BROOKLYN, N.Y., NOVEMBER 10TH, 1909
BROOKLYN, N.Y., NOVEMBER 10TH, 1909
Beloved Brother, — Yours of October 6th was duly received, and I was glad to get it. It has remained unanswered longer than I anticipated, but this is for want of time. I quite go [p. 74] with your remarks as to John 14, etc. That section necessarily contemplates the Lord’s death, resurrection and ascension. It is of great importance to note that ascension is involved. As ascended to the Father He sends the Spirit, and He speaks of coming to the disciples Himself after speaking of the coming of the Spirit (verses 16, 17). It is clear from this that chapter 20 is not the fulfilment of verse 18. Chapters 13 and 14 contemplate the assembly here in the absence of Christ and the latter sets forth resources which should be available; of course, the existence of the assembly as inaugurated at Pentecost (of which John 20 is pattern) is supposed. I do not think the presence of the Spirit changes the orphan state. After speaking of the coming of the Holy Spirit, the Lord says, “I will not leave you orphans, I am coming to you”. You would not like to detract from the blessedness of the presence of the Comforter, but still we have to pay attention to the wording of Scripture. The Spirit is truly a Comforter, but He produces affection for Christ in our hearts, so that we look for the Lord to come, feeling His absence. “I am coming to you” sets forth the great privilege vouchsafed to us pending His appearing.
As to the “Shekinah”, I would say that it refers to the presence of God here by the Spirit.
As to John 14: 21 - 23, I believe the Lord there has the breakdown in view, and therefore His words have special reference to our own times. Faithfulness secures for the individual the privilege enjoyed by the whole company at the outset. Where this favour is enjoyed is a question. “To him” and “with him” (verse 23) refer, I daresay, to his location ecclesiastically, so to speak. I think a careful comparison of 2 Timothy helps as to the bearing of the passage, “Open the door” (Revelation 3: 20) helps. This involves that the individual accords to the Lord His place. “He with me” involves the church. On the whole, I feel that John 14: 23 contemplates, in principle at least, the assembly.
Referring to John 13, I think the point in it is the example set by the Lord. He would be away, and saints should serve each other in His absence as He had served them when present. The chapter shows what the disciples should be to each other in His absence — hence the new commandment. Chapter 14 is what He would be for them on high. I am unable to see that the Lord’s supper is intended for feet washing, for the latter,
[p. 75] as I say, is, I believe, our service now; although the Lord does it.
John 6, as you say, refers to the individual — what he must eat so as to live; in chapter 14 the company lives because Christ lives. This involves association with Him in resurrection.
In speaking of the regulation for the tabernacle not extending beyond the brazen serpent, I had in mind the law given at Sinai. This had man in the flesh in view, and he was terminated, typically, in the brazen serpent. Then we get another generation (typically, the people of purpose), and to them another law is given; Deuteronomy 1.
In saying that the world to come will be testimony (Toronto notes) I think I was right. It will not be moral, as it is now, of course, but actual display; but in it God will “show” (this means testimony — in that day the faithful and true Witness shall be seen) every thought of His established in Christ.
Remembrance is of One who is absent, not of One who is present. The word is “call to mind;” this would have no force if the Lord were present.
It will not do to distinguish the Supper from the breaking of bread. They are identical. A person who participates in the breaking of bread participates in the Supper. The Supper does not refer to heavenly privilege (Canaan) but to the wilderness position. It is truly a supper in a spiritual sense, but outwardly it is a testimony now. “As often as ye eat ... ye do show the Lord’s death till He come”. The spiritual thought cannot be separated from the symbols.
To say that the Lord is at the head of the table is confusion. If He was there He would break the bread, as He did when He instituted the Supper; but having broken it He said to the disciples, “This is for a remembrance of me”. Hence the apostle says, “The cup which we bless ... the bread which we break”.
To say that the assembly is neither in heaven nor earth is simply untrue and leads to mysticism. “The assembly of God which is in Corinth”. Corinth was somewhere on the earth. It is true that by the Spirit we may be enabled to abstract ourselves from our terrestrial condition, and thus enjoy partnership with Christ as risen with Him. This is our great privilege. The fact remains that the assembly is regarded in Scripture as on earth till the Lord comes. It is well to press [p. 76] the spiritual and heavenly side of the assembly, but we must remember that it is composed of persons (it is not abstract) who are actually here on earth. Besides, we should not make statements which contradict Scripture.
Affectionately yours in Christ,
James Taylor.