THE CROSS AND THE SPIRIT
THE CROSS AND THE SPIRIT
FER I have an idea that this is the beginning of the second part of Numbers.
WTPW What do you call the first part?
FER The first twenty chapters.
WTPW Could you give a broad general outline?
FER They give in type the responsible side of the christian, and after the death of the high priest another chapter begins. You cannot understand chapter 21 unless you see that it comes in after the death of the high priest. The death of the high priest terminates one chapter of christian experience, and after his death another chapter is opened.
FHB Why is it so? Is it necessary to bring in another order?
FER The death of the high priest changes the platform. It is the end of priesthood in one sense.
GE What is the end of priesthood? I do not quite understand.
FER That when a christian has done with the responsible side of his course down here, it is the end of priesthood; we do not need it any more as connected with infirmities. That part of our christian course will be over, and we shall no longer want the help of the high priest in that sense. It will come to an end in regard to us. And this is true now insofar as our souls enter on the ground of divine purpose. The priest is known in another light.
FHB Do you mean we need His priesthood as minister of the sanctuary, in connection with purpose?
FER Yes, that is another thing.
MG And I suppose we are only ready for that as we have part with Him here, as we get started here.
FER The second part of Numbers is in [p. 228] the history of the christian contemporaneous with the first part. We do not go through Numbers in the way that Israel went through the wilderness.
WTPW You will have to explain that a little bit.
FER The reason is simple; properly speaking every christian begins with the cross and the Spirit, of which we have the type in Numbers 21. He begins his christian course with the cross, and goes through in the power of the Spirit.
FHB And the latter connects him with a state of things outside of his responsible life.
FER The effect of the dealings of God in the first part of Numbers was to bring to light the people that were to inherit the land. This helps us to understand the two numberings. The first, the responsible people brought out of Egypt, and the second, the elect people who are going to inherit. The link between the two was Caleb and Joshua. Faith was the link.
FHB By their going on contemporaneously you mean that though we are a responsible people going through the wilderness, we are connected with a new order of things, outside of things here.
FER Yes, for we begin with the cross and the Spirit of life in Christ.
AP When you say this, you mean that is in the history of our souls?
FER Yes, I think you must admit that both the Galatians and Corinthians had begun so. Thus the apostle speaks to the Galatians, “Before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you”, Galatians 3:1. And in the beginning of the epistle to the Corinthians it had been the same — the preaching of the cross. Then he says to the Galatians, “Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?”, Galatians 3:2. He had presented the testimony of the cross, and upon that the Spirit had been received by them.
FC [p. 229] Is the cross the paschal lamb?
FER I think the cross is the complete setting aside of man, according to the type of the brazen serpent.
FHB But many converted persons are not so far on as that in the history of their souls, and therefore I suppose you could not say they had yet made a start in christianity till they come to the cross and to the Spirit.
WTPW You will have to explain that, please — because they had been christians some time according to that remark.
FHB I do not say they are not converted persons, but a christian is one who is in the Spirit, a spiritual man.
ED Would you not say Romans 8:9 was the starting point of a christian?
FER The starting point as to the christian state is the old man crucified. That answers to the brazen serpent. “God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh”, Romans 8:3.
WB Have you to travel through chapter 6 before you touch chapter 8 9?
FER I think Romans is very much like Numbers. Chapters 1 to 7 take up one side, and chapter 8 takes up another side. The experience which is the result of being in the Spirit, runs concurrently with what we get from chapter 3 to chapter 7. Chapter 3 to chapter 7 goes pretty much with the first part of Numbers, and chapter 8 with the second part, and I think it is not difficult to prove this.
WTPW Perhaps you will just give us an outline of it.
FER In the first part of Numbers the people are taken account of in connection with their responsibility, in view of the wilderness. What is prominent is the means by which God conducts the people and sustains them in their responsibility; and two great points that come out are the water of purification and the priesthood.
[p. 230] That is what you get also in Romans. In the early part, chapters 3, 4 and 5, the christian is in divine light, but in his pathway he is in responsibility. In chapter 6 we get what in a sense answers to the water of purification, and in chapter 7 we get the support and refreshment of the priesthood, so that we bring forth fruit to God.
FHB That is another husband?
FER Yes. Then chapter 8 takes up another side which runs contemporaneously with the previous part, and that is the state of the christian as in the Spirit; that is the proper christian state. Not exactly the light of the christian’s path, and how to walk in that, but the state.
WTPW I think you must distinguish between the state of a christian and the christian state.
FHB You mean between the practical state of a christian and the christian state?
WTPW The state of a christian is the positive actual state before God.
FER I think that there is nothing true of him before God as to state, but what is effectuated in him.
WB Are there not christians in Christ irrespective of whether they enter experimentally into it or not?
FER I think that a christian is in Christ as he is formed in Christ.
FHB I thought Scripture used the term “In the Spirit” in an abstract way.
MG It is not in an abstract way in Romans 8. In verse 2 the apostle changes to the experimental; it is what is true in your soul. “For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death” Romans 8:2.
Ques “There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus” (Romans 8:1), what of that?
FER There the statement is abstract — but as to what comes out in the next verse, “For the law of the Spirit of life ..”. Romans 8:2 that is [p. 231] undoubtedly experimental.
FHB And no longer abstract but individual.
Thus verse 1 would be really the christian in Christ.
Full deliverance effected in the power of the Holy Spirit.
ED Verse 1, if I understand rightly, is reaching one’s place in Christ through deliverance?
FER I think it is actually effectuated. The moment the christian is formed in the divine nature, he can be spoken of as in Christ. Deliverance never really goes beyond the degree in which a christian is partaker of the divine nature.
MG Is not that true in the beginning of Romans 8?
FER Yes. Those who are in that state.
WB When may a person be said to be in Christ?
FER The moment there is the first breath of life in Christ.
FHB It depends upon his having received the Spirit.
FER Yes; he has received the Spirit and not only so, but the Spirit has taken effect in him. Christ is in him. The moment Christ is formed in you you are in Christ.
ED Would being “in the Spirit” go as far as that? Does being in the Spirit necessitate state?
FER Yes. I think so.
MG But would there not be a difference between the Spirit being in me, and my being in the Spirit?
FER One is dependent on the other, but they are not quite the same thought.
MG They are often misunderstood.
FHB As to the thought that at the first breath of life in Christ, that moment one is in Christ, there is often much misunderstanding as to that. You do not mean the first breathing of the Spirit causing the sense of sin, or new birth?
FER No.
ED Would John 20 be concurrent?
FER I [p. 232] think so.
FWG You spoke of Romans 8 being concurrent with chapters 3, 4 and 5. I should like a little more about the early part of Numbers and Romans being concurrent.
FER The thought came out more in connection with Numbers 21. Light and life must be with us concurrent. Every christian must of necessity begin with the cross and the Spirit, and that comes out in chapter 8. The light must be concurrent with the life. It is light up to chapter 7 afterwards, in chapter 8, it is life. So in Numbers, the beginning is the people in the light of deliverance. When you come to chapter 21 it is typically life.
AP How are we made sensible of that breath of life?
FER When you become conscious of the love of God and there is response on your part.
AP How does the brazen serpent come in? Is it through human instrumentality?
FER No; every bit of divine work done in the soul is simply and entirely the work of God.
FHB But God might use an instrument to enlighten, to convey the truth?
FER Yes; an instrument may enlighten, but the effect of, or answer to, the light is God’s work.
EW You would say it is new creation by the Spirit?
FER Yes, exactly.
EW But there must be the recognition of the instrument.
FER The soul newly born wants light; but the presentation of light is not in itself the work of God in the soul. The work of God in me is seen in the way in which He causes me to answer to the light.
FHB You would say, He works by light?
FER Yes; but that is not His work in me.
MG The one is purely objective, and the other is subjective. The light is always by the Spirit [p. 233] of God.
FHB I wish you would repeat that again about the work of God being the answer to the light.
FER Suppose the love of God is presented to a soul, it is as light. The answer is in that I love God, but that is the work of God.
WB Why do you say the love of God is presented as light?
FER Is not that what you present in preaching the gospel?
WB But why not be satisfied with the term ‘presenting the love of God’?
FER But what you present is the light of His love. The light is the revelation of God.
FHB And surely that is His love.
FER That is the wonderful character of light, that while it exposes, it attracts.
MG The revelation of God is what He wants me to know about Himself.
FER Nothing can be more marvellous than that the light has come into the scene, and God wants us to answer to it.
Ques Has the light no effect unless there is a corresponding work in the soul?
FER The light may affect the conscience of any man; it is not only the elect who are affected, but the light, being the revelation of God, can affect every man; therefore the evangelist has not to choose the people he preaches to.
MG Is not that the light in the second parable of Luke 15?
FER Yes; the light fell upon the silver piece to bring it into view.
DLH Where does our responsibility come in in connection with that? If God gives light are we not responsible to answer to it? “That they may turn from darkness to light”, Acts 26:18.
FER Yes; but you never can, and never will, except God works it in you. Everything that is really [p. 234] effected is the work of God from beginning to end. Where can you put an evangelist or a teacher between John 3 and John 6?
WTPW He comes in very happily in chapter 10. He gets his instructions from chapter 3 to chapter 8, and then he comes in in chapter 10.
FER Well, from chapters 3 to 6 you get a person a pretty good way on. The Spirit in him, the well of living water; he eats the flesh, and drinks the blood of the Son of man; he has passed out of death into life. A person has got on a good bit who is there.
AP Where does the brazen serpent come in as to life?
FER In chapter 8 the light of the brazen serpent comes in. This is essential, for as life comes out in connection with another spring it is on the ground of sin having been condemned in the flesh, the first man completely set aside and another man come in to God’s glory; only on that ground could the Spirit be communicated to man. The natural state of man is in the flesh, and that must have come to an end if another state is to be produced in man. And another state in man means another order of man.
FHB Would you say a person does not breathe, has not any sense of life, before he has entered into that in some measure?
FER My impression is, that the first breath of divine life is love; it is the response to God’s love. When you know God’s love you love Him.
FHB Do not many get that sense before understanding much of the cross?
FER Perhaps so.
ED Is that why in chapter 5 we get the love of God shed abroad in our hearts Romans 5:5?
FER Yes; and then the answer is in chapter 8:
“All things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to purpose” Romans 8:28.
MG There [p. 235] is state.
FER The first true sign of life is love. The importance of this is that love brings to light the elect of God. I cannot tell who they are, but they are brought to light by life, and the first sign of life is love to God.
WTPW There was a paper written some time ago, ‘Light from the glory lends light to the cross’. What do you say to the title?
FER I do not understand it. I know a certain brother who has passed from amongst us condemned it. I have a strong impression that man, being what he is, has to begin at the cross. You may try and give him as much light as ever you like, preach all sorts of things, but when he comes to himself, he has in the history of the soul to begin at the cross.
FHB Do you mean, to get a sense of the righteousness of God?
FER Yes, I do. Every soul has to get a sense of the righteousness of God. It is a moral foundation.
FWG It says in connection with the brazen serpent that “when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived”, Numbers 21:9.
FER Does it not show that the cross comes before life?
WTPW There must be a reason for God letting this — come in here at this particular part of their history.
FER Yes, a very good reason; it was necessary in the case of Israel. They had been thirty-eight years under law, and thus tested, and the flesh proved to be incapable. In their case you have the anomaly of a people delivered from the judgment of God, and the power of the enemy, and yet tested in the flesh.
MG While we begin with the flesh gone.
FER Yes, exactly; we begin with the revelation of God, the destruction of the enemy’s power, and the flesh condemned.
WTPW We have been a long time before we learnt the truth of liberty. The soul has been a long [p. 236] time on the road. We have known the Lord and had a sense of His love and grace long before we have known liberty as in Numbers 21.
FER We learn the evil of the flesh in a different shape, perhaps we learn it in our indifference and unreadiness, the opposition of the flesh to the Spirit.
WTPW But the soul has been on its pathway a good long time often before the point is reached of the absolute ruin of the flesh, its incapacity to enter into the things of God and its opposition to the Spirit.
FER You only go back to where you started from as to God’s testimony.
WTPW We have not made a fair start.
FHB I think that is the reason why there is so little spiritual prosperity.
WTPW Do you put the blame on the evangelists?
FER It is not fair to put the blame on the evangelist. The hindrance may be owing to the person who comes after the evangelist. Take the case of the Corinthians and the Galatians, they were not badly evangelised, they had had the truth presented, but had been spoiled afterwards. Now, perhaps in some measure hindrance is caused by the defective way in which the gospel is preached. But there are other reasons.
GG Did you say there is no love to God in the soul who does not know the truth of the brazen serpent?
FER I did not say so. What produces love is love. Love to God is given in Scripture as the normal description of the christian. The love of God is shed abroad in the heart by the Holy Spirit. He loves us, and we love Him.
FHB But that is true of every one that has the Spirit; and where the Spirit is, there will be that response in some measure.
ED Were the Galatians loving God?
FER The Galatians had been stopped. [p. 237] They had never really got on. They had got the Spirit, and yet were going back to legalism, and that does not look like a response to the love of God. Love is incompatible with legalism. Perfect love casts out fear. If I know that a person loves me perfectly, and I love that person, I cannot be legal with him. If I am, I do not know the love; so in regard to God, we cannot be legal with God if we know by the Spirit His love. There must be a complete end of all legalism, it must be love.
Rem The Galatians had the Holy Spirit, but Christ was not formed in them.
EC They are not addressed as in Christ.
FER No, it is not implied that they had never tasted it, but they had been stopped, and the apostle said he stood in doubt about them. He travailed again in birth for them.
ED He says, How soon you are turned aside.
GG Is it possible for the love of God to be shed abroad in the heart, and for there to be no response?
FER I think not.
AP If there were a response, would not the flesh be an intolerable hindrance? And is not that where this chapter comes in so helpfully?
FER Yes; but the love of God is light, and the response to it is love.
Ques Are there not hindrances after the Spirit of God has taken possession of a believer?
FER I have no doubt it is after the Spirit is received that we really learn the constant opposition of the flesh, it comes out after. This is a hindrance; I think, too, we have been hindered by terms. There is one thing that has been a great hindrance to christians, that is the common idea of nature; and I will tell you why — the thought is too limited. Give me the man, and I can tell you the nature of the man; but give me the man first. The great idea in christianity is not of a new nature but of a new man. First [p. 238] the man, and then talk about his nature. How could you talk about God’s nature if you had not God? If you talk about the man it at once brings in the thought of a whole system of affections which centre in the man. Relationships are not in a nature, but in the man. God creates man, and puts that man in certain relationships, with affections belonging to those relationships.
FHB We have generally put it the other way—the nature first, then the man.
MG Scripture speaks of the new man, and then of the nature that is characteristic of him.
FER “Which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness”, Ephesians 4:24. You have put off the old man according to his nature, and you get the nature now because you have put on the new man, and it is in that new man that you are set in relationship to God and to Christ and to fellow-christians.
WTPW By nature you mean what is characteristic of the man?
Ques And you cannot have that nature apart from the man?
FER You cannot have the nature apart from the man. Take any substance you like in natural things; when you get the substance, the nature is that by which it is characterised; you must have the substance first. Nature is not something in the substance, but it is the nature of the substance. So, speaking reverently, we can speak of God’s nature, for we know something of God, and so, too, of the nature of the new man. The man (not the nature) is said to be created.
WTPW How do you connect “partakers of the divine nature” 2 Peter 1:4 as in Peter?
FER Peter does not speak of things quite as Paul does; not the setting aside of one man and the introduction of another; but it comes to the same thing practically. You have part in another man; you [p. 239] become partaker of the nature of God as expressed in Christ.
Ques You are a partaker of the man, it is moral?
FER Yes; you have certain moral qualities which answer to Him.
WJ You said the breakdown in connection with the thirty-eight years in the wilderness was in connection with the law; is not the breakdown here in connection with loathing the manna?
FER Does not that bring out the state of man more than the law did? The coming of Christ, His presence in the world in lowliness and grace, was the greatest test; but the grace of God rises above their breakdown. But Aaron has died, the priesthood connected with that order of things has come to an end, and now God comes out in a different way.
WJ Is there not a difference between the serpent of brass in Romans and in John 3 — is it not deeper in John?
FER The difference is this: in Romans, as I understand it, it is on our side, more connected with our state. In John it is on God’s side, it is in order that there may be an outlet for God’s love.
WJ Were you referring to Christ’s rejection? John starts with Christ rejected.
FER No; in John 3 it is the lifting up of the Son of man, that the love of God may flow out. There is very little of man in John, all is on the divine side.
WJ Is the Son of man lifted up by God or man?
FER I have often thought that Christ could not die on earth.
Ques. Why not?
FER Because He was the righteous Man, He could not die on earth or in heaven.
Ques What is your idea of not dying in heaven?
FER He could not die in heaven; He must become a man to die, and therefore must come down. He could not die on earth, for He was the righteous [p. 240] Man who glorified God on earth; hence He must be lifted up as testimony.
WGB The love of God could not flow out unless He was lifted up?
WJ Is it the same thought in connection with the brazen altar, the lifting up?
FER I should think the brazen altar is more connected with the provision of a place of acceptance on the ground of sacrifice. That (the brazen altar) will stand as good for Israel as for us; it gives the ground of acceptance all through Scripture.
MG Where man approaches?
FER Yes.
WTPW Is it not Romans 3?
FER In Romans 3 the point is not of man’s approach to God, but of God’s approach to man.
ED Then the Son of man lifted up is not the thought of the burnt-offering, but the brazen altar would be, for it is the place of acceptance?
FER Yes, it is the basis of acceptance because it is the place of offering; acceptance is founded on sacrifice. Every offering was offered at the brazen altar. In one case the blood of the sin-offering was carried into the holiest, but it is noticeable that the blood of the burnt-offering was never carried into the holiest.
W.T.P.W. Why was that?
FER I think the blood of the sin-offering was carried in as a witness. The glory of God had been vindicated in the death of the victim, and not only a ground of acceptance established for man.
MG The blood on the mercy-seat is God’s side entirely. At the brazen altar it was a question of man’s approach.
FER The great thing as the basis of God’s approach to man, is that God’s righteousness has been established, His glory vindicated, so that God can come out to man; when it is a question of our approach to God, then it is “Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification”, Romans 4:25. That seems to me more the thought of the brazen altar. You would be very defective if you did not see that God could not approach man if His glory had not been vindicated. On the day of atonement after the blood was sprinkled on the mercy-seat, all the other offerings came in.
MG God must be glorified before He could come out.
JP If priesthood characterises the first part of Numbers, what characterises the second part of Numbers?
FER The second part is taken up with the elect — they are brought to light. The evidence of this is that Balaam appears, and Balaam in the vision of God speaks of the elect of God; not the Israel of responsibility, but the elect of God. You come to the anti-type of this in Romans 8, “Who shall lay anything to the charge of God’s elect?” Thus the elect are brought to light, and through Balaam God pronounces upon them. Then they are numbered, but not for the wilderness, as at the first time; now they are numbered to inherit. In the second part of Numbers we have but little of priesthood. Except in one instance, which showed the zeal of the priest, we hardly get an allusion to the priesthood. Eleazar is appointed to the priesthood, and we have the inheritance referred to; but priesthood is not prominent in the second part of Numbers. That is what makes me say that it is of importance for understanding our experimental history as christians to take the two parts of Numbers together. Most certainly as long as we are down here we cannot do without the water of purification, nor the refreshment of priesthood. Moses was to take the rod of Aaron. It was divine goodness on the ground of priesthood, providing refreshment for [p. 242] the people.
AM Then after chapter 21 it is the purpose of God, and that is Romans 8 also?
FER Yes, exactly. In chapter 8 you come to state — and in connection with divinely — formed state, you get the elect of God brought to light. “Who shall lay anything to the charge of God’s elect”, Romans 8:33?
JP What you say as regards the new nature is equally true about the old?
FER It is what characterises the man; you have the man — the old man corrupt.
WJ Is the serpent of brass the condemnation of the first man?
FER I think so. The blood in Egypt typifies the declaration of God’s righteousness; the Red Sea, the destruction of the enemy’s power; the brazen serpent, the condemnation of sin in the flesh — man’s state. All three are realised in the one death of Christ — all in connection with the cross of Christ.
FHB Would you say that in some measure we enter into the truth of the cross before we enter into God’s purpose?
FER Certainly you must. You could not enter into the light of the new man if you did not see that the first man is set aside.
FHB Otherwise you would connect God’s purpose with the first man.
AM Is not the order of Romans 8 life and the purpose of God?
FER Yes. God’s acting according to His purpose. It is life by a divinely-formed state, and it is by life that the elect of God are made manifest.
Ques Brought to light by the light, and it comes out in love to the brethren?
FER Yes, I think so. “We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren”, 1 John 3:14. Christ “laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren”, 1 John 3:16.
WJ What is the bite of the serpent? [p. 243] Has it anything to do with hatred marking the nature of man?
FER I think the thought of the serpent takes you back to the garden of Eden.
AP What is the song to the well? When does the song come in?
FER John 4 is, I fancy, an allusion to it. “Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again: but whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life”, John 4:13,14. A christian reaches eternal life by the power of the Spirit in him.
MG Is that what comes out in Romans 8?
FER Yes. John 4 is reached in Romans 8. At the close of the chapter we have the persuasion that nothing shall separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord — that is the well of water springing up into eternal life.
EC Would you say both the rock and the well are effected in John 20?
FER I should say so — There is the introduction to it at any rate.
GG Is the well in Numbers 21, and the rock in chapter 20 the same? The Spirit in both cases.
FER That may be — but it is more the Spirit’s ministration in the way of refreshment in chapter 20, ministry may serve to that end. In chapter 21 the well of water points to the Spirit Himself.
Ques John 4 is clearly normal christian state?
FER Yes; in the true sense John 4 is the beginning as to state.
WGB As a type Numbers 20 was never properly completed?
FER They got the water, and the type shows the way by which they got it; it gives the divine thought. The servants may fail, but God takes care that His people get the water; it is a gracious ministry of the Spirit of God. I do not know how we should [p. 244] get on if we had not that. The water of purification maintains you in the truth of Romans 6, but you get also the Spirit’s refreshment. Ministry or refreshment is part of God’s ways with a people in the wilderness.
THR The failure of ministry did not hinder the grace of God from flowing, but was a very serious thing, I think, for the ministers.
FER It kept Moses out of the land!
WTPW Have you any thought about the princes and the nobles?
THR I think it is simply what the Lord said, He that will be chief among you let him be your servant, Matthew 20:27.
Ques Is the water of purification ministered as well as the water of refreshment?
FER It is available. The wilderness is a scene of death and therefore of defilement.
MG Marah comes in.
FER Yes. I think the waters of Marah may be drunk, but Marah has to be maintained. It is all very well to take up the truth of Romans 6 and say “Dead indeed unto sin”, but it must be maintained.
MG We have to drink into death?
FER Yes, and you want the water of purification; and the responsibility rests on every christian to serve one another. We speak of ministry, and it is our responsibility one to another to do as Christ had done to His disciples; we are responsible in a way in regard to any defect we notice in one another.
WTPW Is that done by ministry?
FER It may be done in ministry, but I think it is more done by care. What is wanted is more regard for one another; more pastoral care — you care for me, and I care for you. I think we are defective there. It takes some courage to approach one another — I believe it is often lack of courage that prevents us from carrying out the Lord’s injunction.
WTPW Do you not think it may be lack of love?
FHB That is it, I expect.
FER It must be done in the spirit of love, and love would make us courageous and skilful.
AM When you say the Lord washes our feet, you mean He does it through His people?
FER Yes. I think so. “I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you”, John 13:15.
FHB You do not look upon it as an example of His present service?
FER Yes, I do, but mediately through His people.
Ques One word more as to the thought of John 13. Is that advocacy?
FER I do not think so, I think it is the Lord’s present service, it is a service which the Lord carries out mediately through one another. We are in a scene where we contract defilement, and if love were more active amongst us, if we had more confidence in one another, we should be more active in this service in the desire to remove anything hindering from another.
AP Is that priestly service?
FER Yes. I think priestly service would be realised.
MG I suppose the eating of the sin-offering in the holy place would come in there. We must be in the presence of God to partake of it.
FER Yes, you must partake of it. I wish I could put out the exceeding beauty of God’s ways: the full light of God come in, the revelation of His righteousness, and the setting forth of His power, and now all administration in the hands of the Lord Jesus at the right hand of God, and all the light of that coming into the soul. Then the rich provision which God has made to maintain us in the light, and the subjective side — that in which we are formed according to the love of God, and in that way the elect of God brought to light.
MG That really brings us from Romans 3 to 8.
FER [p. 246] And it covers, in a sense, the book of Numbers.
At the close of this book we see the purpose of the two-and-a-half tribes to settle on the wilderness side of Jordan. You may get a certain amount of light, a sense of divine things, and yet stop short of the purpose of God. You may enter into the thought of relationship, and may respond to the love of God without going over Jordan into God’s inheritance.
WTPW The two-and-a-half tribes went over and came back again.
FER Yes, and they fought, too, and so it is today; when a real crisis arises, people of that kind are prepared to go and fight, but when the fighting is over, and the quiet time comes, they go back to the other side — the place of their providential possessions.
FHB Because they were never in the land in heart?
FER Their hearts were where their families and possessions were. They were too individual and too social. A good many people are in that boat; they do not put the assembly before the social; they put the social first, and the assembly after — but the other way is the divine way.
WTPW Is not service sometimes a hindrance? A man may think more of his gift than of the assembly.
MG Gift belongs to the assembly, does it not?
FER It does properly. Every gift was set in the church. I know of no gift but what is set in the assembly, under the direction of Christ, of course.
AM They are to go in that connection?
FER They could not go independently of it. You do not find Peter or Paul doing anything as to which they were not prepared to justify themselves to the church.
WTPW They were very simple in those days, and they came back and told the saints all about [p. 247] their service.
FER Why should not we be? They took great pains to make all clear to the assembly when any important question arose, or anything that might tend to compromise fellowship.
MG Just as in human things. In a business all are working for one interest. There was great simplicity in reference to both the saints and the servants.
AM The simplicity would apply on both sides to saints and the servants.
Ques Did they justify themselves to the assembly, or to the saints individually?
FER To the assembly. You might not be able to justify yourself to an individual when you might to the assembly.
WTPW I think the way the Spirit of God brings out the truth in the Acts is very lovely. The mutual interest between the assembly and the servant, and between the servant and the assembly is very beautiful.
Ques I suppose what we have in Acts 13, the gathering together of the assembly for prayer and fasting, would be an example of it. Would it not hold good now?
FER Yes, in principle. I would not care to go out on a tour of service without the fellowship of the assembly.
Rem If a man started thus he would have the fellowship of the assembly.