps, that we have.
AEH They seem to be like two believers who know nothing of the Spirit’s operations and living system of things. They supposed He would have redeemed Israel, and then they constrained Him to stay with them, as if to say. Let us go on with the way things have been, but He is moving on to great things and we must go with Him.
JT We are reminded here of the religious seminaries and such like institutions. They have not the living Christ really. The Lord here points to Himself. It is a question of recovery. Some think they can stay in the seminaries and study the Scriptures, whereas the point here is that the Lord Jesus is the object of the heart, and recovery is finding an object in the Lord.
ABP In relation to that certain words, in effect, shall serve as milestones in the recovery — verse 24, “him they saw not”; verse 27, “interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself”; verse 31, “they recognised him”; and in verse 36, “he himself stood in their midst” Luke 24:36.
JT Yes, you can see how the Lord is in the thing right through. He is setting them in movement in the interpretation He gives of the Scriptures from Moses onward. It is Himself. We learn presently that He vanished, but they find Him in the assembly [p. 56] later in Jerusalem. That is the point that we come to, the assembly. These interpretations that the Lord gives lead us to the assembly.
AR Is there some suggestion in Him taking the house-father’s place in Emmaus?
JT There is indeed, and what goes before, “Stay with us”, not stay in our house but with us. “For it is toward evening and the day is declining”. They give a reason why He should. “And he entered in to stay with them”. An empty house would be nothing to Him; it is a question of those two persons. He has already touched their hearts, and He knew they were burning but they do not say anything about that yet. The Lord went in with them, because He is going to do something more. “And it came to pass as he was at table with them, having taken the bread, he blessed, and having broken it, gave it to them. And their eyes were opened, and they recognised him”. Their eyes were holden before, but now they were opened. The assembly is largely a question of the persons whom we see. It will be that in eternity too. As they recognised Him, He disappeared from them. Notice what is going on in their heart. “Was not our heart burning”. It is the singular. “Was not our heart burning in us as he spoke to us on the way, and as he opened the scriptures to us? And rising up the same hour, they returned to Jerusalem. And they found the eleven, and those with them, gathered together, saying, The Lord is indeed risen and has appeared to Simon”. That is what they were saying, and then “they related what had happened on the way, and how he was made known to them in the breaking of bread”.
AEH Is there any guide in this as to houses where you would be free to stay overnight?
JT Well, I think the Lord in Luke helps us in the instruction to the seventy. If they reach a city they enquire for the son of peace, and if there be one [p. 57] they stay there. We have to look out for the son or sister of peace and stay there. We have the further case of Lydia, “If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house and abide there” (Acts 16:15). She is entitled morally to that. She knew she was faithful, and puts it on that basis. I would say that is the basis of entering into a house and abiding there.
AR They say He was made known to them in the breaking of bread.
JT It helped them and it helps us many times. The Lord’s supper is the suggestion in the whole matter, and they are touched by it. It shows they are recovered; the Lord had recourse to the recoverable power of the Supper.
APT The first clause in verse 33 would involve looking into the matter locally. “And rising up the same hour, they returned to Jerusalem”. Recovery is taking place.
JT They certainly were good cases. They are turned right around; they are converted, and the Lord did it. They did not turn until He vanished, having blessed the bread, showing that the Lord’s supper is the great recovering point.
FNW Is our understanding of the glory of Christ dependent on this?
JT Quite so. We get that as we proceed in the Lord’s supper. We enter into the full service of God which involves the glory.