THE ASSEMBLY - HOW IT IS KNOWN AND HOW IT FUNCTIONS IN LATTER TIMES
[p. 353] THE ASSEMBLY — HOW IT IS KNOWN AND HOW IT FUNCTIONS IN LATTER TIMES
Matthew 18: 19, 20; 2 Timothy 2: 19 - 22; Revelation 3: 7 - 13
JT In order to make the matter in mind clear I will allude to Exodus 12. We have often noticed these verses but I thought I would call attention to them as helping us in this subject: “Speak unto all the assembly of Israel” (verse 3) and “the whole congregation of the assembly” (verse 6). Mr. Darby’s note reads, ‘Assembly’ is the congregation looked at as a moral whole, a corporate person before God ... ‘Congregation’ ... is, I apprehend, the actual subsisting congregation composed of all its members.
We are to see that the assembly exists in the moral sense right to the end and that, though the actual members of it may not be available always, are not indeed, in our times — the idea of the assembly remains and the members of it are included in the word ‘congregation’. All are taken account of in this early mention; and so they are in Acts 2, “all together in one place”, all there. That is the great general thought that the idea of the assembly and of the congregation synchronised at the beginning and doubtless continued for a considerable time. The members would gradually disappear; did, as a fact; they were not all available, but the assembly as a moral thought functioning without all the members continued, and does continue, only that the general failure obscures it: so that the verses in Matthew 18 help us to identify members in character, that is “two of you”, persons with a known status or character, and then “two or three”. And then 2 Timothy 2 shows how these prove themselves as the general failure existed, “The firm foundation of God stands, having this seal”. The foundation has [p. 354] the seal, and the concrete thought is in verse 22 where we have persons actually characterised by following righteousness, faith, love, peace; and these obviously afford scope for the Spirit to work out assembly conditions, however small, outwardly despicable, but still conditions are there. And then in Philadelphia we have the formal recognition by the Lord Himself of assembly characteristics, which we shall see as we go on.
CAM I was wondering if you could apply the idea of calling or forming the assemblies in Ecclesiastes, as a sort of principle of working that out, taking account of individual members generally you would have the assembly before you. (See note to Ecclesiastes 1: 1).
JT The passage in Ecclesiastes would apply at the beginning and does now, but its application is more difficult in these days because it has got to allow for the obscurity, for many are not available. The thought is to be maintained in spite of very great obstacles. That is our position, how to recognise the use of the word ‘assemblies’. Today we have not got the word ‘congregation’ — it appears only two or three times in the New Testament, but we have the idea of assembly in 1 Corinthians 11: 18, the saints viewed as coming together in assembly, which does not require the whole, it is the character; but we have the whole assembly mentioned in 1 Corinthians 14: 23, all the members in the place.
Ques Is the character of the assembly weakened by the fact that we have not the congregational idea today?
JT The thought stands. The non-use of the word in the verses read in Matthew and in 2 Timothy and in Revelation (where the word is only used in the local sense), would cause us to avoid using it in any official way now. It is more what we understand and carry [p. 355] in our minds.
AFM Do not you have the congregation in 1 Corinthians 14: 23? “If therefore the whole assembly come together in one place” — is that what is in your mind, the congregational thought?
JT That is what I spoke of — I called attention to that verse.
AFM And then chapter 11: 18?
JT It does not say there the ‘whole assembly’. It is in assembly, the character. Any number of christians may be so regarded. Verse 20 reads, “When ye come therefore together into one place”.
AFM Do I understand your thought about chapter 14 that the apostle, having the whole in mind, is calling attention to the distinctiveness of each member?
JT I thought so, and he uses the word ‘whole’ in verse 23: “If therefore the whole assembly come together”. The whole, that is the whole local assembly, that would be the idea of the congregation, that is every member in the place, but in verse 18 of chapter 11, “When ye come together in assembly”, that is the character of the thing. I do not know whether I am saying what is clear.
CAM I think so. When you are looking at the saints in their character as forming the assembly it seems to convey the thought of unity, whereas in chapter 14 there is a most marvellous variety.
JT Yes. Take New York, where we have so many gatherings. We all come together in assembly on Lord’s day morning. It is the character of the thing, but we must never lose sight of the one assembly in the city, “When ye come therefore together in one place” — the oftener the better. So chapter 14: 23, “If therefore the whole assembly come together in one place”, when the unity and entirety of the assembly is recognised. They are all there, corresponding with Acts 2 when they were [p. 356] all together.
RWS Does that suggest that the number is not an unwieldy one? It is rather restricted — “in one place”.
JT It would seem so. However large, however many sub-divisions, the general unity is maintained by the fact that they are “all together in one place”. We are not so many assemblies in one city although the word might be used, but the whole number of persons in the assembly is taken account of in chapters 11 and 14, so that we never lose sight of the whole.
AFM Is the “ye” of verse 18 and the “ye” of verse 20, chapter 11, of similar value?
JT In verse 18 it is “when ye”, not ‘all’, it is the character. That is, the meeting-room is not in view. Of course it must be there, but the point is we are all together in relation to one another in assembly. It is the character of the thing. In verse 20 “one place” is added without the word ‘assembly;’ any number of subdivisions might be recognised in that.
Ques Would the “two of you” in Matthew 18, and “in assembly” be somewhat similar as far as the idea of character goes?
JT I think it is first to identify persons; there are such persons and they are identified in this simple humble way, in unity as to something that God can recognise. I would call that the basic thought. In our times, which Matthew 18: 19 contemplates, you must have the testimony of these persons; there are many christians in the world, not all characteristically members, but there are some, and they are marked in this way that “if two of you shall agree on the earth concerning any matter, whatsoever it may be that they shall ask, it shall come to them from my Father”. The thing is to be known. Two would be enough — there are such persons in the [p. 357] world. The point is, they are not only ‘christian’ but those who are characteristically of the assembly, and if you have two of them you have the basic thought. And then there must be loyalty to Christ. Verse 19 is that they are united as touching anything that they shall ask. The Lord says, “It shall come to them from my Father who is in the heavens”. That is, you have the idea of character, so that they are marked off and recognised in heaven, and heaven has confidence in them, for He says, whatever they shall ask, not ‘in my name’ but “whatsoever ... they shall ask”. That is the idea of unity before heaven and confidence in the persons. In verse 20 they are gathered together to the name of Christ. His name refers to the fact that He is not here and that it is that in which things are done.
BC Do you think the full thought of that is shown in Solomon’s prayer?
JT Do you mean that what Solomon asked for was owned in heaven; what is in your mind?
BC You were speaking of the whole and the separate thought. Solomon assembled the elders of Israel and the people when the temple was finished.
JT Heaven shows there that it is pleased, “for the glory of Jehovah had filled the house of God”. In Matthew 18: 19 you have the same idea that there are two who are agreed — persons in whom heaven has confidence and whom the Father recognises as agreed. I think the reference to Solomon is interesting because it typifies conditions. Heaven owned his prayer in filling the house. Here they are also owned but there is nothing public on earth. It is “to them”. I only refer to this so as to bring out the identity of assembly material, how it comes to light, first in unity as to anything that is on their hearts, the Father owning it and answering and then, secondly, loyalty to Christ in gathering together unto His name. All other names are given up.
— [p. 358] B. Do you mean to convey that if two of us agree we have authority to act as using the authority of the assembly?
JT It is a matter of who we are — two of you — two of assembly character.
— B. How do we reach this agreement?
JT Two of the assembly would, I think, be illustrated in such persons as Simeon and Anna. They had the interests of God at heart: they were in the temple. It is a question of two of you, persons of that kind.
AR The two in verse 19 are known in heaven, heard in heaven, gathering together “unto my name”.
JT That is the other side of the position. Heaven comes in, not only hears, but “it shall come to them”. The expression of the answer is in the presence of divine Persons.
CAM That reference to Simeon and Anna is helpful; and so is the reference to Solomon’s prayer. It had a far-reaching effect: it seemed to go right on to remnant days, in Daniel and Ezra and godly ones at the beginning of Luke, their eyes were all towards that wonderful place.
JT All that helps, because heaven would say, Daniel, that is one of them; how heaven saw that and answered him! He tells us in chapter 9 that Gabriel was sent to him; he was greatly beloved. Heaven knew that man.
— B. It is not necessary then to have all the brethren in agreement in referring to any matter?
JT No, you are sorry you cannot get them.
Ques Would the house of Chloe be “two of you”? They were united in showing Paul that there were divisions in Corinth.
JT You can understand that the godly souls in Corinth would come in under that head. I think that is right.
[p. 359] Ques Would you say that when the throne at Jerusalem was being usurped and David had to leave, there were certain men representing the “two of you” in principle, I mean Abiathar and Hushai?
JT They were in principle David’s kingdom.
Rem I was wondering whether these men, without removing from Jerusalem, would hold to the Jerusalem thought in the principle of it and thus be moving in the light of all that might have been at Jerusalem.
JT That is the basic thought. We have basic thoughts and then what is built on them. Here it is not the full thought, but certainly David’s kingdom was there, you might say, in mystery, that awaited fulness which came in time. The first thing in this lesson is, I think, to recognise character, are there any “of you”? Heaven notices them and has confidence in them. The next is loyalty to Christ in their public movements. They gather together unto His name. It is an orderly setting out of the subject. The Lord contemplated latter times when He said, “Again I say to you”. He had already been speaking of the assembly possessing administrative powers and then says, “Again”, as if that position would not continue, “If two of you shall agree on the earth concerning any matter, whatsoever it may be that they shall ask”. It seems to me that He is beginning over again as to how the assembly is reached in the identification of two, not one but two. John would make it one person who loved Jesus, the Father would come to him, but Matthew in view of the working out of the thing publicly makes it two, and then two or three.
Rem Matthew makes a lot of two but I suggest that we should all see the value of the word ‘again’. I think unless something of what you are saying is understood that word again is practically meaningless. It emphasises the Lord’s love for us today.
JT He contemplated our present position. In [p. 360] 2 Timothy 2: 19 you have the foundation: “The firm foundation of God stands, having this seal, The Lord knows those that are his”. The seal is that the Lord knows those that are His. The other side is, “Let everyone who names the name of the Lord withdraw from iniquity”. Your mind is taken with the words ‘foundation’ and the ‘seal’ that is on it. It is an abstract thought so far, but it is a basic thought. It has unity in mind, it is a question of how the minds of the saints are drawn into the truth and how the assembly becomes workable, the seal affecting me so that I must withdraw from iniquity, knowing that the Lord knows all the members of the congregation, the congregation of the assembly, everyone that is in it, but the assembly is another thought, as Mr. Darby says, like a corporate person and it has an existence right there. That is a very important matter so that we reach it in this passage without naming it, in the fact that there are those who have pure hearts and follow righteousness, faith, love and peace.
— E. So that if you have two there is something to build on. You would like to have four but the nucleus is there.
JT Yes, the basic thought, the idea of assembly material, and then the next verse shows it working publicly in loyalty to Christ. It has a foundation that is firm and it carries its own moral mandate with it. Of course there are many members, and love says, ‘Where are they?’ They are not forgotten, the Lord never forgets them.
JS There is no weakening of the foundation!
Rem In Numbers 16 the position is attacked and the firmness of the position comes out.
JT On the principle of withdrawal. “Separate yourselves”. If that is done the cloud takes charge of the whole tabernacle. The divine idea is maintained. As soon as you get persons moving, separating,
[p. 361] you are in accord with the seal. I am not forgetting my brethren, but it is individual. The Lord has knowledge of every saint in christendom.
AFM “Let every one who names the name of the Lord withdraw from iniquity”. We do not separate in groups, but as the result of individual exercise.
JT Yes, that is the basic thought, and then in verse 22 you have workable material, so the assembly is worked out in broken times.
AR The features of the moral whole are maintained.
JT The moral whole is a most important matter. Referring again to the notes to Exodus 12: 3, 6, the words might seem to mean the same thing. The translators of the Authorised Version did not grasp the idea, whereas Mr. Darby did, he had gone through the thing. The congregation is one thing — the persons, and the thought of the assembly is another.
Rem In Exodus 33, where the tent is pitched outside the camp every one that sought Jehovah went out. This corresponds with 2 Timothy 2.
JT There was scope outside for the Spirit and every one that sought the Lord was there.
Ques Is the moral whole maintained in that setting?
Ques Does not the thought of the corporate person fit in with 1 Corinthians 15? The whole person is there.
JT It is there in the sense of responsibility, yes, and separation is owned of heaven. You have workable material in 2 Timothy 2: 22, two or three following righteousness, faith, love, peace. I believe that John 14 and Matthew 18 enter into that.
AR If you get a moral whole you are making room for the Lord and the Holy Spirit to be amongst [p. 362] us.
JT The thought of the assembly comes into view, a working basis.
When we come to Philadelphia we see that working out under the Lord’s eye. I think we should lay it well to heart that the idea of the assembly as a corporate responsible body is in view from the very outset in 2 Timothy 2, that is the foundation and basic thought, God’s foundation. Not one person, it involves the whole and you move on that line, and then there are others, and the seal that the Lord knows those that are His.
— E. And the gates of hades shall not prevail against it.
JT We humbly speak of that. We have no official status, but God recognises it and moves with us. In Philadelphia you can see the assembly as it were opening up like a flower under the Lord’s eye. “I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an opened door, which no one can shut, because thou hast a little power, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name ... . Because thou hast kept the word of my patience”. The other, of course, is the public thing which we see around us: “Behold, I make them of the synagogue of Satan, who say that they are Jews and are not” (verse 9). The Lord has something under His eye which answers to the assembly in its entirety. Chapters 21 and 22 bring it out as a bride, and she is saying, “Come”.
Rem It is something like the end of the Song of Songs — the assembly seems to change into the idea of the bride.
JT Ecclesiastes brings out the preacher. He does not minimise the difficulties. We must take account of the difficulties of the path, and even dissolution and death. There are a lot of things in the book of Ecclesiastes that help at the present time. The next book, by the same writer, is what the bride is to Christ.