SPIRITUAL UNITY IN THE MINISTRY OF JOHN (6)
SPIRITUAL UNITY IN THE MINISTRY OF JOHN (6)
SMcC The brethren will readily see how in this chapter spiritual unity as seen in the ministry of John comes before us in the most dignified and refined kind of way. We are now in the presence of one divine Person speaking to another; one divine Person in the condition of manhood, speaking to One who is unseen, and yet in another way, has been seen in Himself, in the Lord Jesus, the Son. In the previous chapters the Lord Jesus has been speaking to the disciples, going over the truth with the disciples, but now He is speaking to the Father with His eyes lifted up to heaven, and the subject of the speaking is very full and rich, and into it comes the thought of the unity or the oneness that we have been considering. The Lord is speaking to the Father about the apostles, and about us who come in as believing on their word, and about the assembly. So that the assembly appears as in the divine mind in this section as the most wonderful vessel in the universe of God, for it would anticipate that. Its capacity, its formation, its intelligence, will for ever be unique through all eternity. The epistles of Paul to the Colossians and the Ephesians develop it in its fulness and greatness, and it all has in mind, I suppose, specially what the assembly is as the vessel of praise. Ephesians 3 and Hebrews 2 refer to the assembly in that particular greatness and richness in which it is viewed as the vessel of praise, the vessel of glory. I thought perhaps we might think a little of the holy agreement, and arrangement in which the Persons that are before us here are viewed, in the unjealous relations of love, the subject being the saints. It is a wonderful thing that God has come into this arrangement where we have the three holy Persons in it, the Father, and the Son and the Spirit, all having in mind the great divine end in relation to men, for their own pleasure and glory; and we, not only as coming into it, but bound up with the holy Persons in it, for we are to be one as they are one.
PL How true the Lord is to the position He has taken in manhood, that He should ask the Father to glorify Him.
SMcC It is very affecting to take account of that, the dependent position in which He is viewed in a gospel, and environment in the gospel, where the greatness of His Person is stressed. It is very interesting that in this great chapter, where as has often been referred to the Minister of the sanctuary comes before us in the Lord Jesus, the great subject matter that is unfolded should begin with eternal life and end with sonship, eternal life and sonship being the greatest blessings that God has in mind for men. It begins with eternal life and it ends with sonship. These thoughts expressed in the Lord’s words stress the heavenly and spiritual character of the order of things that we have part in with Himself.
WH Why did He say in verse 1, “Glorify thy Son”, speaking in the third person, and then in verse 5, He says “glorify me”?
SMcC The first verse involves the holy arrangement to which we have been referring in the economy in which the Persons in wondrous holy agreement are viewed, as to the completing of matters and the working out of Their great thoughts. The fifth verse takes us beyond that arrangement; it takes us back, for it views the Lord as having His place in Deity, outside of that arrangement.
ALRT Would it be right to say that He has that place still as man, or is that going too far?
SMcC When you say, ‘He has that place still as man’, what do you mean?
ALRT You said that He has this place in Deity. Has He this place as man?
SMcC Well, in all things we need to be governed by the scripture, and especially in speaking about these things. Verse 5 says, “and now glorify me, thou Father, along with thyself, with the glory which I had along with thee before the world was”. The Lord asks as man, to be glorified with the glory that He had along with the Father before the world was. So it would be right to say that He has returned to that as man. Abstractly, of course, He never left it.
AJG Is this verse brought in in our hearing so that while partaking in the greatest privilege in association with Christ, we should have definitely in our souls, the light of His personal glory in Deity, and thus His pre-eminence?
SMcC I think that is just the thought. We should remember that mystery attaches to that, for it is dealing with what is infinite and we are finite. If Deity comes within our range in Christ, to be known by us insofar as God can be known by the creature with finite mind and understanding, we have to see how dependent we are on the Spirit. We are to remember that we are in the presence of mystery, that we cannot penetrate, or enter into, or explain.
AEM There is no change in the Person.
SMcC That is an important thing always to keep in mind. Whether we take account of Him in Deity, or whether we take account of Him as Man before us, the Person is the same, unchanged and unchangeable.
GRC So that verse 5 is the glory of Deity, it is not a question of Deity itself, which ever attached to the Lord, even when here, in manhood.
SMcC So that we, with the help of the Spirit as considering it, would revert in our thoughts to Philippians 2: 6, “who, subsisting in the form of God, did not esteem it an object of rapine to be on an equality with God; but emptied himself, taking a bondman’s form”. It brings before our souls the greatness of this Person. Whatever change there would be, it would be in what was external.
GRC So that in this gospel, do we not see what is meant by the fact that He did not esteem it an object of rapine to be on an equality with God? He says, “before Abraham was I am”, and He makes other statements which His enemies knew meant that He was equal with God. Is that so?
SMcC Just so. And in this chapter, while His co-equality with the Father is before us, yet He maintains the dependent position, which He is in, in asking of the Father certain things.
HV How far does this verse take us, “Thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world”? It says in Hebrews 1: 2, “by whom also he made the worlds”.
SMcC Well, it takes us as far as we can go, indeed it takes us beyond where we can go. The expression in verse 24 “thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world” is to impress our minds and our hearts that between the holy Persons in that place, there was love; not that we can say much about it, or that we know much about it. It is undisclosed, except that the love that was there has come into the relative position. But there was love between the Persons there, just as there is love between the Persons in the economy.
GRC As to the Deity of the Lord Jesus, it says in Colossians 1: 19, as to the time when He was here on earth, that “in him all the fulness (of the Godhead) was pleased to dwell”. As to His present position in verse 9 of chapter 2, it says that it dwells in Him bodily. All the fulness was dwelling in Him, was it not? Men could not discern that, but it was there.
SMcC These two verses in Colossians are very interesting, and help as to what we are referring to in connection with the holy arrangement, where the Persons are seen in relation to one another. In chapter 1, we get the expression “all the fulness of the Godhead”, or “all the fulness” it might read, “was pleased to dwell, and by him to reconcile all things to itself”. You do not get that in chapter 2. You do not get “was pleased”, neither do you get the mediatorial thought immediately. Chapter 2 does not emphasise the mediatorial thought; it is a question of the greatness of Christ personally, “For in him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily”, but the word ‘pleased’, in chapter 1, brings in this matter of the holy arrangement, where the Persons are viewed in relation to one another, and one Person is viewed as in connection with the work of reconciliation, “by him to reconcile all things to itself”. It emphasises the relations in love between the Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Spirit in this holy arrangement. Mr. Darby uses the unusual word ‘covenant’ in “Notes and Comments”; not in the sense of the old covenant or the new covenant, but just in the sense of the understood arrangement between the Persons.
HW You spoke of the Lord asking to be glorified with the glory which He had before the world was. Would you let us know please what you have in your mind in regard to that?
SMcC The allusion is to the external form. Philippians 2 shows a change as to the external form, not as to essential glory exactly. Christ Jesus emptied himself taking a bondman’s form.
CMM Would you confirm that Scripture does not say that He left the form of God?
SMcC Scripture never says that, nor does it say that of the Spirit. Nor would it be right for us to say that of either the Lord or the Spirit.
CK Would you say a word as to verses 4 and 5 being reciprocal, “I have glorified thee on the earth”, and then following that, “and now glorify me, thou Father”?
SMcC That is one of the things that is in mind that we should be affected by, for all the arrangement in the relations that are before us in these Persons are to affect us. So that there is mutuality with us, and reciprocity of feeling and affection, in regard to matters as they work out in the economy.
GRC As to verse 5, it is a question of the glory of Deity here, is it not? It is not Deity itself, which the Lord never left, of course; it is impossible to think of such a thing, but it is the glory of it.
SMcC That is to be emphasised. It is not a question of change as to His Person; it is the external form as J.T. pointed out.
AJG You have in mind in this chapter, from what you said at the outset, the very exalted character of unity that is in mind for the saints. Is that in view of their position here in testimony, the Lord Himself having been here in testimony?
SMcC I think so. And as the chapter works through to the end, it also has in mind the service of God, in the position that the Lord anticipates, “I in them”. Both sides, do not you think, would thus be in mind? The matter of eternal life, as it appears here, is therefore very important. We have just heard that our brother has been taken to the hospital, and we have just heard from other parts of the world about death coming in; these are very real and practical matters, and they affect our spirits. So that we are to see the bearing that eternal life has in this exalted setting, so that our spirits should be set free and lifted above the pressure of death, while feeling it. Would you go with that?
AJG Yes, I would. Would you think that eternal life known and enjoyed is a great background to, and support for, the position in testimony, and also is essential if the service of God is to be entered upon in fulness?
SMcC I would think so. I suppose, Mr. M., in regard to what you have come through, you would say that eternal life has had a great place in helping you to keep above the infirmity?
AEM Yes.
SMcC It is to help us all, so that we are not overburdened with what keeps men under, in the world around us; the world to come, the millennium, is contemplated anticipatively in the opening verses.
JOTD Has the use of the word ‘flesh’ any connection with what you are saying? It is not man, nor men exactly, but “all flesh”.
SMcC I think what is in mind in the chapter is men, not angels. That is why flesh is used; men are in mind, and not angels. The angels would like to look into these wonderful things, for man is God’s great thought in the final working out of things. So that flesh would bear on men, and in the world to come you have men in conditions where sin has operated, but God shows His triumph, under the headship of Christ, in that that is subordinated through His power.
PL So that Christ being “the head of every man” (1 Corinthians 11: 3), would link on with this, would it not?
SMcC It would. “As thou hast given him authority over all flesh” would allude to the Lord’s place in headship, in that sense.
APCL And would the fact of the life eternal being presented as the matter immediately before Him in relation to His being glorified show what a place it had in His mind in regard of these persons that are before Him?
SMcC I think it is important to see that. Eternal life in that sense is not an afterthought; it is a primary thought with God, but it is a primary thought, as we have been taught, that God has made relative. Sonship was a primary thought, but it was never, as it were, altered in relation to relative conditions. Eternal life was in divine purpose for men, but, when sin came in, God moved eternal life into the relative position to meet the need that arose in the human heart. So that it is a primary thought now made relative to the need in men occasioned by sin.
JTS In relation to the Lord having authority over all flesh, it says, in the closing chapter of Isaiah, “it shall come to pass from new moon to new moon, and from sabbath to sabbath, all flesh shall come to worship before me, saith Jehovah”. Will that be the outcome of the Lord’s authority over all flesh?
SMcC No doubt. The world to come will be a wonderful realm of things, but it is not so great as the present realm of things that we are in in the assembly; it is not so great as the present time. So that the Lord, while He opens with that, channels our thoughts into the exclusiveness of the present time, “that as to all that thou hast given to him, he should give them life eternal”, and He works down to “the men whom thou gavest me out of the world”.
TJG In verse 2 is “all flesh” the widest possible thought, and is the expression “that as to all”, including only the saints of God? I am asking, or is there a difference between “all flesh” and “all that thou hast given me”?
SMcC I think so. I think there is a wide general view as to the authority over all flesh, and then there is a specific view “as to all that thou hast given to him”. We are to notice these two parallel lines of thought that run all the way through John’s gospel, from the first chapter to the end; there is the great general thought, and then the specific thought in which certain ones are specially in mind.
JSE Could I ask a further question about this matter of flesh, for I believe we all need help about it? Does the inclusive term “all flesh”, as bearing upon the world to come, include the restoration of normal relationships between the animals according to Isaiah 11, and when that is all set out, does God resort to His fullest thoughts in dwelling with men, without allusion to any other kind of creature?
SMcC I think men are His primary thought, and chiefly in mind; and the lower creation incidentally is affected in relation to man who is the centre of creation, as Psalm 8 would show. All creation is made to revolve around the central figure in it, which is man, “What is man, that thou art mindful of him?”
MPS Would you therefore say something please about verse 3, and the expression “Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent”, in particular?
SMcC We had it in this very hall, from this very part, the thought that the true God delivers us from idolatry, and Jesus Christ, the true Man, delivers us from lawlessness; we have got the true pattern of manhood in Jesus Christ. “Other foundation can no man lay besides that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ”, 1 Corinthians 3: 11.
JPH In verse 6, to which you referred; is the speaking in a similar strain to what the Spirit gave through Paul in Ephesians 1: 4, “according as he has chosen us in him before the world’s foundation, that we should be holy and blameless before him in love” - the men that were the Father’s and were given to the Son?
SMcC Yes, and eternal life is one of the blessings that we are blessed with in Christ Jesus in the heavenlies. We have been blessed “with every spiritual blessing in the heavenlies in Christ” and eternal life is one of them, sonship is another. These are great and wondrous thoughts involving man.
JPH I was referring to the end of verse 6 primarily, “They were thine, and thou gavest them me, and they have kept thy word”.
SMcC Yes, they belonged to the Father, in counsel, as we might say. But it is important to see that the Father does not give them away, just as in John 3 in regard to the things, when it says “the Father loves the Son, and has given all things (to be) in his hand”. That does not mean that the Father has given them away, that they are not the Father’s any more. The point is the arrangement, and the Lord Jesus as the great Administrator in it. The great Operator in it.
HFR Does the supremacy of the Father shine out in these expressions, “as to all that thou hast given to him, he should give them life eternal”? And then “the men whom thou gavest me out of the world”. The Lord does not take the place of selecting Himself, it is those that the Father has given to Him.
SMcC I think it is very important that we should see, in relation to that, the great place that the Father has, the Father and His name. We should see too how the Lord, on this upward way would fill our minds with thoughts of the Father’s greatness and of the Father’s glory, for the name “Father” is the crowning feature in our dispensation. It is the name by which God is specifically known, in contrast to “Elohim”, or “Almighty”, or “Jehovah”. Father is the name by which He is specifically known in this dispensation and it represents the crown of the dispensation, in that sense.
PL All to enrich the service of God with these spiritual feelings seen in Christ?
SMcC Just so. All this is intended to bring about richness in our souls, so that we are not just using mere terms, in assembly service, in the service of God, but we are enriched in the knowledge of the Father.
HW Could we view the statement made in John 1 as underlying all this that we are speaking of, “Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” - the restoring of the relations between God and His creature in eternal life?
SMcC That is very interesting, because, as we know, that looks on to the world to come, when God by His power, through the Lamb, will deal with what has entered into the ordered system in which His pleasure was once.
HW I thought it would help us in our souls to view that as the basis on which God is securing all these great thoughts.
SMcC Yes, it would.
GRC Is that implied in verse 4, “I have glorified thee on the earth, I have completed the work which thou gavest me that I should do it”? Did not that work that He completed culminate in the offering of Himself, as it were, upon the altar of burnt-offering?
SMcC Exactly. In the very scene where sin had come in, and evil had raised its head, the Lord says “I have glorified thee”. We have the emphatic ‘I’, and the emphatic ‘thee’. “I have glorified thee on the earth, I have completed the work which thou gavest me that I should do it”.
AH Would it be right to think that what the Lord now says in verse 5 has in mind what Paul is speaking of in Ephesians 4: 10, where He goes beyond creation in order that He might fill all things?
SMcC That would involve His place in that sense beyond the created realm. We cannot enter there; He can enter it because of who He is, and what He is.
RGB Is the choiceness and greatness of the assembly in mind in the reference to the men, that they are capable of having the Father’s name manifested to them, and then they are capable of keeping the Father’s word?
SMcC I think so. I think the whole chapter in that sense would bring into our minds the greatness of the assembly, as the vessel that is peculiarly in the divine mind at the present time. The assembly is divinely capacitated and divinely formed to take in these communications, to receive them, as it says, “they have received them”, alluding to the apostles.
PHH You said earlier the assembly is to be the vessel of capacity and intelligence. Would you say a little here about the Father, and God? I would judge that the saints have good intelligence as to that, but there is still some hesitation in some places. I wondered if we could ask you for a minute or two on that. Does it enter into the intelligence of the assembly, as the vessel of praise, that it knows the different settings of these two names?
SMcC When you referred to hesitation, would you say a bit more about what you mean.
PHH It has come under my notice, for instance, that some in the service of God are very free to speak to God as Father, and are full and happy in it, but when it comes to what the Lord speaks of later, in John 20, “my God and your God”, the fulness of what is contained in that does not seem to be such a happy portion. So that with some, at any rate, while the truth is not opposed, it is not voiced.
SMcC I would feel for myself that if that marked one, it was because one did not know the Father. I do not think that any person, any believer that knows God in the parental relation, as the Lord has in mind that believers should know Him, would have any difficulty about God in the general position, involving His supremacy, and involving what He is, known as Father, Son and Spirit. I think perhaps you would say something yourself, but the whole burden of the Lord’s ministry here is bearing on the knowledge of the Father, and if that knowledge has been rightly received and we are rightly formed in relation to it, we shall not have much difficulty in traversing the path with Him from “my Father and your Father” to “my God and your God”.
PHH Yes, I fully follow that, and agree with it. Even here in the early verses, verse 3, for instance, the Lord is speaking to the Father, and says “Father”, but He also says “that they should know thee, the only true God”. I understand what you mentioned earlier that the true God delivers us from idolatry, but the expression “the only true God” must contain a great deal more in itself, would you say?
SMcC Abstractly it would. But here, of course, it is the Father.
PHH Yes, it refers to the Father here; I am clear about that.
SMcC Wherever you get the word ‘God’, there is a fulness in it that we could never detract from. But then, Scripture does differentiate and distinguish between God and Christ at times; so that we would have to go by the Scriptures, and speak as Scripture speaks. The word ‘God’ never loses its fulness, but yet distinctions are maintained in Scripture, and there are certain passages which could be quoted, where God and Christ are viewed as distinct.
GRC But I suppose the term “the only true God” here is in contrast to “false gods”. It is not intended to exclude the Son and the Spirit; it is not exclusive in that sense.
SMcC No reference to God excludes either the Son or the Spirit or the Father abstractly. Nowhere in Scripture does any reference to God, in that sense, exclude any of the Persons abstractly. There must always be in our minds, even in speaking to one Person as God, the light as to all three.
PHH So that on the lines on which we are going now, in John, you are never very far away from the Trinity, and would the expression used in John 20, “my Father, and your Father”, detain us,
and so to speak bathe us, in the sense of the gracious name that God has taken on in order that we might be filled with the thoughts, and the grace of the Father?
SMcC Yes. And you I am sure would say that we cannot put the Trinity into the name Father. There is only one Person involved in that name. So that we have to be governed by Scripture and the context in which names and appellations appear.
PHH By saying not far away from the Trinity, I meant that we are in the presence of the Son, He is speaking, and we are in the presence of the Spirit, by whose power we reach that position, and we are before the Father Himself. Does not that help us on?
SMcC So that we are always reminded of the mystery that we are in the presence of, and of what we cannot explain or define. While Persons come on to our view concretely, in the Father, the Son and the Spirit, sometimes together, sometimes singly, there is always a mystery surrounding the position, that we just cannot fathom or explain.
APCL You were saying that the knowledge of the Father is what would enable us to proceed restfully to God; when the apostle is asking the Father to strengthen the saints in Ephesians 3, he speaks about “according to the riches of his glory”. Is that so that their affections might be filled with the riches of the Father’s glory in view of their arriving at the full thought suggested in being filled even to all the fulness of God?
SMcC I would think so, and this section of John’s gospel is to impress us with some of the riches of the Father’s glory.
APCL I was thinking that. I am very thankful for what you say as to that particular matter, because the Father’s place is a critical thing, is it not, as in the economy?
SMcC So that there would be great care in assembly service that the Father’s portion should not be diminished, and that the sweetness of the Father’s name should not be lost sight of as giving character to the whole dispensation. It is the Father’s name that gives character to the dispensation.
JTJr I was thinking of what Mr. H. was referring to as to the Trinity. I thought that John’s ministry, really in regard to the recovery of the truth, shows how we arrive at Paul, and that is the question of how we arrive at the Father, because we have the Father here in this chapter. I think it would lead therefore to what Paul says, that it is through Christ and by the Spirit that we have access to the Father.
PHH That was what was in my mind in speaking about the Trinity. Does not that lead us into a position of fulness, you might say? And do we need therefore, to remain, detained in that position, as Mr. McC, has just said, and not to move too quickly or on too small a scale, through the portion which is for the Father.
JTJr That is what I thought. Therefore the arriving at Paul through John really leads to what Paul says in Ephesians 2, as to the moral side; that is, the blood in Ephesians 2 precedes the thought of access. I think the moral side is involved in the statement here, the Father is the only true God.
SMcC And would you say that we cannot rightly approach the side of what is spiritual, and what is linked with purpose, without the moral side?
JTJr So we are brought nigh by the blood of Christ in Ephesians 2, but access is by the Spirit, it is through Christ and by the Spirit. That I think is the point that should be understood more in the assembly, in the Lord’s supper and what follows the Lord’s supper.
SMcC You mean the great value of the Spirit in regard to the access?
JTJr Quite so. The blood is that we are brought nigh; but it does not say access there, the access is by the Spirit. Therefore it is a question of the state of soul really, the state of the saints that is in mind in arriving at the Father.
JSE Have you in mind. Mr. T., that being brought nigh is the divine side of the matter, but “through him we have both access by one Spirit to the Father”, is what we take advantage of for the enjoyment of relationship?
JTJr I would think so. It is therefore a question of experience in what we are saying, because the question of unity comes in here, and in what we have mentioned already, as to receiving the words in verse 8, “for the words which thou hast given me I have given them, and they have received them”. It involves really the words affecting the intelligence of the saints in the assembly.
SMcC The emphasis on the Spirit as the power for access as bearing on our state is very important, because we have got abundance in the ministry in regard to terms that can express our thoughts, but what the Lord seems to be getting at all the time is our state, in relation to the spiritual side of the worship of God.
AW Is there a reference to the Spirit in “these things Jesus spoke” in that verse, because Jesus spoke of the Spirit?
SMcC That is very good.
ECL Is there a way in which the Father serves us in this matter? I am thinking of the way the Lord seems to hand over the men to the Father, whom He had kept “in thy name”. Later on, too, in verses 16 and 17 and also in Ephesians 3, being strengthened by the Father’s spirit. Do we have the Father’s service in helping us to the further side of the worship of God?
SMcC I think so. I think the Lord here is impregnating their minds and souls with the thought of the Father, and the Father’s name, and I think the Spirit now would do so. The Lord has gone on high, He is still, of course, the Minister of the sanctuary, but the Spirit augments the whole matter of the praise, and He would keep the Father, the Father’s renown, the Father’s name before us. I think what Mr. W. has referred to in that sense is very interesting, at least I have not noticed it before, if we could just refer to it for a moment. In verse 1 it says “These things”, well, what is that? that Jesus spoke. It refers to what has gone before in chapters 13 to 16, and the whole subject in this section is the access, “I come to thee”. Therefore what Mr. W. points to is important, “These things Jesus spoke” would have a reference to what the Lord has said in regard to the Spirit.
JSE Would “these things” include His allusions to the Father, in His words to His own?
SMcC I think they do. All the way through, they involve the Father, they involve the Spirit, they involve Himself, they involve the truth. But the Spirit has a peculiar part in what the Lord is stressing in the truth running alongside of the knowledge of the Father.
JMcK As helping us into the fulness and gain of these relationships.
JTJr “These things” in verse 1 of chapter 17 allude to chapter 17, do they not? I think the “these things” of chapter 16 would point to what Mr. W. says. But I submit that, “These things Jesus spoke, and lifted up his eyes to heaven and said”, I think refers to what He was going to say. Is not that so?
SMcC I had not understood it in that light. I thought it referred to what had gone before.
JTJr Maybe it does, but I had never looked at it in that way.
SMcC It says, “These things Jesus spoke, and lifted up his eyes to heaven”. Would that not indicate that the lifting up of His eyes to heaven was after He had spoken?
JTJr I thought it was a new subject in this chapter, it was what He was proceeding into, but the thing is right in any case, that is, the “these things” in chapter 16 would include the Spirit. He begins, chapter 16, “These things I have spoken unto you”.
SMcC My understanding of it is that “These things Jesus spoke”, refers to the previous chapters, and then “and lifted up his eyes to heaven and said, Father, the hour is come” brings us into John 17.
GRC Could we have another word as to Ephesians? Chapter 2 has been quoted, as to access to the Father, but could we have a word as to chapter 3, where the apostle says “in whom we have boldness and access in confidence by the faith of him”, verse 12? Would it be right to think that the access of chapter 2 of Ephesians would link with what is said in John 13, as to the Lord departing out of this world to the Father, and chapter 3, would be more “he came out from God and was going to God”? I believe Mr. T. has made some remarks on those two chapters recently, but I was not present.
JTJr Well, I think that what we have understood in chapter 2, is that we arrive at the Father through Christ and by one Spirit. But in Ephesians 3 we are strengthened by the Father’s Spirit; it is the Father’s Spirit, the thought is carried forward in the Father. That is what I understand.
GRC So that you mean there we arrive at the fulness of God. The Father helps us in that.
JTJr By the Father’s Spirit, it is the Spirit in that connection, that is the Father’s Spirit.
SMcC We get the thought of access, too, in Ephesians 3. It is very remarkable how it comes in there in verse 11, “according to the purpose of the ages, which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord,
in whom we have boldness and access in confidence by the faith of him”. That is the access is linked with the faith side in chapter 3, whereas it is linked with the Spirit in chapter 2.
GRC And so the Father would strengthen us by His Spirit that Christ might dwell in our hearts by faith. Does not that suggest that the whole realm is now before us, in connection with the fulness of God?
SMcC And is it not to stress that we are still in the faith state; we have not reached the thing in actuality? Chapter 2 bears on our state in our relations with one another. The work of reconciliation in chapter 2 involves unity of affection between Jew and Gentile, and between the brethren, affecting the state of the brethren in their relations with one another. But when you come to chapter 3, it is the realm of God, in which the mystery of God is seen, and faith seems to be stressed. Chapter 3 bears on our state in relation to God and the realm of God.
APCL Is there a significance therefore, in connection with the access, that in chapter 2 it is “through him”, and in chapter 3, it is “in him”? I was thinking that man in Christ has the great scope of the position in mind, has it not? One is access to God, we might say, but in chapter 3 it is a question of the one in whom we have that access. Would that be right?
SMcC So that the “through him” is instrumentality, the “in whom” involves the status - “the assembly in Christ Jesus”.
AJG Chapter 2 is specifically to the Father, whereas chapter 3 is general, is it not, we have boldness and access?
SMcC Without referring to the Person you mean. Just so.
CJHD The prepositions ‘by’ are different in the two verses. “By one Spirit” is ‘in the power of’, and in verse 12 of chapter 3, “by the faith of him”
is ‘by means of the faith of him’. Does that help at all?
SMcC Say something more as to what you understand about it.
CJHD I thought there was something personal in the way of our access to the Father, in the power of one Spirit, the unifying effect that that would have upon us. Whereas, the expression as to faith in chapter 3: 12 is an instrumental matter, “we have boldness and access in confidence by the faith of him”. That appears to be an instrumental matter.
SMcC Yes. It is “the faith of him”. “Through him” in chapter 2 is the instrumentality in the Person in the mediatorial position. “The faith of him” brings in a characteristic thought emphasising faith.
ACPL But then, it is right to see that that access is said to be in the Person. By means of the faith indicates, as you say, that we are still in that position. But is not the access said to be in that Person?
SMcC Yes. “In whom we have boldness and access in confidence by the faith of him”.
APB Could we ask who is referred to in the “him” at the end of that verse?
SMcC I take it it is Christ Jesus our Lord, the One in whom we have the boldness and access.
JMcK Does it involve mediatorship, specially in this realm?
SMcC Well, it does. The whole realm stresses the need of it, so the Christ, the great Operator, is dwelling through faith in our hearts, in the very centre of this great realm of God.
JMcK Do you think that in a practical way in the service, it is important to be in the joy of relationship before we can expand to God in relation to the whole realm?
SMcC I think it is. We have often gone over it,
the name of Father and the relationship into which God has come in that light is to enrich our souls, and to help us on the lines of greater intimacy; so that when we come into the general position linked with God as Christ’s God, we are not overawed by the majesty of who He is, as exalted as Head above all.
GRC Is that why the word ‘boldness’ is added in Ephesians 3? With the Father there is everything attractive, there would be no thought of fear, but in Ephesians 3, it is “in whom we have boldness and access”.
SMcC That is interesting, so that eternal life and then sonship, which comes in at the end of this chapter, are to help us so that we should be without fear, without fear or pressure of death, because in the assembly we are in a deathless state of things, and then we have sonship, bringing in liberty.
JMcM Would verse 24 of chapter 17 help in this, “Father, as to those whom thou hast given me, I desire that where I am they also may be with me, that they may behold my glory”? Does that link with the faith of Him, that Man there?
SMcC I suppose that verse conveys to us the Lord’s desire that we should see His special distinctiveness and uniqueness in this realm that He speaks of, “where I am they also may be with me”. As has often been noted, we do not share in that glory; there is nothing in it that we share in, it is what is distinctive to Himself; we contemplate it.
WMcK In view of spiritual intelligence in unity and balance in the service of God, could I enquire if the Lord’s words here, stressing the Father so greatly, are to imply that the Father should have the greatest portion in the service of God? There seems to be some lack of clarity about that among us.
SMcC I should think we would have to take the scripture, and the teaching in the scripture as it appears, and where it appears, and John would, in his ministry, impress us with the thought of God in the parental relation. That is the great thought in John’s ministry, that God has come into the relationship of fatherhood; and there is a glory attaching to that that is to affect us.
ECM Is that why stress is laid on the quality of love here, in view of the radiation of those affections in the assembly?
SMcC It is to help us in that way as to the quality and the richness that enter into assembly service.
WMB Could I ask a question as to the help we may need as to the distinctive glory of the Father, in Himself, as apart from our enjoyment of relationship with Him? Do we need help and liberty as to the worship of the Father Himself?
SMcC I think John’s ministry would help us as to that, because the Lord refers to the thought of the Father Himself, and we are to think of that. It is not only what He is, in the sweetness and preciousness of the relationship in which we stand to Him and He to us, but we are to think of His personal glory, and the choiceness that is linked with it as in this gospel.
WMB I wondered if that would help in relation to Mr. H.’s question as leading us to the fullest thoughts about God.
SMcC I think it would.
PHH And would we get in the Lord’s utterances to His Father in the gospels, specially John, something which would help us greatly to speak in richness to the Father? What Mr. B. speaks of is also a matter of enquiry, I would suggest, because very often we have limited ourselves to the position of blessedness in which we, as the saints, are before the Father. But to go on to speak to the Father about Himself, and His glory, is not so readily with us.
SMcC J.T. often referred to the relationship into which God came in fatherhood. He said that He took up a relation well known in the human family, the relation of father. In the human family, there is the father, and the children; there is the sweetness of the link between the father and the children. But then there is what the father is himself, which may stand related to other things beside the children, and the father’s glory would be bound up in that personal side, I would think.
AJG Do you think the very fact that He not only has the assembly before Him, but also takes pleasure in many families, heavenly and earthly, shows what He is, what the expansiveness of His love is, and His desire to be known in that tender relationship throughout the whole universe?
SMcC Yes. So that in the sense and enjoyment in our souls of the relationship between us, we would love to think of Him as He would stand out related to other things as the “Lord of the heavens and of the earth”, and as putting His impress upon the many families.
PL The Father’s house setting forth an eternal family sphere, filled with the shining of the Father to the satisfaction of His own love.
SMcC All that would help us to see the importance of the Father. Mr. Taylor taught us that the Father not only puts His impress on this dispensation, but He puts His impress on the eternal state into which we are going. If that laid hold of our souls, we would see the magnitude of what is involved in the thought of the Father, the majesty and the greatness of what is linked with the thought of the Father.
AH Did not Mr. Darby refer to the angels being brought into it as well?
SMcC It says “the tabernacle of God is with men”, well, where are the angels? We must make room for the angels, it may include abstractly the angels, because the tabernacle of God with men is an abstract thought.
WRM Does the word ‘Father’ always refer to one Person? It says in 1 Peter 1: 17 “And if ye invoke as Father him who, without regard of persons, judges according to the work of each, pass your time of sojourn in fear”. The matter of judgment comes up in connection with the Father.
SMcC I would say that is one Person that is on our view, concretely, but abstractly, we must keep in mind that we are in a realm that involves all three Persons. In John 5 we have the word, “for neither does the Father judge any one, but has given all judgment to the Son”, and Hebrews 12 says we have come “to God, judge of all”. I would say, in verse 17 of 1 Peter, that the Father personally is in mind, as God, in that setting, in His fatherly care of us in holiness.
APCL Is not the point of that passage that it is “if ye invoke as Father”? It is a question of God being before us, but as Father, in that Person.
SMcC That is important. It is God as Father. And that helps as to Hebrews 2, which bears on the service of God. The context always helps us, that God in the parental relation is before us in Hebrews 2. The teaching of Hebrews generally bears on the majesty of God, and the greatness of that Being, but then, chapter 1 opens up with God Son-wise, God speaking Son-wise. But chapter 2 deals with God Father-wise, it is God in the parental relation, bringing many sons to glory.
WC Will you say why, when it speaks of the Father in relation to the families in Ephesians 3 and goes on to speak of His Spirit and so on strengthening, it says “that the Christ may dwell”, not that the Son may dwell? Is that leading God-ward, so to speak, the passage finishing up with the fulness of God?
SMcC I think it is in that sense, because it is the faith state, and the great Operator is still before us. We are still in the faith state, it is leading us on to the fringe of eternity, but it is still the faith state, and the Christ the great Operator by which we are reaching eternity, as it were, is in the centre of our affections.
APCL Would you be free to tell us now the final thought of unity that you have before you, in the closing part of chapter 17?
SMcC I think it is very affecting to see the way that divine Persons are bound up with One Another, and we are bound up with them, and we are bound up with one another in this holy realm of infinite love, yet we are finite in it. What can we say about it? I think it would help us to see the value of the Spirit. We have been referring to the access by the Spirit, and while the Spirit is not formally alluded to here, how could this be possible apart from the Spirit? And therefore the essential need that our state should be right.
Ques What do we understand by the expression “one in us”, near the end of verse 21?
SMcC It says “that they may be all one, as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us”. It is a perfect state of love, persons in one another in a perfect state of love. You cannot have it apart from a perfect state of love, moral issues with us must be solved and settled. It is by the Spirit of course; it is not just by thought in the mind.
PHH Does that help us to understand what you were saying about the Spirit as the binding power?
SMcC We heard about that before the Lord took His beloved servant, and it always affected one. We would like to have heard more about it, but J.T. referred to this section, and how divine Persons are bound up with One Another, in the holy arrangement linked with the economy, and how the saints are bound up with Them in such holy nearness and intimacy. The thing is profound, and it brings out the distinctness and uniqueness of the assembly’s capacity and formation, that she is so near to the Deity, as contemplated in the arrangement here.
AWGT Does the latter part of verse 21 indicate that that is in view of the day of display?
SMcC Yes, the millennial world would be in mind there. But Mr. T., you remember your father making the reference, in that reading in Nostrand Avenue, to the remarkable way in which divine Persons were bound up together in the economy, and the way the saints were bound up together.
JTJr Quite so. So it gives us an experience as together; that is the experiences together in these meetings should have that result, so that we have the Father, and the Son, and we are with Them in it.
SMcC Do you not think the way we are bound up together is a good note to finish with? By the Spirit is a very real living and practical matter, would you say?
JTJr It is really the proof of things, that we experience in these meetings, that God is here, that is that the Father and the Son, and we - the men - are bound up with them by the Spirit.