MAN AS PRESENTED IN CHRIST AND THE ASSEMBLY (3)
[p. 296] MAN AS PRESENTED IN CHRIST AND THE ASSEMBLY (3)
John 5: 17 - 30; John 6: 60 - 71
JT The allusion to Exodus 24 in our prayer is opportune; it is said there that the seventy elders “saw the God of Israel”, and we may hope that the present reading in John 5 will correspond — where we may see God. It is a question, however, of our state as to whether we can see God in such a sense; for the chapter affords an opportunity in the work of the Father, and the work of the Son; both being viewed as in the economy into which They have come, not in which They were in abstract Deity. The chapter contemplates the Son in the most remarkable way as in obedience and in subjection, and yet asserting at the beginning of the section that He is equal with God: “He had not only violated the sabbath, but also said that God was his own Father, making himself equal with God”. That is to say, it is Christ in subjection; there is the most remarkable evidence of it, but yet in equality in the holy mutuality into which divine Persons had come. We finished yesterday with some remarks on the subjective side of the truth; that is, chapter 3 being the objective side of it as to eternal life, and chapter 4 being the subjective side of it; that is, in the Spirit. Hence, the woman of Samaria is brought into it. One who was unworthy of the name of woman but who acquired her place in the discernment of the Lord when she perceived that He was a prophet. That is to say, she began to see things and hence qualified in due course for the system set up according to chapter 3: “the Father loves the Son, and has given all things to be in his hand” (verse 35). The system is thus set up in love, and open to those who believe, persons qualified to enter into it, not simply as believers but as workers, as witnesses. So [p. 297] that, as was remarked, the persons of the saints are represented in her as discerning, available in their bodies; as coming into the system which God had set up, the Spirit operating in them: “springing up into everlasting life” (verse 14). She was able to administer, at least, in the sense of light; for the Lord honoured her peculiarly in telling her that He was the Christ. So she would be a worthy type of the assembly. The assembly is clearly in mind. John the baptist having suggested the thought of the bridegroom and the bride, undoubtedly the Lord had this woman in mind, and had the assembly in mind in her.
Now this chapter opens up with the raising up of the impotent man at the pool of Bethesda; but the point is not to rest on that but rather what is in the Father and the Son. Although the sign must enter into the chapter; the sign of the Son, acting by His word, what He said to the man: the Son, therefore, is working, but on that principle.
Ques Just for a moment, with regard to your remark as to this woman being a worker; did the disciples fail there as being only observers? The Lord says: “Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already to harvest” (verse 35).
JT Quite so. They were really employed unnecessarily there. Employment in going into the city to buy bread by so many was superfluous, I would say; one of them could do it. The minimum should be resorted to when material things are in question, they are relatively insignificant, for they “perish with the using”, Colossians 2: 22. But persons are in mind in the administration; they should have lifted up their eyes to see the persons coming in. The woman understood that. Hence, she went to the men and told them — imparted what light she had. She did not go beyond her measure. She would be involved in the waterpot. Paul says he had “a measure to reach even unto you”, 2 Corinthians 10: 13. Therefore, we have to test ourselves as to the “measure of faith”.
HGH In connection with the chapter we have read: “The Son can do nothing of himself save whatever he sees the Father doing” (verse 19). Does that suggest the Father is behind all the movements?
JT Quite so; it is a great operational chapter, divine operations by the Father and the Son. But, evidently, the Father, as He is introduced, is the Source of all that is coming out; which, of course, is the idea of the dispensation. The Father and the Son give character to the dispensation. The Son has taken a place above, and He has His own interests; but the thought here is the general divine system of which the Father is the Source. Hence in Ephesians we have: there is “one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in us all” (chapter 4: 6). He is the Source of all, with the Son in absolute subjection. Subjection in equality is the thing to be understood, if God is to be seen in the dispensation. In chapter 4, the disciples were not in the work, therefore their remarks were beside the point. The feminine side was being stressed at the moment. They did not see anything at all in that. The teaching had been understood by the woman and the men come in in their own place.
FH “Others have laboured, and ye have entered into their labours” (verse 38). Would you include the operations of divine Persons in that?
JT Hardly. “My Father worketh hitherto and I work” (chapter 5: 17), shows that divine Persons are to be regarded by Themselves. The others mentioned in verse 38 of this chapter are spoken of honourably, as the real labourers.
EuR In chapter 4 the Lord speaks to the woman about God and the Father; do you think that He would bring God into the consciousness of her being as told out in love in chapter 3: [p. 299] 16?
JT Quite so: God has to be apprehended as God.
Ques Would what the woman is doing answer the exercise you were raising with us last night as to the matter of occupation?
JT Quite so. It has been a real question with me for many years as to my occupation. I never found my way clear to give up my actual physical occupation, finding it helpful and practical in one’s exercises generally; but the question now is as to whether the Lord is calling men to what we call the work. Clearly He is. At the same time we have to come to Paul really; as if the Lord would say to us from time to time, ‘Consider Paul’, because he is the last word in these matters. He stresses the fact that he worked with his hands; this is to be noted, but yet Paul says too that “they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel”, 1 Corinthians 9: 14. We have to provide for that. There are considerable financial resources amongst the saints now and the question is whether it will last in the ways of God; and we are to regard the matter. The question is: “What is your occupation?” Genesis 46: 33. When Peter and Andrew were called the Lord said: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew 4: 19); which meant a change from their then occupation, which looks as if we should keep all these things before us and think of the measure of faith which is necessary to go wholly into the service. The need is great, but there is need of those who are nominally in the service to be placed on the principle of weight and measure: that is also great.
HFN How does what you are saying as to the opening up of this wonderful economy bear on the thought of life and manhood?
JT It is the level to which the subject rises in this chapter. We are taken up above the ordinary level. It is a question of the Father and the Son.
[p. 300] We had John the baptist; and we had Peter, and Andrew, and Philip, and Nathanael, then Nicodemus, and then the woman of Samaria. All these are introduced in the gospel so far; but here, while the sign introduces an impotent man, a man wholly dependent on others, yet it is just a sign and does not enter into the actual remarks of the Lord in these verses. He is confining Himself, one may say, to the mutual relations of the Father and the Son in the economy. The Son in absolute dependence and subjection and yet in equality. The mind has to take in all that; it is a question whether we can rise to that. Our brother who prayed alluded to Exodus 24 and it was there a matter of ascension. “They saw God” (verse 11) but on the principle of ascension. They were to go up, and as has often been remarked, Moses was to go up into the mount in addition; though they were all to go up, Moses only is told to go up higher; that is, to come up into the mount. Therefore, it is a question in the first part of moral elevation. That is the great thing we have to apprehend in this chapter.
Ques Does the thought of the woman in chapter 4 suggest the assembly in the thought of worship, and in this chapter is it divine Persons in the economy active in securing the worship in the system?
JT Well, yes; if the idea represented in the woman is just that, I would say the waterpot is the basis of the allusion, and what answers to that is herself; that she is the vessel. I would say that, although worship was brought up by her, what she had in mind was the light that had come to her, the Person speaking to her was no other than the Son. “If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that says to thee, Give me to drink, thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water” (verse 10). That is the light she had although [p. 301] there was further progress in the fact that she said, “I perceive”. I believe the Lord uses the word woman rather as a type of the assembly here below in testimony; and she immediately goes out because He tells her He is the Christ, the Person who does things for the Father, the great official Actor under the Father. A divine Person, but nevertheless, in absolute subjection and obedience; and I think the woman would work out here, as already remarked, as a type of the assembly.
AJG Is your thought that it is a feature of manhood to be working with the Father in what He is doing?
JT I would think so. Adam was not to be idle, he was not to be a man of leisure; he is to be in the garden “to dress it and to keep it”, Genesis 2: 15. Then we have in the divine mind his having a helpmate, and I believe that this comes into these chapters.
AJG Is that working to be carried out in the consciousness of sonship? Does that enter into it?
JT Perfectly; and the moral side added to it: for the Lord speaks of His judgment being righteous in verse 30: “I cannot do anything of myself; as I hear, I judge, and my judgment is righteous, because I do not seek my will, but the will of him that has sent me”. That is, it is sonship in obedience, equality in obedience; the moral side entering into it, but His judgment is righteous, a cardinal thought in the service in the economy.
GS Would you say a little as to how the truth of the Son of God relates to the truth as to the Son of man which you have stressed? The knowledge of the Son of God seems to be the height.
JT Of course we have to compare the difference between the terms Son of God and Son of man. Son of God is His relation with God; Son of man is His relation with men. Sonship of God in man, but then [p. 302] it is sonship of man too, which, it is clear, has a part in divine counsels; because sonship is the great thought in mind, all the others are simply accessories: the divine mind is man.
Rem Ephesians 1 would show that the great thought is association with the Son of God but union with the Son of man. The church is seen united to Him there. The One whom God has set to be “head over all things” the saints are united with Him. “Head over all things to the assembly, which is his body, the fulness of him who fills all in all”, Ephesians 1: 22, 23.
JT The church His fulness; “the fulness of him who fills all in all”. Your idea is that it is Man in mind there. I would say that.
HFN In relation to the Persons working, what is distinctly the Father’s working? He is said to raise and quicken. I think we would all like to get a little help as to the Father’s working.
JT Well, I think the chapter is to bring that out; “My Father worketh... and I work” (verse 17). It is to bring out the Father’s place; and for that we must go back to the beginning. After the seventh day, the Father had been working from the outset, I would say. The Son did His bidding and yet is His equal, so that the work goes on between the Father and the Son. Hence the importance of the word where we have the suggestion, “from the beginning it was not so”, Matthew 19: 8. We have to go back to the beginning for what was so. The Father takes things up after Adam’s failure, and carries them on provisionally. Even so, the Lord came in on that line that the work of God could go on provisionally with the Jews. Now, it is a question of new creation, or rather, a new generation, as we had yesterday. Things have to begin over again. We have to come to that. God would go on patiently with Adam and with Israel; but there has to be the new start in the [p. 303] new birth. That is what John stresses; and that the Father and the Son are working on that line in this chapter.
Ques “The Father loves the Son and shews him all things which he himself does” (verse 20). Does that bear on the extension of the service?
JT It shows the height to which we have come in the service. Whether we can bring that down to our ordinary service is a question, I think. We should be safe in keeping it to the divine operations.
COB Would you explain the use of the word used in expressing the Father’s affection for the Son in John 5: 20? The note at John 21: 15 says it implies attractiveness in the one loved.
JT The Greek word is phileo, so that the love is active; the Person being the object of the affection at the moment. The other Greek word agapao would refer to a settled disposition of love. The point here is active affection. In this section the Son is drawing out the Father’s affection.
WC Would the Hebrew bondman be the counterpart? “I love my master, my wife, and my children, I will not go free”, Exodus 21: 5.
JT It would, if we turn aside to the type from what is here. Here it is a question of the Father and the Son. Chapter 3: 35 has the other word; that is, agapao, the settled love of the Father for the Son.
Ques Would “in like manner” (verse 19) indicate the fulness of the response of the Son to the Father?
JT Quite so. The charge was that He was making Himself equal with God, which is true. “Jesus therefore answered and said to them, Verily, verily, I say to you, The Son can do nothing of himself save whatever he sees the Father doing” (verse 19). A marvellous statement! It seems to be something to be taken into our souls as to the divine Persons; “For the Father loves the Son” (verse 20), the Greek word for love conveying that the Son is the Object of affection immediately. “For the Father loves the Son and shews him all things which he himself does; and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may wonder” (verse 20). How is that to come out save by contemplation!
Ques Would you say that quickening is the characteristic line of divine operations in John; and is quickening necessary to bring us into the appreciation of the Father and the Son in this manner?
JT I would think so; it is a stronger word relating to the Spirit’s operation. We have in John compared for us the acts and workings of divine Persons; which is a great matter if we can follow it out. They are all taken account of: the actual doings and services of divine Persons. So, here, it is the function of the Father, but also the function of the Son. It is given to Him to have that function; and the Spirit is said to quicken too, so each divine Person is seen as doing it.
Ques “He came to his own, and his own received him not” (chapter 1: 11). Does that give God the opportunity to work by His divine power? Faith would lay hold of what is done by divine Persons.
JT This chapter 5 views the divine workings in the economy; the economy did not begin with Adam. It was in the Son become Man. It is a question of the relations of divine Persons functioning in the system. It must be in the Father and the Son, but the Spirit is referred to very strongly in the epistles as quickening.
HFN Is your great point that we might lose sight of ourselves and service and all that, and the whole gist of it is to be wholly taken up with these operations of divine Persons, and that would work out in manhood?
JT That is the way. The Son is the great Operator, and that comes out in the woman’s testimony.
[p. 305] The assembly must come into it and in this sense the operations are by the Spirit now subjectively in the assembly. That is where the work goes on now. So this chapter must be taken as inaugural; what has been inaugurated and carried on in the Son, both in manhood before He died and after He was risen. From heaven the operations go on through the Lord, but in the main it is a question of the Spirit and the assembly, whilst divine Persons can never be restricted: only we have to understand the divine Persons respectively through whom they are carried on. In chapter 4 the woman implies all that.
JV “Come, see a man... is not he the Christ?” (chapter 4: 29): first “a man” and then “the Christ”.
JT That is good. It is a question of attraction, I think. “Come, see a man”; how she admired Him! But then, is He not the Christ? But the Lord had told her He was. She has the light of Christ in His manhood, in His perfectness and in His operative power. That is the Christ.
JJT “The Father raises the dead” (verse 21); why does it not bring in the thought of the Son raising the dead as well?
JT It says: “Wonder not at this, for an hour is coming in which all who are in the tombs shall hear his voice, and shall go forth; those that have practised good, to resurrection of life, and those that have done evil, to resurrection of judgment” (verses 28, 29). I would think that that covers the matter of the Son raising.
JAP Would that be the Son of God in verse 29?
JT The line begins: “He who honours not the Son, honours not the Father who has sent him. Verily, verily, I say unto you, that he that hears my word, and believes him that has sent me, has life eternal, and does not come into judgment, but is [p. 306] passed out of death into life. Verily, verily, I say unto you, that an hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God” (verses 23 - 25). That is the point, “Son of God”; and the question of the Son of man arises because of the matter of judgment. The Father does not judge. That is another matter. The operative thought as to the Persons; what One does and what One does not do. The Father does not judge anyone; He “has given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is Son of man” (verse 27). But in verses 28 and 29 the resurrection refers to the operations of the Son of God I would say; because that is what is in mind.
Ques “Marked out Son of God in power, ...by resurrection of the dead”. Romans 1:4. Does that bear on it?
JT The Son of God raises the dead; the Son of man executes judgment, because He is Son of man.
JSE The instruction seems to be given in chapter 5:16 to those who seek to kill the Lord, but in chapter 6:24, 25, it is to those who followed.
JT That is good. What you say conveys the truth; it is a question of following. It is important to see the height to which the truth rises in this chapter 5, bringing before us the economy operative in the Father and the Son. The Son in complete subjection to, and yet in equality with, the Father, so that the truth of the Deity is - preserved in the economy. It is maintained at its true height between the Father and the Son. Only the Son has taken a place of obedience here, it has not been imposed upon Him, He takes it. He has taken a place according td the psalm, “a body hast thou prepared me”, Hebrews 10:5. He has come into that position and He is true in the position, according to what governs it. So we have the absolute subjection of the Son, and the obedience of the Son, and yet His [p. 307] equality with the Father in that position; and so our souls are kept balanced as to the Lord’s deity.
Rem The Lord says: “My Father is greater than I” (chapter 14:28).
JT That all enters into this position the Lord has taken. He speaks according to that position, but you cannot impose it on Him; He retains His place in equality.
Ques Does that not bring out the wonderful love of Christ?
JT The passage is wonderful! As has been remarked, it is a question of God, it is a question of divine Persons operating in the economy but retaining Their place in the Deity.
JHT Is the retention of that place seen in His statement, “Before Abraham was, I am” (chapter 8:58)? And again when they come to take Him, and He says, “I am he”, and “they went backward and fell to the ground” (chapter 18:6)?
JT That is important. The mind is so treacherous; we are apt to say things that are degrading and derogatory, and which are not true. Divine Persons act of Themselves and therefore retain Their place in the Deity in all circumstances.
WSS Is it important to have an apprehension of the grace of the position the Lord has taken?
JT Quite so; you are impressed with the grace, and He is true in it. At the same time we are able to perceive that the economy is functioning, and functioning in regard of the place each Person has taken. The Father is working and has always been working, and the Son joins in as Man; and the Spirit joins in too.
WSS That is exceedingly beautiful. “The Father loves the Son” (verse 20). This is the only occasion in which this particular word is used of the love of the Father for the Son. The Son has become so attractive to the Father in that position.
[p. 308] JT That is well worth thinking of: the active love of the Father here in the system or economy. The Lord is always attractive to the Father.
WSS Would it link up with: “I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it:that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them”, John 17:26?
JT Yes.
RD Are we to understand that all divine Persons are included in God being “all in all”? 1 Corinthians 15:28.
JT It is mystery; we cannot say more. There are three Persons in the Deity; They have come into the economy, but in general retain Their places in the Deity, the Father, and the Son, and the Spirit.
Rem “I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father” (chapter 10:18).
JT Quite so; that is another expression of it — we have sidelights. The general position of it is here in this chapter, but we have sidelights: “This commandment have I received of my Father”; as if the Lord would stress that at this particular point.
Ques Why does it say: “Then the end, when he gives up the kingdom to him who is God and Father”, 1 Corinthians 15:24? That is prior to the later verse, “That God may be all in all” (verse 28).
JT It is still God in the true sense of God; but in the economy there are distinctions. Therefore, the Son takes a place below, He takes a place of subjection in that chapter; but the general principle is that the Deity stands. But what we are speaking about is inscrutable; who would define it? We must be guided by the letter of Scripture.
EuR The Deity stands, but the economy continues right on.
JT That is what we have come into.
WSS Hence the importance of connecting the Son’s title with manhood.
[p. 309] JT So that balances everything. We are shut up to inscrutability. We have to say we do not know anything but what Scripture says, and we keep to that.
Rem What we are speaking of now gives emphasis to that word “wherefore” in Philippians 2:9. The Lord Jesus emptying Himself, and the “wherefore”, the consequence — “highly exalted”.
JT Quite so: because of the descent. Years ago we went through all that; but we are now dealing with another matter; the relations of the Father and the Son and their operations in the present dispensation, having specially in view manhood in Christ. Of course, Deity has to enter into this, and the question of the Son of man; but we have arrived at the altitude, the height of the matter, and we are entitled to speak of it as Scripture speaks of it here. This is the very summit of our subject. Notwithstanding the Lord has taken a relatively lower place with the Father, He yet retains His place in the Deity. So we are enabled to go back to the beginning and what is in mind is man. God has come into the sphere of operations, doing things, first in creation and then in redemption, then in new creation, but He has man in mind. The Son has come into that and glorified it, and we have come into it on the principle of entering into an economy in which God is apprehended; the same God that we had at the beginning (Genesis 1:1); but this chapter enables us to dwell on the economy, the operations of the Father and the Son as in the economy; and to retain in our minds that that economy although operating does not change the positions of the Persons: that the Father and the Son are equal.
EuR In this thought of manhood, have you in mind that the woman is essential to it?
JT That is what we said a moment ago. It is evident that she must come in. John had already [p. 310] spoken of it: for where the bride is there is a bridegroom; so where there is a bridegroom there must be a bride. I believe the woman comes in here designedly so that we may get the thought of the assembly as necessary to fill out what we are dealing with.
PD It is the witness of the Father in verses 32 and 37, and the witness of the works in verse 36. Would that apply exclusively to the Lord or does it come in where manhood is manifested?
JT We have not read that part, but it is quite right to speak of it: “If I bear witness concerning myself, my witness is not true” (verse 31). A remarkable thing! “It is another who bears witness concerning me, and I know that the witness which he bears concerning me is true” (verse 32). I would say that is the Father. Then He speaks about John. “Ye have sent unto John”, — the “ye” is emphatic — “and he has borne witness to the truth. But I do not receive witness from man, but I say this that ye might be saved. He was the burning and shining lamp, and ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light” (verses 33 - 35). That is John the baptist. “But I have the witness that is greater than that of John; for the works which the Father has given me that I should complete them, the works themselves which I do, bear witness concerning me that the Father has sent me” (verse 36). Now we might bring in chapter 9, because the man was born blind in order that the works of God might be manifested; but it is the Father here in chapter 5, the Father’s witness to the Son.
HFN Might we have a word as to chapter 6?
JT We do well to take notice of the fact as to the order of these thoughts. We have come to the top here as to the order of the truth, because we are dealing with the individual side of our subject, but the point is the Father and the Son.
[p. 311] Now, to come to chapter 6. The chapter is very long, has 71 verses and deals with the subject of eternal life, especially the food needed for the entrance into it. The Lord is ascending. His ascension is alluded to, but He has come down to give life to the world. We should see the one side in the verses read; that it is a question of departure. It was a time of complaint as in the book of Numbers. We should see whether there is anything of that kind amongst us. Moses even fell into it himself: he complained; we are all liable to it although dealing with such great matters. So it is a question as to going away. Peter answers the question, “Will ye also go away?” (verse 67), by replying “Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast words of life eternal; and we have believed and known that thou art the holy one of God” (verses 68, 69). As much as to say the Lord Jesus is apprehended as the High Priest. That side of the truth evidently enters into this position. Chapter 6 contemplates the food essential to life.
JHT Does Numbers 15 come in in that sense? I was thinking of the rebellion in chapter 16 and how in chapter 15 you have the food in the offerings.
JT I think it is especially the balancing of the things that are brought in accompanying the offerings; such as fine flour and wine, the accompanying of the necessary things, that we should be balanced in holding the truth set out both in principle and in general in the book. There is the need of balance as in Numbers 15.
WD Is there the antidote in Numbers 21? “The princes digged the well, and the nobles of the people hollowed it out” (verse 18)? Would that be the antidote for complaining?
JT Quite so; the princes and the nobles are working with [p. 312] the lawgiver.
HFN What is your thought in regard to this chapter? Are the garners of the economy opened up to us? What is your thought as to life and manhood? Is the food the support of manhood?
JT That is what I think. The side that is opened up in the chapter is the question of food; and of course it runs through as in chapter 5 — the Father and the Son — but chapter 6 is the food that man needs in view of being raised up in the last days. We are to be carried through provisionally by this kind of food until the time of resurrection.
EuR How does eternal life link on with manhood?
JT Life is the light of men. “In him was life, and the life was the light of men” (chapter 1:4). Man was in the divine thought in innocency; that was tried, but of course man was in the divine counsels, that is man in Christ. Adam is regarded as a figure of Him that was to come (Romans 5:14).
Ques Would verse 19 have any bearing in reference to the progress they had made to arrive at the new position?
JT “Having rowed then about twenty-five or thirty stadia, they see Jesus walking on the sea and coming near the ship; and they were frightened. But he says to them, It is I be not afraid. They were willing therefore to receive him into the ship; and immediately the ship was at the land to which they went” (verses 19 - 21). What is in your mind?
Rem I thought it bore on the question of spiritual progress, arriving at things quickly, and the question of food here. Finality is reached here as Christ is received.
JT “They were willing therefore to receive him into the ship; and immediately the ship was at the land to which they went” (verse 21). They reach their end: that would help them in view of spiritual instruction. We are now dealing with the way the [p. 313] mind is intended to travel spiritually; and the end is, “Thou art the holy one of God” (verse 69). Peter is saying that, and I think it alludes to the service of God.
EG Would you say a word on “Thou hast the words of eternal life” (verse 68)?
JT It is just details. The Lord coming down to our minds in detail, because we “know in part”, 1 Corinthians 13:12. We have been at this question of eternal life for fifty years and we have not arrived at it yet. In that we are all slow learners; but there is so much in this question of the man God had in His mind and the kind of life.
EG Does it involve the Lord’s ministry?
JT It involves the ministry we have now too. The ministry is that in which the truth is brought to us. The objective idea is in revelation, but the gifts are needed to bring the thing to us as power, and that is where the Spirit’s power appears. It is well to apprehend the power in which the truth is brought to us, not an abstract thing but brought to the saints in power by the gifts.
PH The words being “spirit and... life” (verse 63), is it intended that as coming under His divine teaching we should become spiritual and enter into this matter practically?
JT Well, just so. We have alluded to the need of detail. Sometimes we break them up too much and the saints are kept too long in childhood or babyhood. God has given us minds to work things out ourselves and not always be asking.
WC With regard to the service of God and the question of manhood; the service is to go on, but the test comes apparently in the hard sayings, whether we can take them in in view of enrichment in the service of God.
JT Quite so. It was at the beginning; this disengaging of the truth from the Jewish system,
[p. 314] what a struggle it was as seen in Galatians. This setting aside of the truth by itself as Paul does in the Acts; “Lo, we turn to the Gentiles” (chapter 13:46), and they receive the truth. Right through from then till now there has been a struggle. There is a struggle now in this thought of eternal life, whether we are accepting the humbling in the defections that are coming every week. “Will ye also go away?” (verse 67); we are all challenged, and the segregation of the truth as in Peter’s word, “the holy one of God”, is the point. There is the need of apprehending Him in holiness in the sanctuary at the present time in incorruption, loving Him in incorruption (Ephesians 6:24).
PHH Why does the Lord refer to “the Son of man ascending up where he was before?” (verse 62), in answer to their murmuring?
JT I think the Lord is not shrinking from the highest truth. We are all to think. We say that we are the Lord’s people; let us think. We have to come to that: keep to the truth at all costs. He had said wonderful things in chapter 3 but He had not spoken of ascending. He is laying the basis of the idea of ascension, which is enlarged on in chapter 20. Of course, heavenly truth is never received by the natural mind, and therefore we are bound to lose people all the time because of the disciplinary ways of God.
PHH Does that mean that the trend of the truth is more heavenly from the present time?
JT I think that the Lord is resolved to keep to the things He has ministered to us, to arrive at the distinction we are on in the truth.
Ques Does that emphasise the value of walking with Him in the way you are speaking of, but to go on to the most heavenly side?
JT That would lead us to move to the heavenly side of the administration. “Lo, I am with you”,
(Matthew 28:20): John says, “Part with me” (chapter 13:8), but in Matthew the Lord says, in effect, Stand by the truth whatever it cost and I am with you. But then “part with me” takes in the heavenly side. He has part in heaven according to this chapter; He has part with the Father, and it is our privilege to move on into that. I believe the Lord is entitled to our continuance to go in for the whole matter.
Ques Why do we have, “We have believed and known that thou art the holy one of God” (verse 69)?
JT We are not just recent comers; we can say, “We have believed and known”. I have been speaking to one quite lately, he has come in but he could not say much about what he had seen; and now we have new comers we must provide for them. But, in principle. Peter is an old brother — not that he was, but there is that principle of believing things and knowing them. Old brothers, as we were saying, know more than the young ones practically and experimentally.
CL So is our outlook to be constantly towards the economy and divine Persons in a day like this?
JT Quite so: this chapter involves inscrutability, but the Persons are there. Even though you do not understand Deity, you are in proximity to it.
CL Is there a danger with us of having our thoughts on a lower level than on the great Persons of the economy?
JT Quite so. Peter’s answer is the point for us. “Will ye also go away?” This is to the twelve. Notice, the twelve are administrative, viewed in that light. The truth must go on. One knows one thing and one another; perhaps we do not all know enough, or each as much as another, but the truth is to be before us as introduced here. The Lord had in His mind that the truth has to be administered. It is a long chapter full of holy truth; but it is to be [p. 316] administered, brought to the brethren, and the gifts ought to do that. As in Ephesians 4, the gifts are brought in so that the truth might be brought to the brethren: as the apostle says: “Until we all arrive at the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, at the full-grown man” (verse 13). The gifts are to do that. So the Lord says: “Will ye also go away?” The “ye” is emphatic. Peter replies: “Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast words of life eternal; and we have believed and known that thou art the holy one of God”. Then the Lord says: “Have not I chosen you the twelve? and of you one is a devil” (verse 70). An evil thing among the administrators; one capable of such treachery. Hence, all the struggle and conflict we have had, and we shall have. Not that we would be prognosticators of evil; but, “Have not I chosen you the twelve? and of you one is a devil. Now he spoke of Judas the son of Simon, Iscariote, for he it was who should deliver him up, being one of the twelve” (verses 70, 71). He is not let go, nor are the twelve let go. He had been allowed to be there. Why are things that are not true allowed amongst us? We have the Bible, and the Spirit; why cannot they be exposed? Judas was allowed to be with the twelve: that is a solemn matter.