MAN AS PRESENTED IN CHRIST AND THE ASSEMBLY (2)
[p. 276] MAN AS PRESENTED IN CHRIST AND THE ASSEMBLY (2)
John 3: 1 - 21; John 4: 13 - 30
JT It is thought well that attention should be again called to Nathanael as representing the progress made in the truth so far, that is, the end of chapter 1. He says to the Lord, “Rabbi thou art the Son of God, thou art the King of Israel. Jesus answered and said to him, Because I said to thee, I saw thee under the fig-tree, believest thou? Thou shalt see greater things than these. And he says to him, Verily, verily, I say to you, Henceforth ye shall see the heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of man” (chapter 1: 49 - 51). That is, he is learning quickly, but he finished with what applies to Israel; but the Lord said, “Verily, verily, I say to you, Henceforth ye shall see the heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of man” (verse 51). That is, the Lord led him on to the “Son of man”, to the idea of man, which is the point before us. The Lord proceeded to Psalm 8, whereas Nathanael remained on Psalm 2. It is thought that there is an application to our present circumstances in this, that we are to proceed in our learning steadily higher, apprehending man’s place in the counsels of God; not simply His special dealings with Israel, but man, and as the object of heaven, and we might say, of earth. “Angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of man”. So that it is higher and higher, at the same time having in mind the place man has in the counsels of God because it is the Son of man here, and the Lord enlarging on the matter in using the plural, as if the truth was stated in what He said Himself and including what Nathanael said. The truth was stated and should be expounded and would be expounded;
[p. 277] for the Lord Himself expounds it in the plural as if it goes beyond Nathanael, beyond Israel. This leads to what we have now in chapter 3, where we have, not simply an Israelite indeed, but “the teacher of Israel” (verse 10), but very slow to learn, very slow to give up old thoughts. Chapter 2 is passed over simply because the time requires that we should proceed somewhat speedily to reach the end in mind, that is, chapter 20 and perhaps chapter 21. So Nathanael is in the mind of the Spirit now, and the Lord holds to the rising principle of the teaching, although beginning at the very lowest, namely, new birth.
Ques Would you say a word as to the distinction as to manhood as seen in Christ here in humiliation, and manhood as above according to God’s counsels?
JT We can see that in humiliation He took up a lowly position and yet an authoritative one. In chapter 2 He distinguishes between His listeners. It says, “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” (chapter 2: 23 - 25). That is the point to have before us I believe, and that the Lord distinguishes between persons who are affected by outside signs and the like and fail in the basic truth, especially life. It is a question of new birth, of a new beginning in man. It is not the generations of Adam as in Genesis 5, but a wholly new beginning.
Ques Do I gather from your remark as to the end of chapter 1 that you regard the glory of the Son of man as the objective?
JT Yes; the “greater things”, because the idea of the Son of man goes back to the counsels of God.
[p. 278] Wisdom had its delight in the sons of men (Proverbs 8: 31) showing that it is there from the beginning.
Rem Before Caiaphas the Lord said, “Henceforth ye shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of power, and coming on the clouds of heaven” (Matthew 26: 64); and they could not stand that.
JT Quite so.
AJG Is it leading up to what is heavenly? “If I tell you of heavenly things?” (verse 12).
JT I think so; that is what is in mind. It was important there should be an Israelite without guile. That is the principle, to be truly the thing, but not to stop short of the divine counsels, for these are in regard of men.
PHH What is the thought of birth? It already says in chapter 1 “born... of God” (verse 13); here it is “born anew” (verse 3), and “born of water and of Spirit” (verse 5).
JT I think it is the great basic thought, that it is not simply the family, but born throughout. It is the basic thought that we are to have before us now; what the race really means, what is in mind in it, and that certain things cannot be reached or touched aside from this fact of the new birth. Being “born anew” setting aside all professions of humanity from the natural standpoint, what is in mind at the end of chapter 2. He does not commit Himself to that at all. Nor does He commit Himself to human things today, what man thinks he is discovering or effecting. We are dealing with the thing itself, not in its abstract sense but what it really is. A wholly new thing covered in the word new, which is not merely new but born throughout.
HGH Is new birth the indication of manhood according to Christ?
JT Hardly that, but it is an entirely new beginning. Nicodemus was a specially slow learner. He was hindered by what was accepted and that is [p. 279] what is current today. People are so engrossed with what they think they have and are, and we have something new here applying to man throughout.
Rem The greater the man was naturally the more difficult it was for him to accept that he could not carry anything over into the realm of new birth.
JT Just so; hence the claim generally to add something to Christianity. That was the great baneful thing at the outset, but what is claimed in John’s reference to “from the beginning” (1 John 1: 1) shows that man can add nothing to Christianity.
HWS Why is the thought of man linked thus with the kingdom of God?
JT It is because of what had taken place through man, involving the breakdown in him through sin coming in. It is obvious that God being God, if He is acknowledged at all, must have a kingdom, in order to meet the conditions brought in by sin. “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God”; 1 Corinthians 15: 50.
ECM Have you a thought as to Jehovah’s answer to Rebecca’s enquiry? “Two nations are in thy womb, And two peoples shall be separated from thy bowels; And one people shall be stronger than the other people”. Would that illustrate the thought?
JT Yes; and the working out of the two as it culminated in Malachi; “Jacob have I loved”; which is the true idea; Rebecca’s idea really was Jacob. “But Esau have I hated”, Romans 9: 13. That is how matters stand, I think, in the working out of the truth in John, leading up to the lake of fire; showing how little we can build on natural birth, because nothing for God came from Esau morally.
PHH Are the thoughts in John 3 as to new birth progressive? that is, “born anew” and “born of water and of Spirit” (chapter 3: [p. 280] 5)?
JT I think so. I think the water comes in as necessary. It is just touched on here, whereas Paul in Titus speaks of “the washing of regeneration and the renewal of the Holy Spirit” (Titus 3: 5), leading us on to the ground of Christianity.
EG Does verse 8 refer back to verse 3? “Thus is every one that is born of the Spirit”? Is that the same as being “born anew”?
JT It is fuller, you know. “Born anew” is not very conclusive, it does not terminate in anything definite, but “born of the Spirit” does. It is a great operational thought; it means a divine Person is operating.
JSE Does this thought of entering the kingdom of God involve the enlargement of the thing in its spiritual wealth, or is it merely a positional suggestion?
JT I think the moral element must be there from the outset, because the idea of God must be taken according to what is found in the beginning of Genesis. It is God, a plural word being used, as if to convey the fulness of the idea, the operative thought being in mind here; it is divine operation additional to what Genesis presents. It is a new and distinct matter that must enter into all that follows in man. Now it is not creational, but as in Titus, “the washing of regeneration”. The thought of washing being attached to it, is that we might have the real idea that God has in mind, brought into being.
JSE All that I had in mind was as to the trend of the narrative that the saints might be brought into the intelligent enjoyment of all that the Lord had in mind. “Born anew” is in order to see the kingdom; but when it is a question of entering it, He uses these two subjective ideas “of water and of Spirit”.
JT The idea of God was there. The Lord does not at all minimise the thought that Nicodemus was [p. 281] a teacher, neither the thought God had that He must have a kingdom. If it be the vegetable kingdom, or any other kingdom that belongs to nature, God has to do with that; but “the kingdom” is specifically stated, and evidently works out from what God is morally. Hence the need for those born anew so that man might come into what God has in mind. He has a kingdom; the kingdom of Israel did not come up to the fulness of it, it is “the kingdom of God”.
WC The idea of birth and new creation are brought in in James 1: 18, “Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures”. Do they bear the one on the other?
JT Quite so: “firstfruits of his creatures”. It is clear that the word ‘creature’ and the word ‘generation’ must run together. They have a great place, of course, in the language that is known to us. But now we are dealing with birth or generation, the family being in mind; that man is to be in relation with God as a family, not simply as a number of creatures. Then the great fact that the Son has become man, and all leading up to the thought of believing on Him, as stated later in the chapter.
HH You have referred to the word ‘regeneration’, the Lord said in Matthew 19: 28, “Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel”. I thought the link of the Son of man with what you are saying is interesting.
JT The idea of man runs into the millennium, of course. Regeneration is a provisional matter, involving a certain change in man, and intended to work out what God can do and be to him, though still in flesh and blood condition. It is what God [p. 282] can work out thus, that is simply a provisional situation measured by time. The apostle says, “Flesh and blood cannot inherit God’s kingdom” (1 Corinthians 15: 50); hence the teaching here runs into Paul’s teaching.
Ques Would you say a word as to Peter’s view of the matter where he refers to the instrumentality, “born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the living and abiding word of God”, 1 Peter 1: 23?
JT That is in advance of what we have here, “the living and abiding word of God”. Here we lead up to the greatness of what God has in mind on the life line, and how the Lord changes over when He finishes with Nicodemus. He has been speaking of earthly things, but now He speaks of heavenly things and connects the Son of man with heaven. As in Chronicles, the Spirit of God was in haste to reach David. Heaven is introduced very early in the narrative; and here in chapter 3 the Son of man as in heaven is in mind. If Nicodemus does not understand earthly things, how is he going to understand the Son of man in heaven? It is a question of using our purified mind to understand what God is saying to us.
HH How do you understand what is spiritual? The Lord moved on. Do you connect the kingdom of God with what is heavenly?
JT With regard to the designation, “kingdom of God”, I would add to that, “the kingdom of the Son of his love”, Colossians 1: 13. Then we also have the “heavenly kingdom” of the Lord Jesus (2 Timothy 4: 18), and several other expressions of the same kind, all linking with this.
Ques Is not a universal kingdom as presided over by the Son of man, essentially a universal kingdom involving heaven and earth, and are not all the great thoughts of God seen in [p. 283] that setting?
JT Well, Stephen saying that he saw the Son of man standing at the right hand of God would suggest all that, because Stephen indicates the change over from the twelve to Paul’s teaching, which, of course, is absolutely necessary to arrive at the full truth; until we arrive at it, we are just making for it. The idea is to move on in order that we may arrive.
EuR Did you say this ran on into Paul’s ministry?
JT I would say so; only we are dealing with John. Stephen saw “the Son of man standing at the right hand of God” (Acts 7: 56); and that would be a universal idea. God was there working out the universal idea of man.
TAP When it says, “the Son of man who is in heaven” (verse 13), is it analogous to “the bosom of the Father”, John 1: 18?
JT Well, heaven is a place, and you might say the bosom of the Father is a place, but it is a place of affection. “The Son of man who is in heaven” is a mysterious statement which we ought to be ready for, too. What does it mean? He is here on earth, seen by human eyes, but He is in heaven. So He says later, “What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?” (chapter 6: 62). We have to seek to get to the meaning of these things. Therefore, I would think that the position of the Lord as in the Father’s bosom is a suggestion of the place of supreme love. The expression is found in chapter 13 in the sense of being receptive in a supremely attractive way. Heaven has to receive Christ, “until the times of restitution of all things”, Acts 3: 21. That is another matter. He is there now. The Lord’s position in heaven is that of waiting. It is the same idea in that sense, heaven is open to Him, but not final; but He is there as pending the time of the fulfilment of prophecy, until [p. 284] things come about which have been spoken by the prophets since time began. Therefore, the prophetic period has not yet begun at all in the full sense of the word; it is a waiting position, but a receptive position: “Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things”. The idea of “the Father’s bosom” is also a receptive position only in a fuller and more blessed sense.
Ques “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit”, Acts 7: 59. Does Stephen understand that?
JT Just so. He would have full place there; and, I suppose, Paul too as he entered the third heaven, at least he went as far as that. Paradise is a receptive idea; he entered into paradise. I suppose the idea is, the higher the creature is allowed to go the more he realises how welcome he is. It is the Lord’s thought to have him there.
WC John in the Lord’s bosom (chapter 13), is that not final, a similar thought applying to ourselves?
JT You are speaking of “in the bosom”, John 13: 23? The bosom is receptiveness, I think. Where love is. “The Son of his (the Father’s) love” (Colossians 1: 13), is a beautiful expression.
AM There has to be receptiveness on our side too. “As many as received him”, John 1: 12. That involves the affections, does it not?
JT What is contemplated is that those that are born of God afford all that to Christ. Luke contemplates the time “of his receiving up” (chapter 9: 51), It was a period that had certain characteristics; and so on the mount Moses and Elias speak of Him and His exodus out of the world. Heaven was wide open to Him. That is the position now: He is waiting there for the “restitution of all things”; and now a privileged family is peculiarly in evidence; that is, the assembly.
Rem “Received up in glory”, 1 Timothy 3: 16. Is that the idea?
JT Quite so.
WS With regard to the thought of flesh and blood not inheriting the kingdom; does that refer to the end of human life?
JT Well, if it does not inherit the kingdom what else is there? It is the thought of domination; it is clear that flesh and blood does not continue into eternal conditions.
Rem I should like to be clearer as to the Lord using the present tense, “who is in heaven”, to a man like Nicodemus, because “his receiving up” was not yet.
JT The mystery of His Person enters into that statement, but the passage, “the Spirit was not yet, because Jesus had not yet been glorified”, in chapter 7: 39, refers to the Lord’s ascension consequent on His death. That is, there was a time “of his receiving up”, Luke 9: 51. Moses and Elias were to understand that. Great things were pending then and great things are pending now; all that the prophets have spoken of and all the millennial conditions. And so we have to confine ourselves to get at the truth of what the Lord Jesus is engaged with at the present moment, and what is meant by the passage, “whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things”.
PHH Is your thought that the Lord being in heaven, the heavenly things have their place in the ministry at the present time?
JT If we are really ministers we are always concerned as to what is current in heaven. That is how I look at it. Not that it is a question of anything being told to us outside our dispensation, but it is a question of waiting on the Lord. There is “joy in heaven for one repenting sinner”, Luke 15: 7.
[p. 286] Repentance is current in heaven and joy is current in heaven at any given moment.
PHH I was just wondering about the “heavenly things”, what that covers?
JT That would cover the features of the truth that refer to heaven. But we should especially note the statement, “whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things”. What is occupying the Lord there now? He is now on His Father’s throne. It is a question of what is current in heaven at the present time. The Spirit here, and the gospel going out, so that it is a living state of things all the time; what is proceeding up there and what the Holy Spirit is doing down here. What is up there is what Christ is going on with; what is down here is the Spirit’s work.
JHT So Colossians 3: 1 refers to seeking “the things which are above, where the Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God”.
JT That is it, where He is “sitting at the right hand of God”. What is going on up there, and correspondingly what is current on earth in the power of the Spirit.
HFN Would that link up with what comes out in Hebrews? He has “passed through the heavens” (chapter 4:14); and He appears in heaven for us, (Hebrews 9: 24). Then in Ephesians 4: 10, it is said, He has “ascended up far above all heavens”.
JT They are great facts relative to His ministry, what He is engaged with now. The epistle to the Hebrews opens up what He is doing now. He has an office, High Priest over the house of God, and what enters into that! But His going beyond all heavens would show that all this service that is carried on is by such a Person. You cannot limit Him at all. We cannot limit divine Persons. We are limited, They are not. Hence, if the Lord Jesus is [p. 287] gone beyond all heavens what opens up flows out of the position He has taken. The greatest things are being opened up to the assembly now. It is not merely a kingdom matter, but a bride matter. Hence the liberty the Lord has in our service down here. Christ and the assembly enters into it as well as the Father and the Son and makes the most precious subject possible amongst us, including the Song of Songs.
Rem I like what you say. Is it right to view Paul, Peter and Stephen as entering into what heaven is? I was thinking of the sheet let down from heaven; and Paul entering into the third heaven, and Stephen seeing what is actually current in heaven. Is that the possible link at the present time instanced in these three men?
JT All that suggests much. Take Peter, what happened at Caesarea in the house of Cornelius, and what happened in the house of Simon the tanner. What things are opened up! What vastness! All coming within the cognisance of Peter. There is personal contact between the Holy Spirit and Peter as there was between the Holy Spirit and Philip. Then going on to Paul, what he experienced in his relations with the Lord after he was converted! What he experienced, for instance, at Jerusalem! What he experienced himself in the desert. And the fourteen years before he recounts that he was caught up to the third heaven, caught up into paradise. Then what he heard “which it is not lawful for a man to utter”, 2 Corinthians 12: 4! But then there was something to utter. Undoubtedly it was to come out. To be simple, we are living in the currency of heaven. Heaven is not static, it is active. Angels and divine Persons are active and impressions are coming in constantly, the Spirit being here. Hence, the greatness of our position, and what is possible.
[p. 288] Rem It is said of the Spirit, “he shall not speak from himself; but whatsoever he shall hear he shall speak”, John 16: 13.
JT What is the Spirit saying down here? Reflecting what is going on up there; because there is “another Comforter” here. One up there and one down here.
Ques How does Ephesians 5: 26 fit in? “Washing of water by the word”?
JT That proceeds all the time, only we have to remember there is our side as to what is being done. What heaven is doing has correspondence here. What the Holy Spirit is doing corresponds; but there is our responsibility entering into all that and on all possible occasions this inward work proceeds. All these have to be taken account of so as to get into our souls what we are in, what is going on all the time. The Lord here is referring to what He had been saying to Nicodemus. It says, “Jesus answered and said to him, Thou art the teacher of Israel and knowest not these things? Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that which we know” (John 3: 10, 11); that is plural, and it conveys the authority with which the Lord spoke. “We speak that which we know, and we bear witness of that which we have seen, and ye receive not our witness. If I have said the earthly things to you and ye believe not, how, if I say the heavenly things to you, will ye believe? And no one has gone up into heaven save he who came down out of heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, thus must the Son of man be lifted up, that every one who believes on him may not perish, but have life eternal. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believes on him may not perish, but have life eternal. For God has not sent his Son into the world that he may judge the world, but that the world may be [p. 289] saved through him. He that believes on him is not judged: but he that believes not has been already judged, because he has not believed on the name of the only-begotten Son of God. And this is the judgment, that light is come into the world, and men have loved darkness rather than light; for their works were evil. For every one that does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light that his works may not be shewn as they are; but he that practises the truth comes to the light, that his works may be manifested that they have been wrought in God” (verses 11 - 21). All that contemplates continual activity both as to believing and not believing; and as to judgment and salvation.
Ques Would you say a word as to eternal life? When the Lord comes to the “heavenly things” He brings in the thought of eternal life.
JT I think it is to be noticed that He speaks of heavenly things as the thought of eternal life is reached. The truth of eternal life has some link with the heavenly.
WSS I was wondering whether what is said about the “Son of man who is in heaven” would bear upon what Christ is personally and intrinsically. It was not necessary for Him to die to go to heaven; but it was necessary for Him to die because of others being associated with Him, and the woman of Samaria would represent the character of the persons secured.
JT Now we come to chapter 4; and the thought in mind is to see what chapter 3 leads to, the subjective side of the truth. The introduction of certain persons helps us to understand. We have Nicodemus, we have Nathanael, we have John the baptist and we have Peter; and now we have the woman of Samaria. Undoubtedly the thought as to the woman of Samaria includes what she would [p. 290] come into as a result of the light of God coming into her soul. She would become a vessel in the system the Lord was inaugurating. She represents that in a peculiar way because she leaves her water-pot, meaning that she would be herself a vessel; and we have to consider what her vessel would be useful for. Hence the importance of the subjective side in chapter 4 as to the question of life. Chapter 3 gives the highest point, I would say, the Lord referring to what is in heaven. But now we have Him here in an administrative way. Chapter 3 finishes with the fact that the Father loves the Son; the great feature as to the administrative side. “The Father loves the Son, and has given all things to be in his hand. He that believes on the Son has life eternal, and he that is not subject to the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides upon him” (chapter 3: 35, 36). That is what I was saying, the idea of judgment proceeding as well as blessing, salvation and life. But now the Son is seen in an administrative position, and I think the woman comes in as linked on with the system in which the Lord is administering, into which each of us is to come; and if we are ministering in the things of God we are in it.
FSM Is every person in this system a potential worshipper?
JT It is very remarkable that the Lord speaks of worship here and tells the woman that “God is a spirit”. That is another great matter to be understood. The question is whether we, in ministering the truth, understand these great things; for there is much ministry, there are many ministers. The idea of a vessel is opened up in this chapter. On the Lord all the vessels, great and small, hang (Isaiah 22). Paul was specially a vessel, “an elect vessel to me” (Acts 9: 15); and I think he is a pattern for all of us as to service and administration [p. 291] generally.
Ques Would such a vessel be available for ministry?
JT That is what I was thinking; whatever is current. We have certain things stressed in the testimony at a certain time and it is a question of what is being stressed now and how much one is in it, how one can be used.
Ques Is the system the assembly?
JT The assembly must involve a system. Israel involved a system and the universe involves a system. It is going on all the time in a systematic sense. Hence, we cannot but believe that the assembly involves a system and she is coming into it here. The woman of Samaria knows what to do; she left her waterpot and went into the city, and went to the men, and she had something to impart.
JJT “Is not he the Christ?” Did she have anything further than the present before her?
JT She did indeed! She represents the subjective idea in the system; what she can bring into it as being subject. She is the only one, I think, who is told by the Lord in a personal way that He is the Christ. She was informed by Himself that He was the Christ. The feminine side of the truth must fit in with the Christ (see Psalm 45: 9). In the New Testament the bride undoubtedly refers to the assembly.
ECB What is the position as to the many believers who apparently do not come into the full truth of the dispensation?
JT Well, the fact that they do not come into it is, of course, sorrowful; for it is open to all. This woman came into it in principle; she represents those who come into it as redemption was accomplished and the Holy Spirit given.
ECB God has only one thought for the saints at the present moment, and one has wondered much [p. 292] as to those who apparently have not the Spirit, to what family do they belong?
JT There is no such family recognised. The persons who are in God’s family are those who are of the assembly. The only family contemplated in this dispensation is that in the first chapter of this gospel: those who receive Christ. They have title to become children of God; they belong to the family of God. Therefore, they have to judge themselves to get right with God; and the ministers who are amongst us should make this fact clear to all. There is no family but the assembly on earth now.
Rem It says, “and the Lord added to the assembly daily those that were to be saved”, Acts 2: 47.
JT “Those that were to be” — those that are to be saved are added to the assembly every day. There is no other family.
HH Would Acts 19 show how the thing is to be put right? There were persons who had been without the Spirit and Paul puts it right. Would that show how the minister is to put right a faulty ministry?
JT Quite so; that is the point there. Note the number twelve which is an administrative number. In chapter 18 we see a man and a woman engaged in putting another man right. He is a good preacher, an eloquent man, not that he did not have the Spirit; I would say he did. Aquila and Priscilla regarded it as their business to put this man right. He preached and they evidently enjoyed his preaching, and they “took him to them and unfolded to him the way of God more exactly”. You may say, But may he not belong to another family? There is no such suggestion in any part of the New Testament. The family is designated in chapter 1 of our book: the full thought of Christianity. Aquila and Priscilla put Apollos right; and then Paul finds twelve persons at Ephesus and they do not have [p. 293] the Spirit. There is not the slightest suggestion that he would relegate these to another time, the time is now. The Spirit is available now.
WC Isaiah 54: 13 refers to “all thy children shall be taught of Jehovah”, and the Lord quotes that in chapter 6: 45 of this gospel: “They shall be all taught of God”.
JTS Does what you have been saying connect with the scripture, “He that believes on the Son has life eternal”, and, on the other hand, “he that is not subject to the Son shall not see life”, John 3: 36?
JT That is the only alternative now. “The Father loves the Son, and has given all things to be in his hand. He that believes on the Son has life eternal, and he that is not subject to the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides upon him”, John 3: 35, 36. That is the only alternative.
Ques Is the work of divine Persons now to bring persons into their own distinctiveness?
JT That is what the ministry is for: “Until we all arrive at the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, at the full-grown man”, Ephesians 4: 13. The aim is to get all into this standard.
ECM John in his gospel speaks of gathering “together into one the children of God who were scattered abroad” (chapter 11: 52).
JT Quite so. That is the only family owned of God as on earth now.
PH Should we be exercised as to what gospel we preach?
JT I would certainly challenge anyone who suggested anything of another family, as to what gospel he is preaching. There is only one gospel.
Rem The word in Galatians 1: 8 is as strong as here: “Let him be accursed”.
[p. 294] JV The eunuch in Acts 8 when he is asked if he understood said, “How can I, except some man should guide me?”
EuR Do the brazen serpent in chapter 3 and the springing well here involve an upward move towards the inheritance?
JT The springing up is that. The Lord indicates an upward move in chapter 3 objectively, but here in chapter 4 it is a well in the believer — a subjective thought; a well “springing up into everlasting life”.
EuR That is how we would reach the heavenly things.
JT So chapter 3 and this chapter agree. The woman indicates what is subjective and how she came into it! She went to the men; she is not afraid of them or liable to be damaged by them now. It is complete deliverance. She is delivered; she goes to the men and the truth goes on. Christ is believed on as “the Saviour of the world”.
Ques Is this woman born anew and born of water and of the Spirit?
JT She is in the gain of more than that; she is delivered. What she is implies the Spirit; that is the truth the Lord ministered to her. Not the Spirit as in new birth but as sealing her, the anointing, the sealing. She thus typifies full Christianity.
WSS Would she represent the assembly as apprehending Christ?
JT Quite so. It really works out in Paul’s ministry, “I have espoused you unto one man”, 2 Corinthians 11: 2.
HFN Does the attack of the enemy on the unity of the Godhead underlie this thought of another family? “One Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all”, Ephesians 4: 5, 6.
JT I should say [p. 295] so.
WM It says in chapter 3: 26: “All come to him”, and then John the baptist says: “He that has the bride is the bridegroom” (verse 29). Does that show that the assembly is the exclusive thought?
JT Quite so; we can read it into the passage. Paul says: “I speak as to Christ, and as to the assembly”, Ephesians 5: 32. Really the woman is in mind in this; she represents the subjective side. The Lord does not call her woman until she owns the truth. “The woman answered and said, I have not a husband. Jesus says to her, Thou hast well said, I have not a husband; for thou hast had five husbands, and he whom now thou hast is not thy husband: this thou hast spoken truly. The woman says to him, Sir, I see that thou art a prophet. Our fathers worshipped in this mountain, and ye say that in Jerusalem is the place where one must worship. Jesus says to her, Woman...” Can anyone, who has considered the matter, doubt that the Lord used the proper word governing her position! She had discredited it before, but she is entitled to it now and I am sure the Lord is emphasising the assembly and what it is to Him; not shrinking from telling us what God is Himself, that “God is a spirit” (verse 24).