THE GLORY IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN (1)
[p. 17] THE GLORY IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN (1)
John 1: 14; John 2: 11; John 7: 39
JT I thought we might look at the glory in the gospel of John. What is in mind is to dwell on these three verses speaking of the glory of Christ. It is significant that the idea of glory is so prominent in this gospel. Its setting and place generally in the Scriptures are intended to attract and to draw us out of the world, whatever form of it may be holding us. We find Stephen saying, “The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran”, Acts 7: 2. So, throughout, the introduction of glory and the thought of it seem to have movement in mind. Those who were moved by it, we are told, “had had opportunity to have returned; but now they seek a better, that is, a heavenly” country — the home of glory. So that “God is not ashamed of them, to be called their God; for he has prepared for them a city”, Hebrews 11: 15, 16. We know that the city of God is the residence of His glory. It is said that it descends from heaven, from God, having the glory of God. It is significant that John speaks much of it, more than the other evangelists do; linking Revelation with the gospel we shall find that there is a very frequent use of the idea of glory. Exodus in the Old Testament is peculiarly marked by it; it is the book which treats of the outgoing of God’s people from the world and the building up of a system of things in which His glory resides, or was to reside His glory filled the tabernacle. John has in mind the people of God being delivered out of religious settings in this world, and he stresses the thought of glory, particularly as centred in the Person of Christ. Indeed nothing can be more attractive than what he says: “we have [p. 18] contemplated his glory, a glory as of an only-begotten with a father”, John 1: 14. It is as if he were to say, ‘We — some of us, anyway — were drawn to it, were occupied with it’. And that is how the matter stands at the present time for those who value what has come within our range in the Person of Christ; and those who do value it would call the attention of others to it. John alone alludes to this, and the link between it and Exodus is that Moses turned aside to see the bush, and as Jehovah saw that he turned aside to see, He called out his name twice, as if to honour those who draw near to contemplate what God has for us in the way of glory.
JC-S I am sure that is very helpful. Especially the idea that this glory is to so affect us, to so lay hold upon our souls that it draws us completely out of this world.
JT That is what is in mind manifestly. So that the Lord Himself pursues the thought in this gospel, even back to the glory that He came from, the glory of Deity; that is, the full range of glory is brought before us from this verse to the end of the gospel.
EESL The enemy fears its effect upon those who are in this world. He blinds their eyes lest the gospel of the glory of Christ, the image of God, should shine forth.
JT That is a good thought. The god of this world would guard and enlarge the glory of this world. He brought the Lord to the top of a mountain and showed Him the kingdoms of this world and their glory, claiming it all as his but exposing himself as to his methods. His methods continue, and young believers are ensnared by these dazzling things in this world. The ministry of John would eclipse what there is. We have this in the apostle Paul’s allusion to the glory of the covenant; the first has no glory, he tells us, in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. So that the glory of this world is of [p. 19] no account at all by reason of the glory that excelleth; the apostle Paul speaks of an exceeding weight of glory.
EESL I suppose the glory so outshone everything for Paul that he was blinded for the moment to the glory of the world.
JT Well, that would be to prepare him for the full view of the true glory later. It is in this process, I suppose, that he was led into the city as blind, but his eyes were opened in the city. I suppose the idea would be that he was there in the midst of the brethren. It is there that the idea of glory begins to dawn on us, in the midst of the brethren.
JC-S Is this glory that is seen shining in Christ in the various presentations calculated to supersede every other kind of glory in our souls?
JT Well, that is what I think we may see. First the peculiar glory that shone in an only one, “an only-begotten with a father”. It is characteristic, it is not with the father, but with a father, and it is that kind of glory which is perhaps the most attractive of any that is mentioned.
ESW Does this passage give us the whole system of glory centred in a Man, in the Person of Christ?
JT Well, it is rather the family side of it. That is, it is that feature, the peculiar family feature, an only one with a father, an only-begotten with a father. It is the radiation of glory and affection really between a father and an only one. Not the radiation of affection only; affection and love must be the body of glory always, for glory, whatever it may be, refers to what the person is, what is presented. Here it is evidently the family, the radiation of affection between a father and an only one — an only-begotten.
EE Is the contemplation of the Person of Christ in this connection to mark out the affections that belong to [p. 20] the family?
JT Well, that is the idea. “We have contemplated his glory”, it says, “a glory as of an only-begotten with a father”. That is, the persons who contemplated it have testified to it, so that we have testimony to it.
JSD Is this a kind of secret glory, one that could only be contemplated by those who have, at least in measure, been formed in love?
JT Yes, evidently. It is not what was public.
It is “we” — certain ones. Certain ones saw it.
JFS Do you think that the “we” gives it a family character?
JT I think the “we” is meant to convey that there is abundant testimony to it. “We” would be the “we” of authority, the apostolic “we”, although John does not stress that side. Evidently the allusion is to those who were competent witnesses, so in the epistle John calls attention to what they had seen and heard.
JFS Does that cover the twelve?
JT Well, I should say so.
GC Would it be right to say that it is only seen by those who turn aside? It is unique in Him, that is Christ.
JT That is manifest.
When the voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight” (Matthew 3: 17) there is a suggestion of what we have here. The apostle John does not record that incident, but I think we have the introduction of what is alluded to — the Father’s voice from heaven addressing the Son.
EBMcC This would be purely manhood, would it not?
JT We can see nothing of divine relations save in manhood.
EBMcC I was wondering why it is connected with the “Word became flesh, and dwelt among us”.
JT Well, it is just as we were saying, it depends on manhood, on the incarnation, if we are to see the relations between divine Persons. It has come within our range in the Lord Jesus becoming a Man — “the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us”, that is, He came into ordinary human life. He dwelt in Capernaum, for instance; He came into ordinary human life so that He could be seen, but evidently ordinary eyes could not see Him. “Blessed are your eyes”, the Lord said to His disciples.
GHC Does it contemplate a relationship known in the human family?
JT Quite so, well known. As far back as Abraham, the idea of an only-begotten was known. That would be the thought. It was an only-begotten with a father, as for instance, with Abraham and thousands of others, it was a well-known relation, but it is the glory of “the Word become flesh” that is in mind.
ESW Is there something peculiar attaching to the relationship of an only-begotten with a father?
JT That is what I thought. As we are remarking, it is an only-begotten such as Isaac was to Abraham; and those who turned aside to see would have some understanding of what the mind of God is in the incarnation — in the formation of a family — for we are brought into the love that was there, the glory that was there. Indeed, the Lord says, “the glory which thou hast given me I have given them”.
PL Do you think that our current vagueness as to glory is disposed of by that priestly appraisement of John, his spiritual and discriminating taste, so that after referring to His glory he comments upon it in this exquisite character?
JT Quite so. He is really, you might say, the representative of the ministry for the family, and hence, we are told of him, that he was “the disciple whom Jesus loved”; he understood that love, and reposed, we are told, in the Lord’s bosom.
AMH How do you connect “the glory which thou gavest me I have given them” with this?
JT I think it is the glory of sonship; I mean it is the family of God; I apprehend the family thought.
AMH Is sonship foreshadowed in this incident?
JT Well, I thought so. John does not enlarge on sonship, as we have been remarking. He does not mention it at all formally, except in the book of Revelation, but the substance of it runs through his gospel — I mean the substance of it, not only as to Christ, but as to ourselves. Then the second verse read speaks of the effect of the signs, “This beginning of signs did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested his glory; and his disciples believed on him”. Manifestation is another thing, that is testimony so as to induce faith.
EESL Does that mean that He showed Himself to be equal to any occasion?
JT Well, quite so. The occasions were, no doubt, divinely ordered. This is a divinely ordered occasion. I mean that divine testimony is the setting of it.
EE Is this glory an expression of the ability of the Lord to lift off all that which lay on those who were going to be of the family of God?
JT Well, it is a family occasion; a marriage is a great family occasion.
EE I was thinking of the “beginning of signs”, and it was that He was bringing in that which would be superior to all that lay upon man in weakness or power.
JT Well, we get that thought more accurately in chapter 11, I think. Here it is the poverty of the family. In chapter 4 we learn that although this occurred in Cana, a family there was invaded by sickness, which is an additional thought. Here it is [p. 23] poverty — the wine ran out — it is relative poverty, and the Lord comes in to turn the water of purification into joy. That is, He touches on the real cause of the weakness in family matters — the need of the water of purification: purification is so needed in the family.
ESW Is this an indication of what you were saying earlier in the meeting — that the first covenant really has no glory by reason of the glory that excels, which God had in reserve?
JT Well, it is that sort of thing. The wine that was there was hardly worth speaking of. Wine became deficient. Mary says, “They have no wine”, as if the Lord did not know. The Lord knew better than she; the natural is introduced by the Lord’s mother here and would mar what He had in mind, for we cannot improve things. In her it was an effort to improve the position.
JC-S Do you think the second chapter emphasises the deficiency, and the first chapter gives us the fulness, the substance that He is bringing in here?
JT You can see the great difference between this and what is suggested in verse 14 of chapter 1, the richness of the relations between a father and his only-begotten son. What a rich radiation of affection! There is no suggestion whatever of any want there. Here whatever affection there was was marred by impurity, so that the wine became deficient, and the Lord’s mother instructed the Lord about this, saying, “They have no wine”. She spoke on natural lines manifestly.
JC-S Is it John’s habit to draw upon circumstances here which really serve as a background to emphasise the fulness and sufficiency that are displayed in the One in whom this system of glory is radiated?
JT Quite so. They are selected circumstances and evidently for testimony, because the word “signs” is to call attention to what is spiritual; the mother of Jesus would mar the thought by introducing the natural, her natural right to speak to the Lord, to suggest to Him that the matter should be relieved. But He repudiates that by introducing what is spiritual, based on purification. The family is to be purified.
EESL I suppose a sign is intended to arrest attention, is it not?
JT That is the intention of it manifestly.
PL Do you think that you have the glory on its own divine level, so to speak, in the first chapter, and then that glory stooping in service in the second to meet conditions in order to lift those served into what true glory is?
JT I think that is so. The circumstances afforded what is needed, so that there were, it says, standing there six stone water-vessels. They were standing there, and they are to be filled up with water, meaning, I think, that with the brethren, or with our households, there was a low state of things. What is needed is to fill up with the water of purification. Purity is the real difficulty in family life. The real difficulty is in maintaining what is in the mind of God, so that the circumstances here were designed to provide what, was needed; for if the Lord is dealing with His people at any time, the external elements are present, and He uses them to get to the root of the difficulty. The root of the family difficulty is impurity.
AMH Do you think the waterpots there indicated that there is always a possibility of purifying the family?
JT I think so normally, although things may be very low, as at Corinth. That is the externals are there amongst the saints and may be used. It is well to keep the externals in mind, even although the state [p. 25] may be low.
EESL The Lord might have supplied wine in many another way than that which He chose. Do you suggest that He does this in order to convey to us that purification must precede a right elation which the wine would bring?
JT Yes. Otherwise it would be an assumed happy, jubilant state of things. Unless there is purification this is objectionable, as the apostle Paul says, “ye have not rather mourned”, 1 Corinthians 5: 2. And Peter says, “I stir up your pure minds”. He could speak to the saints in his time as having pure minds.
JFS You are suggesting to us that moral state is a necessity for the outflow of that new wine which was coming in?
JT Well, that is manifestly what is here. The real difficulty is impurity, where family conditions are not realised, as at Corinth; the family feelings, the family state of things, were marred manifestly, but the externals were there, more or less, and the apostle uses them.
JFS Would it be right to say that “signs” call attention to the greatness of the Person, more than to what He does?
JT Well, that is the intention here, His disciples believed on Him.
JFS You suggested at the beginning that the presentation of the Person in His glory calls for faith.
JT That is what is stated here. “His disciples believed on him”. People generally did not believe on Him. At the end of the chapter “many believed on his name”, but Jesus did not commit Himself to them, so that the point is really faith in the family. Impurity is a terrible thing, often allowed, and God has to put His hand out to touch it, and it is exposed, but when it is exposed we are reminded to see to ourselves as to it. So that we have the vessels filled to the brim, and the servants do what the Lord directs here. He says, “Fill the water-vessels with water”, and they filled them to the brim, and He says to them, “Draw out now”. The servants do exactly what the Lord wishes. Where the wine is deficient you may be sure that this is the secret; and there are servants — in Luke 15 there are bondmen — there is no question about them being there; they are there. And so here, there are servants, and that is the great element of salvation for the saints in any difficulty, if there are servants they will carry out the Lord’s wishes.
EESL Is this purification reached by self-judgment, or is it analogous to what is in the expression: “purifying their hearts by faith”?
JT Well, self-judgment must precede that”repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ”. That is a principle that the water of purification requires, that what is impure is to be judged, judged in the roots of it.
GC Is the manifestation to strengthen what was already there in the disciples in that they believed on Him?
JT Well, quite so. It was intended that they should believe — His disciples, notice, not men generally, because the suggestion is that the brethren in these cases are wanting in faith, and the real difficulty lies in purity.
ESW Would you suggest for us what are the elements that are necessary for purification that should always be at hand?
JT It is a question of persons really. It is the principle of being filled, I think. The water-vessels would suggest something durable, the divine thought of durability — stone — stone water-vessels. It is a permanent idea that is in mind. It is the presence permanently of vessels that can be used in an emergency, because emergencies are the commonest things amongst the people of God, and this denotes what [p. 27] may be used at any time, the permanency of water-vessels. There are six of them here, meaning, I suppose, double testimony. There is no question about it in this case as to what had happened.
PL Would Chloe be one of these water-vessels at Corinth?
JT Well, that is exactly the thought. There was somebody there that the Spirit of God could employ, and doubtless there were many others that are not mentioned.
AMH Is the filling with water some form of ministry?
JT I think that is right, that is how God would meet a situation of this kind.
JFS Would it be a ministry connected with the death of Christ?
JT Well, there can be no purification without that. It is introduced here before we get the application of the idea of purification in a believer through the operation of the Spirit of God. In the next chapter the thought of an emergency arising is introduced, but there is present what can be used to meet it.
GHC Would the work of God underlie these stone water-vessels?
JT Quite so. It anticipates what we get in the next chapter. But it is here on the third day, to bring out the great testimony under the numeral three in the gospel. It is on the third day; there is that present that is needed to meet the emergency, both in the way of servants and in the way of water-vessels and the water, all the items are there.
EESL Is the expression “according to the purification of the Jews” a contemptuous one? Are not expressions such as “Feast of the Jews” through out the gospel generally so? The Jew is generally connected with that which the Lord would [p. 28] repudiate.
JT I do not think it is that here, because they are usable, and are used. Dispensationally it is the millennium, of course, the third day working back to the second and the first.
PL Is their usability more in mind than their capacity? It says, “holding two or three measures each”.
JT I think that is good. Capacity is not stated exactly.
EESL I was struck by the fact that they were not full. I thought that in that way the purification of the Jews referred to something which was not full, something which God could not honour. Before the Lord would use these water-vessels, He would have them filled to the brim.
JT They were not being used. Their general capacity is mentioned, but as has been remarked, it is their usability, they were there. If we look at it dispensationally we can understand that it is a reference to Jewish items coming into evidence again and used by Christ, which is really how the millennium will be introduced. We have in the next chapter a question about purification between the disciples of John and a Jew. But that would show that there was decline; there is not much in disputing about purification.
JJJ Ministry has been referred to. That would come in in 1 Corinthians 14, where two or three speak.
JT I think that is a good suggestion, because the Lord is helping the brethren in localities in their recognition of the whole thought — “If therefore the whole assembly come together in one place”. That is to say, the meetings in a large city are not federated meetings, there is only one assembly in a place, and unless we realise the fact of the one assembly in the city, we shall lose the idea of it and lapse into independent meetings. Although we may hold the theory,
[p. 29] we lose the fact, and I believe these meetings which the Lord is bringing into being are being blessed, because they afford the Spirit of God an opportunity to speak and call attention to needs and the way to meet them, that is by the prophetic word. I believe these meetings will prove, as the brethren pursue them in dependence on the Lord, to be the means of our salvation, by virtue of the prophetic word, in the continuance of the testimony. Prophetic ministry deals with a root condition. Things happen amongst us like eruptions in the body, but they only denote a condition that is existent, and that might be exposed and dealt with were prophetic ministry in full force.
JC-S So that this chapter would really give us the facilities that are ever present in the assembly to meet these eruptions, and the pollutions of the inward feelings.
JT I think that is helpful, and especially now that there is faith there. Faith is introduced — His disciples believed on Him. The meeting of the difficulty induces faith, so that the Lord becomes better known and believed on.
ESW Does the coming of Christ into any given set of circumstances, such as these meetings, depend upon the persons in the meetings, on vessels such as these, the more the better?
JT Quite so.
EBMcC You spoke about coming together in a city for the meeting for ministry — would that bring in the reading on Lord’s day afternoon as well?
JT I think unless we do realise in a practical way the oneness of an assembly in the city, the subdivisions become practically separate meetings.
JC-S Do you not think that sometimes as a result of that, you have meetings being built up on special lines, which does not fit in with the general need in the city?
JT “Thus I ordain in all the assemblies”, 1 Corinthians 7: 17. It is a poor thing to see meetings with different customs, different ways of doing things.
PL And does it also make available to the saints in the city what the Lord has given in the way of gift there?
JT Well, quite so. If gift be local, that is, if there are brothers resident who have gift, the whole assembly in the city generally should get the benefit of these gifts. And, of course, the same applies to eldership, or any other ability to serve, it belongs to the city.
JSD You spoke of the result of the manifestation of His glory — the disciples believed on Him; you referred also to the end of the chapter — many believed on His name — what is the difference?
JT In chapter 20 it says of the signs that “these are written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life in his name”. Here it is, as you say, in verse 23, when He was in Jerusalem at the passover, at the feast, “many believed on his name, beholding his signs which he wrought. But Jesus himself did not trust himself to them, because he knew all men, and that he had not need that any should testify of man, for himself knew what was in man”. It would look as if a reflection is cast upon the effect of His works, miracles and signs in Jerusalem, in the religious centre that would be affected by signs, but the Person Himself seemingly was not believed on, although believing in His name is quite a right thought, provided reality goes with it. Many are apt to be affected by that without being affected by the Person Himself.
Religious leaders, specially, are ready to accredit anything in the way of extra power, extra exploits. We know from chapter 1 that Jerusalem was ready to recognise John the baptist; the Jews sent messages to him which he declined. I think the allusion is to [p. 31] what religious people are given to, a readiness to recognise any special ability without being generally affected by it; affected, I mean, in a moral sense.
EESL They would consider perhaps His miracles as accrediting the religious system in Jerusalem.
JT Well, they might. He had come up to Jerusalem at the passover. He was there in a Jewish capacity, you might say, and they were ready to accredit anything that would add to themselves. Of course, we know how brethren of ability are recognised, but that does not always prove that we are divinely affected by what is said.
PL Are we not more affected by the external expressions of power in gift, and so on, than by this great contemplative line of glory suggested by John?
JT Exactly. And the servant has to watch that. You cannot be sure of the effect of what you are ministering by what is said. If it is in power the admiration of it is apt to go beyond the real state of those that speak of it.
AMH In chapter 2, when He says, “Draw out now”, does it rather suggest that the glory of the Lord was to be manifested in the resumption of the flow of affections amongst the family?
JT That is a very good suggestion, because we certainly should be able to draw out the affections of one another. It is very beautiful, the suggestion is there of the radiation of affection. It is a manifestation of the glory of Christ in principle, because that is exactly what marked Him as incarnate. They contemplated His glory, the glory as of an only one with a father, the radiation of affection.
EB Is that the way the deficiency is made up?
JT Well, that is the thing. In an emergency things come up that cause sorrow, and there is a root behind it all, and it is met under the Lord’s direction. Then the flow of affection is resumed, which is normal. “Draw out now”, He [p. 32] says.
PL Would you say this radiation of affection is seen in the second epistle to the Corinthians, “messengers of assemblies, Christ’s glory”, 2 Corinthians 8: 23? Would it be possible to view the water in the first epistle as something pertaining to the wine in the second?
JT I think the first epistle is the water of purification. The second shows that there is a resumption, to some extent, of family feelings, because the message brought by Titus greatly affected the apostle as to how the Corinthians regarded him then.
CI Would you say a little more with regard to the servants and the part they had in it?
JT Well, that is another item. The vessels are one item, and then the servants, and they do what they are told to do. Indeed Mary herself is brought into that, she is suggestive of a person who is amenable to recovery. She says to the servants, “Whatever he may say to you, do”. That is, she is in accord with His mind now, and the servants do what they are told to do. And then in verse 8, “he says to them, Draw out now, and carry it to the feast-master. And they carried it”; it showed that they are true servants, however few or many they may be, they are doing what they are told to do. Unless there are some like that, how can the Lord carry on at all? However few there may have been at Corinth, there was one anyway in Chloe and doubtless many others like her. Here they do what the Lord directs, and it says, “But when the feast-master had tasted the water which had been made wine (and knew not whence it was, but the servants knew who drew the water), the feast-master calls the bridegroom, and says to him, Every man sets on first the good wine, and when men have well drunk, then the inferior; thou hast kept the good wine till now”. That is the end. Then it says, “This beginning of signs did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested his glory;
and his disciples believed on him”. So that the whole procedure, although many had part in it, is the manifestation of His glory.
Verse 39 of chapter 7 alludes to the glory of Christ, not in the exercise of His testimony, but His presence on high, His exaltation, as attested by the Spirit here.
GHC Is this official glory?
JT I think so. It is the Lord being “exalted by the right hand of God, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this which ye behold and hear. For David has not ascended into the heavens, but he says himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit at my right hand until I have put thine enemies to be the footstool of thy feet. Let the whole house of Israel therefore know assuredly that God has made him, this Jesus whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ”, Acts 2: 33 - 36. But it is seen connected here with the Spirit’s presence — a very great fact that dominates the whole dispensation, the scene of the Spirit’s activities in grace, for what is in mind is not exactly seen in public, but in the believer, for the expression of grace. A very great fact for us, the glory of Christ in its bearing on the inauguration of this dispensation.
PL Would there be in that way the three circles — the glory, the inner shrine, so to speak, in the first scripture read, and then the adjustment in the family circle, and condition set up there, and then here the outflow among men?
JT Well, that seems to be the position. These three references to the glory of Christ, I think, may be said to inaugurate, and to enter into the glory of, the dispensation.
GHC Is there any difference between the water in chapter 2, and the rivers of living water in chapter 7?
JT I think the idea in chapter 7 is refreshment, for satisfaction, as the counterpart of chapter 4. The [p. 34] well of water in chapter 4 springing up into everlasting life is evidently for satisfaction. In chapter 7 it is the Spirit about to be received, not asked for, so that what is enjoyed by the believer is made available to others for their satisfaction in the sense of rivers — in great volume. The water in chapter 2 is apparently for purification, it becomes wine. Wine is not the same thought as the water of refreshment in chapters 4 and 7. Chapters 4 and 7 deal with water as symbolical of the Spirit as satisfying us. Wine is for stimulation, it is really an earthly thought, belonging to the thought of the fruit of the vine.
PL Have we got these three circles in John’s epistles, the first one in the allusion to the contemplation in the first few verses of the first chapter, and then the flow in the christian circle, laying down our lives for the brethren (1 John 3: 16), and then the end of the epistle, the testimony from that circle that the Father gave the Son?
JT Very good. “This is the witness”; it is the public witness.