READINGS ON THE CORINTHIAN EPISTLES (5)
READINGS ON THE CORINTHIAN EPISTLES (5)
FER Do you not think it is important to take the instruction of these chapters as a whole?
H I should think so indeed.
FER If you take them up too much in detail you lose the completeness of the idea.
[p. 366] O I suppose the detail of the chapter applies to the state of things in Corinth.
FER Yes.
O ‘Prophecy’ meant what was specially revealed at the time, which you do not have now.
H Well, you get the great idea of edification.
FER Yes, but people sometimes read chapter 10 and say, That is the Lord’s table; and they read chapter 11 and say, That is the Lord’s supper. It is all very well to take it up in that way, but you disconnect it from the whole; you disconnect the idea of the Lord’s table and the Lord’s supper from the idea of the assembly.
H Would it not be well to say a word or two on that?
FER I was only thinking just now that the point in chapter 10 is that you are separated from all that is religious upon earth by the fellowship of Christ’s death. It must be the case, because there can be no earthly religion if Christ has died. Earthly religion according to God was until Christ died, and it might have been in a certain sense if Christ had been received, but there can be no religion on earth if Christ has died.
A No religion for man in the flesh, you mean.
FER Yes, anything that has the character of national and earthly. That is the point of the fellowship of His death.
J Would all earthly religion then have the character of idolatry?
FER I would not say that, it may have a national character. For instance, christianity in England is strongly marked in that way; it has a national character. It appears to me that the death of Christ of necessity separates you from religion in that way, having earthly connections or character. Then I think chapter 11 [p. 367] brings in the pre-eminence of the Lord, the supremacy of the Lord. Chapter 10 is the introduction of a new order of things religiously and chapter 11 brings in the pre-eminence of the Lord. Chapter 12 the one body down here by the baptism of the Spirit. Chapter 13 completely excludes the flesh by the power of divine love; and in chapter 14. you get the regulation of the gifts.
H So that if we take it in the order in which we have it, the table and the Supper, rightly apprehended, conduct us to the assembly.
FER I think so. I think the Supper brings in the pre-eminence of Christ; He must be the Head. Then I think chapter 12 brings in the one body by the baptism of the Spirit — that is, the saints here in the baptism of the Spirit. But I think there is another thing you want, the complete exclusion of the flesh:
divine love and the flesh cannot go together; the one is completely exclusive of the other; that is chapter 13, the complete exclusion of the flesh by the power of what is of God.
H There is a question I have heard raised in connection with the Lord’s supper, namely, as soon as we enter the room — I mean as soon as we are together — we are in the sanctuary, because the Lord is there. It does not seem to me that this is the case. So far as I understand it, it seems to me the Lord’s supper leads to the sanctuary. What would you say as to that?
FER I do not quite understand the idea of setting up a kind of sanctuary upon earth.
H Well, I am not using the words that have been used; but there is such a thing as entering into the holiest.
FER Well, but that is wholly a question of the state of soul. You have “boldness for entering into the holy of holies by the blood of Jesus, the new and living way” (Hebrews 10:20), etc., but entering there is a question of state of soul.
H But would not an assembly, if in the apprehension of its privileges and blessings, take that place?
FER [p. 368] I think all would be in the good of the holiest. The holiest is wholly and entirely dependent upon the realisation of the presence of Christ.
A Is it not dangerous to connect the idea of place with it at all? Is it not rather moral condition?
FER I think it is a moral idea. In Hebrews 9, when it is a question of the holiest it is Christ has gone into heaven itself. In chapter 10 we have boldness to enter, not into heaven, but into the holiest.
Ques Is not that in company with the Lord?
FER He does not come out, but you realise your companionship with Him. It is all a question of the state of the soul. There is no hindrance in that way, and there is ability to realise your companionship with Him.
H It has been said several times in these meetings, that the Supper leads to the assembly.
FER Well, I think it does morally, that is, as to apprehension of those who are there.
H Well, could you just explain that?
FER I understand the Supper to be the means or way which the Lord has appointed for bringing Himself to mind — the Lord’s appointed way by which, according to the word, and His will, we call Him to mind.
McK That is, in death, I suppose?
FER Yes, I think His death is the way in which we call Him to mind.
H Was there a remark made that His death is called to mind?
FER But that is not the way it is put.
H He is called to mind.
FER Yes; “This do in remembrance of me”, 1 Corinthians 11:24. It is Himself called to mind.
McK It is Himself in death.
FER His death is the means, because He puts before you the bread and the wine, and these present to you the means by which you call Him [p. 369] to mind.
JW Himself in relation to His love as expressed in death.
FER That is the point, the Lord was with the disciples down here. They knew His care for them after the flesh, but they had to learn another great lesson about Christ, that He was going to give Himself for them. They never fully realised His love except as they apprehended His death.
H We had also brought before us that there was that which was serious and solemn and searching in the way in which the Lord was presented in the Supper in chapter 11.
FER Very much so, I think.
H And all that is rightly preparatory to entering upon the assembly line.
FER Yes, I think that the Lord in a certain sense in chapter 11 asserts His pre-eminence. He is entitled to it, but He asserts it.
Ques In what part of chapter 11 does He do that?
FER “If we judged ourselves, so were we not judged. But being judged, we are disciplined of the Lord”, 1 Corinthians 11:31,32. You get “disciplined of the Lord”. “I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you”, 1 Corinthians 11:23. I understand chapter 11 to indicate the Lord asserting Himself in His pre-eminence.
-A. The name ‘Lord’ would suggest that.
FER In a certain sense the Lord speaks of Himself in that way on account of their confusion.
J Is “this do in remembrance of me” (1 Corinthians 11:24) asserting His pre-eminence?
FER I think if the Lord is called to mind in His death He must be pre-eminent in the sense of everybody there. Everybody must be sensible of His pre-eminence. I do not know how it could be otherwise. I do not understand how you could be there calling Him to mind through His death without admitting His pre-eminence.
Rem The pre-eminence [p. 370] of love.
FER Yes.
O Worship would be rather the result of Christ remembered.
FER I think so. That starts it.
H And then is it not that the Lord takes His place on our side as the Leader?
FER I think so.
O Not in remembering Him but in worship.
FER No, but as the consequence of it. The moment you admit His pre-eminence He is with us. That is the difference between ‘Head’ and ‘Lord’.
Ques What is the difference?
FER Do you not see? I think He is pre-eminent, He is the Firstborn among many brethren. It is the difference between ‘Head’ and ‘Lord’. As Lord He is not on our side, but on God’s side, if one may use the expression. On our side He is Head.
Ques In taking the Supper is it not the Lord who is before us?
FER I think it is Christ who is before us.
Ques But is it not called the ‘Lord’s supper’?
FER It gets that name from chapter 11.
H ‘The Lord’ is used chiefly because of the state of things among the Corinthians.
FER I think so. It is not His natural title in regard of the assembly; but I think He uses it because He brings into the chapter at the close the thought of discipline.
A Would you say that the natural title in regard of the assembly is ‘Head’?
FER Yes, He is Head of the church.
Rem You would not bring in the title of ‘Lord’ as a question of affection.
FER No, as authority.
Ques Is the Lord’s supper in contrast to their own supper?
FER Yes, it is brought in in that way; each was taking his own supper.
[p. 371] H How would you address the Lord in the Lord’s supper?
FER Lord! My own mind shrinks very much from any kind of familiarity. One may be very sensible of how the Lord identifies Himself with us, but any right mind would shrink from anything that savoured of irreverence in regard to the Lord.
O You would not object to the Lord Jesus?
FER Oh, no; but you would not use the name ‘Jesus’ without a prefix.
WJ When he says, “ye come together, not for the better, but for the worse” (1 Corinthians 11:17), does he take in the whole thing to the end of chapter 14?
FER I think there was confusion among them in every part of it. The assembly was really disfigured and marred by confusion.
WJ And that is why lordship is brought in to correct it.
FER Yes, the apostle has to go to the very root of the matter, and the root was that they had failed to give the Lord His proper place; and you may depend upon it, that is the root of every disorder in the assembly.
WJ Chapter 10 is correcting them from outside things.
FER Yes, it is separation. The most extreme separation is the fellowship of His death.
WJ Why between the two chapters does the place of the man and the woman come out in the early part of chapter 11?
FER He is putting things in their place.
WJ They needed correction in that line, too.
FER Yes, every part of it. From chapter 11:17 to the end of chapter 14 is one section; it finishes up with “let all things be done comelily and with order”, 1 Corinthians 14:40.
O It is important to make the distinction that it is a moral question leading [p. 372] to the assembly because the assembly as such comes together to break bread.
FER Quite so.
ASL I have heard some such remark as that ‘the Lord’s supper is the threshold of the sanctuary’. Do you accept that?
FER I think so. It is introductory.
ASL “Through the veil, that is, his flesh” (Hebrews 10:20) — is that the thought of His death?
FER Ah, that is a way made instrumentally through His flesh, I should not connect that with the Lord’s supper. It is the way He has dedicated — which He has made.
WJ It is what we come together to do.
FER Yes, the Lord has left the Supper in that sense as the rallying point of the assembly, but at the same time it is that through which we call Him to mind. It is His own way. If the Lord is called to mind He has His own place, and thus you have a good start.
O You would be very jealous as to laying down any rules as to what should take place, because of the authority side of things — how the Spirit of God might lead.
WJ You could understand that after the Supper there could be a prayer meeting, supposing there is a low state.
FER You cannot dictate, you must give the Lord His place.
B It was said at Birkenhead that if the assembly was in its proper state there would be no need of exhortation at the Lord’s table.
FER As a matter of fact, in any meeting you like, it is only a very small proportion of the meeting that is in the truth of the assembly, and yet I would not have any of the others away because I think they get the benefit.
Ques Are not the truth of the assembly and the truth of the sanctuary [p. 373] the same thing?
FER Yes. People do not understand the footing on which we are — priests. Properly you are in the assembly as priests, I do not think the bulk of people understand the ground or platform on which they are priests. They come to worship as believers. It is Sunday to them, the Lord’s day; they are glad it is the Lord’s day and they come dressed in their best. They come as believers, as what is due, and all that kind of thing. I doubt very much if the great bulk of the meeting have any sense of the priestly footing on which they are in the assembly, because we are only priests as risen together with Christ. In spirit, at all events, and apprehension, you must be outside of the course of things down here if you are going to occupy your priestly side in the assembly.
Rem If we are together as priests, worship results.
Ques To whom is the worship addressed?
FER I suppose to God, to the Father.
Ques And the Lord is in the midst as the great Priest?
FER He is the Minister of the holy places — Christ is the true Aaron.
ASL The greater number of hymns in a book that I know (not the English one) are couched in terms of worship without any exception addressed to the Lord Jesus Himself, and are given out after the breaking of bread as worship hymns; that is not what you mean by worship and the truth of the sanctuary or assembly?
FER No.
JSD You would hardly exclude the adoration of the Lord?
FER No, because after all, when you come to the Revelation you get worship which is not really on the footing of the assembly, and yet the church is in it. You get worship to the Lamb. So that you see a character of worship which is not really the proper [p. 374] worship of the assembly. Yet after all, the assembly is in it and that is according to God.
Ques Would you say a word in connection with that?
FER We see that in the Revelation the church is engaged in worship in connection with others in heaven, on ground which is not strictly and properly church ground, because it is God and the Lamb, and not the Father and the Son.
ASL It is a serious thing that there should be a number of hymns in the book I am referring to — that all the hymns should be addressed to God and the Lamb.
FER I can well understand it. The reason is they have not left the earth.
JW Christ is not in relation to the assembly as Lamb. That is His title in connection with the earth.
FER In Revelation it is not properly church ground and yet you find the church in it. The great interest in the Revelation is the earth, and therefore the church comes in as the twenty-four elders. And yet it would be a great mistake to say that in order to set aside the church’s proper place.
H Is not the Revelation, speaking generally, to show what will take place on the earth?
FER Yes, and in that connection one can understand the entire company in heaven connected together in its completeness. It is set forth in the twenty-four elders — the twenty-four courses of the priests. It is the idea of completeness.
JSO Then, apart from the Revelation there is the proper adoration of the Son as such by the saints as well as of the Father.
FER Yes, because you get “In him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily”, Colossians 2:9. I should be very sorry to see all address to the Son excluded. It would not help. It would not meet my present [p. 375] mind.
EM You would not like to see a meeting lacking in praise addressed to the Father.
JW ‘Endless praise and adoration to the Father and the Son’.
FER The only difficulty to me is to make anything exclusive.
H But would not the correction of all this lie in the proper apprehension of the assembly? All these matters of detail would correct themselves directly.
FER I think so. The Lord would correct them.
A Is not the great point that the Lord should have His place? If the Lord has His place everything falls into order.
FER Yes.
ASL It has been often said that it is desirable (without wishing to make rules) that the breaking of bread should be early in the meeting. Do you think so?
FER You come together to break bread.
Ques Is that a reason why it is desirable to break bread early?
FER The only hindrance is the people. It is all a question of the condition of those who come together. You have to hold back in consideration of them.
JSO It has often been said that things take really the character of an open meeting very much, that is to say an hour of open meeting and then the breaking of bread.
FER It is very deplorable! and then a sermon!
Ques Does that mean that it is a poor state of the assembly?
FER It is no assembly at all, simply a company of believers, not much different from what you might have in system, different in form but not morally. I do not think you properly have the Lord except through the Supper. I mean as to our sense of things, our apprehension of things.
[p. 376] O You mean we ought to have faith in the act that we come together to do, and to expect to find blessing in the doing of the thing.
FER I think so, the Lord would call Himself to mind in that way, the remembrance of Himself through death.
ASL When we are occupied with the Supper for which we come together and are present ourselves with the Lord in taking the Supper, could it be said that at that moment (without materialising, wishing to be kept from doing so) the Lord is there as the “Firstborn among many brethren” (Romans 8:29) surrounded by His companions?
FER I do not think you enter into that idea when you take the Supper, because I think it is the Lord Himself who is before you for the moment. It is the Lord in a position in which none of us has been or could be. You call Him to mind through His death. That is a place in which He is alone. That is before us, but the instant you call Him to mind, the instant that He is recalled to mind He is one with us.
Rem “In the midst of the assembly will I sing thy praises”, Hebrews 2:12.
FER Yes, it is the first thing He says in Psalm 22, “Thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns”, then “I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee”, Psalm 22:22. He takes that place immediately.
H Our affections are really drawn out to Him and then we find that He takes His place as the firstborn among many brethren.
FER I will tell you the mistake we make, we do not give the Lord credit for affection; if we did we should understand that it is His pleasure to be there.
O I suppose that strictly, without going into too much detail, the remembrance of Him is the remembrance of Him as the absent One.
FER Yes, I [p. 377] think so.
ASL Are we not entirely dependent on the great Priest to lead us into the holiest?
FER We cannot go in of ourselves. I think the entering the holiest is in realising your companionship with Him. Your only title to be in there is that you are His companions, and we can only be His companions as risen with Him, and that is really what Colossians is. Romans is light; Colossians is life, and Ephesians is power, and therefore Colossians comes in midway. It puts you on heavenly ground in order that you may be in companionship with Christ, and that is where life comes in. In Romans it is God coming out to us in light.
Ques. Where is Hebrews?
FER It runs with Colossians.
O You get the sphere of life in Colossians.
FER You are on heavenly ground, in Gilgal, in companionship with Christ; you are risen with Him, that is life. Hebrews runs pretty much with that, though, of course, the truth there is cast in another mould.
H I should like to ask whether Romans does not in a kind of way prepare for Colossians, and almost run into it? In chapter 8 you get life referred to.
FER Everything in chapter 8 is connected with the Spirit. The Spirit has come in in order that you may be free from the flesh; and what you are to be in chapter 8 is that you have everything in the Spirit. You have to distrust the flesh, and realise that you have everything in the Spirit so that you may be fully and completely in the light of God.
H So that it has relation to you in that connection.
O “Alive to God in Christ Jesus”, Romans 6:11.
FER That is a moral necessity of God having come out in that way, whereas in Colossians it is where I am actually. It is the pleasure of God about you.
I have said sometimes that it is as much the pleasure [p. 378] of God that you are risen with Him as that you are justified, because it is through faith.
Ques Why is worship in Hebrews based on the blood of bulls and goats?
FER The blood of bulls and goats has reference to the day of atonement. All the instruction in the latter part of Hebrews is based on the day of atonement. The point in Hebrews is “the world to come” (Hebrews 2:5), that is the reconciliation of all things.
Ques Is “the blood of the Lamb” (Revelation 7:14) a church thought?
FER I think the blood of the Lamb has its application more to us individually; it is not like the blood of bulls and of goats, the great basis of everything.
—. H. You were making an allusion just now to ‘risen with Christ’ being as much God’s pleasure as justification; now I think that ‘risen with Christ’ has been spoken of pretty much amongst us as more subjective.
FER It is subjective in the apprehension of it.
H Now would you endeavour to tell us what is in your mind?
FER It is very humiliating, but it is really only lately that I have come to what is a right sense of ‘risen with Christ’. I have connected in my own mind deliverance with it. What I see in deliverance is that all lies in the divine nature.
WJ What is the difference between that and risen with Him?
FER All power lies in the divine nature — what you are by God’s work. All power lies in that, and you can only realise deliverance inasmuch as you are formed in Christ. Risen with Christ is God’s pleasure about you, and what made that point quite clear to me is this: it says you are risen with Him through faith. It is as true as that you are justified by faith. Only you may not enter into them both at the same time. A man may enter into the truth of justification; he [p. 379] may believe that God has raised Christ from the dead, and enter into justification; but I say there is something further, that is just as much God’s pleasure about you, and that is, you are risen with Christ.
H Might I ask where do you get that in type?
FER Because I think it was God’s pleasure to bring them into the land, not merely that they should be justified in the wilderness. “Thou shalt bring them in, and plant them in the mountain of thine inheritance, ... that thy hands have prepared”, Exodus 15:17.
Ques What corresponds now to God’s pleasure to bring them into the land? To get there they had to go through Jordan.
FER What has been often said by one who was extremely well instructed in the truth is that the moment you are over Jordan, Jordan and the Red Sea coalesce.
Rem I have read somewhere that the Jordan and the Red Sea coalesce in the death of Christ, and not in our experience.
FER They coalesce to you when you are over; the wilderness is God’s ways, but when you are over, you have done with the ways for the moment, and you simply enter into His purpose which is to bring you out and in. The one is just as much His purpose, His pleasure, as the other.
H Do you not get that idea in Exodus 15, in the song? You get them talking about it. In a kind of way they enter into God’s purpose.
FER Yes, but you are never brought to God in Romans.
H You joy in God.
FER You joy in God, but you are never brought to God in Romans.
Ques. Not morally?
FER No; it is God is brought to you. The most in Romans is this, that the love of God is shed [p. 380] abroad in your heart by the Holy Spirit. That is God brought to you.
H That is why you spoke of it as ‘light’.
FER It is light which has come into the world for everybody; but the believer has come into the benefit of it. He is in the light of God’s testimony; he has the Holy Spirit shedding abroad the love of God in his heart. But when you come to Colossians — it is the first step — you are brought to God. You are with God in life.
O Would you not even say that in that verse we “boast in God, through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom now we have received the reconciliation” (Romans 5:11) — that we are brought to God there?
FER But that is God come to us, He has come to us by the Holy Spirit shedding abroad the love of God in our hearts. It is like the first part of the song in Exodus 15, “I will prepare him an habitation”. But then the latter part of the song is “Thou shalt bring them in, and plant them in the mountain of thine inheritance, in the place, O Lord, which thou hast made for thee to dwell in, in the Sanctuary, O Lord, which thy hands have established”, Exodus 15:17. That is the latter part; that brings you to Colossians.
H Then it is all in view in the song, but it had to be entered into experimentally.
FER These wiseacres will tell you that Exodus 14 is founded on myths!
H Who? The scientists?
FER Yes.
A I suppose it is very sure that man could never have gone to God if God had not come to man.
FER It is very wonderful that in Exodus you have the foreshadowing of these things, and then in the New Testament you have the whole thing laid out in doctrine. Romans is full divine light, the light of God’s testimony and the love of God shed abroad in the heart. In Colossians it is quite another subject;
you are in God’s land, associated with Christ before God in life. In Ephesians you have entered into the full purpose of God, and you begin to taste His power. You have gone in to God and the result is you come out from God to man in heavenly power. I wonder what man ‘invented’ all that!
ASL Could it be said of all the saints that they are risen with Christ?
FER No, but it is God’s pleasure about them.
ASL What is it that would lead us to cross the Jordan?
FER It is getting the light into your soul that the assembly is God’s pleasure for you. Now, how many christians stick on the other side of Jordan, like the two-and-a-half tribes, they never get to the assembly? They know something of justification, etc., but they never get further.
Ques Is it not affection for the Person of Christ risen that gives the desire to cross Jordan?
FER Yes, and that is where priesthood comes in. I have no doubt that what Mr. Stoney has often observed is true — that priesthood attaches you to Himself, and you are not content with anything short of being where He is.
WY Does not that account for the low tone of some meetings?
FER Yes, but we had to get out of very great difficulty, the old thought that people had everything in possession and they only had to experience it by the Holy Spirit — and all that kind of teaching. It has been a very great hindrance to people, and they have failed to apprehend what they have to enter into.
ASL “Having put off the old man and put on the new” (Colossians 3:9,10), where does that come? Is it the same thing as being risen with Christ, or concurrent with it?
FER Yes, the point is this, it is not said of them.
ASL I was in a reading the other day in France and a brother was insisting that all the saints were dead with Christ. He said, ‘I stick to the letter of Scripture, it says in Colossians, “Ye are dead”, Colossians 3:3.’ Another brother remarked, ‘It says in Corinthians, “Ye are carnal” (1 Corinthians 3:3), is that true of all christians, too?’ I said, ‘You must stick to the letter there also!’ The letter kills.
FER The apostle in writing to the different companies of saints addressed each company according to knowledge of their particular condition; he does not address them all alike. He tells the Corinthians that they were not in a condition for him to speak wisdom to them — yet he does speak wisdom to some, “We speak wisdom among them that are perfect”, 1 Corinthians 2:6.
A To say “Ye are dead” would hardly be suitable to those who have not died?
FER I do not know what it means. They died when they died.
ASL When it says in Colossians 2, “Wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God who hath raised him from the dead” (Colossians 2:12), is that expression “through the faith of the operation of God” the apprehension of the Colossians?
FER Yes, but after all, you are justified by the faith of Him who raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead. You then get more light about it. You may see the resurrection of Christ as God’s way to justify you, but God could only justify on the ground of resurrection. Death was on man, and the resurrection of Christ was the only possible way in which God could justify; but then it was not simply God’s purpose to justify but to bring into life outside of death. It is not simply to justify that a man might be cleared — that is what He showed by the resurrection of Christ. To bring into life is as much God’s thought for you as that you should be justified.
H One is the negative side and the other [p. 383] the positive.
FER Exactly, justification is positive clearance because He is risen out of death.
ASL On the continent we have the full-blown results of the doctrine that everybody is risen with Christ, and if you do not realise it so much the worse.
FER It seems to me an unintelligent way to handle scripture. You have a great vantage ground when you can show people God’s pleasure about them. It is an immense thing to show that to people.
JN Everything belongs to every believer, everything is his.
FER Everything is for them.
O God has no other purpose for them.
WJ Presenting things in that way would allure souls?
FER Yes.
WJ So that they would say, ‘I would go through anything to get it’?
FER Exactly. They get into anxiety that they should come into it. The hindrance is not on God’s side, but on their side.
ASL And I suppose the secret of it all is the exclusion of the flesh by the power of divine love? “Being enlightened in the eyes of your heart”, Ephesians 1:18.
FER Did you ever think what a meeting would be .like if you only had 1 Corinthians 13? If you could conceive of such a meeting, what sort of meeting would it be?
H It would be a meeting of the assembly.
FER Exactly, you have the ideal there.
A Christ would be in the midst in His place.
ASL Is it not remarkable that he says to the Ephesians and Colossians, that he had heard of their faith in Christ Jesus and love to all the saints; does not that denote a healthy and normal state? Living faith in Christ and affection.
FER Yes, faith works by love. When you come to 1 Corinthians 14 there are one or two important [p. 384] points. One, to my mind, is that gift is really subject to desire and on the other hand it is really regulated by mind. These are two very important points in regard of gift.
A What is called ‘understanding’?
FER Yes, it is not a thing to be used haphazardly and all that kind of thing, but it is really subject to desire, because the apostle sets them a-coveting; he puts things in their place and shows them the superiority of prophecy to ‘tongues’. That shows that gift is really subject in a certain sense to desire and that a man may really get gift by desire.
H Is not all this equally connected with love?
FER That is the beauty of it, you want to be used of God in some way to edify the saints and that would lead you to desire the gift that would enable you to edify them. Then you find the other principle, it is regulated by mind. Mind is looked at in the chapter as greater than these gifts in one sense. He says, “But in the assembly I desire to speak five words with my understanding, that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue”, 1 Corinthians 14:19.
JN Would ‘mind’ there be a spiritual mind?
FER Oh no; it is the quality by which I put myself into intelligent communication with others, which is peculiar to man; it does not belong to the brute creation.
JN Only ‘mind’ is governed by the word of God?
FER It is governed by love. I do not want to go off in a kind of rhapsody, like the Irvingites in some sort of gibberish. If I take part in the assembly I want to put myself in intelligent communication with those who are there. For that reason a man who cannot speak plainly I think ought not to take part in the assembly.
JN But some of us have not got the mind that [p. 385] others have.
FER Oh, do not mistake my meaning. I mean a man who cannot articulate plainly; because I may be putting myself spiritually in communication with others but they may be dull and their dullness attributable to their lack of understanding.
H The apostle would rather speak five words with his understanding that he might instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.
FER I have often thought what a wonderful man the apostle was, who could compress his teaching into five words.
Ques Do you think he meant it literally? It is a wonderful thing to be able to compress a point into five words.
FER I feel I have failed there myself. I have really clouded things with verbiage, instead of getting a point expressed in the fewest possible words.
H I think I have noticed in my own experience that a point presented in a very few words has given more help than a whole sermon of words.
WJ What is suggestive helps us.
FER Yes; and the point contained a great deal as a rule. You will find that the most of your audience do not take in more than one point.
A Is that why speaking is limited to two, or three at the most?
FER Yes, people cannot take in more.
Ques What is the thought of ‘prophecy’?
FER A prophet is the mouthpiece of God.
T Would you say a man was a prophet that never opened his mouth in the meeting?
FER He does not give much evidence of it. I could not say he was not.
T The reason why I ask is because someone took the ground of being a prophet.
FER I do not think anyone who is a prophet would take the ground of being one. There is the [p. 386] principle in 1 Corinthians 14 that alludes to one prophet having a prerogative to judge what another prophet may say, “The spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets”, 1 Corinthians 14:32. “God is not the author of confusion”, 1 Corinthians 14:33. You might have the meeting a scene of confusion if everybody could speak what they like and were not subject.
A “Let the others judge” (1 Corinthians 14:29), is that the other prophets?
FER I think so.
EM Verse 30—does that mean that the first was to stop speaking?
FER Yes, I think so.
H Or that he is to wait until the first does hold his peace?
FER No, I think the first was to hold his peace.
A Because of the superiority of the revelation?
FER Yes.
Ques Would that apply now?
FER You want to see the principle of the chapter. It is a very great thing to apprehend really that gift is made subject to desire. It is a great point for people to apprehend. It is a great encouragement to people and it is a great comfort to me to know that in regard of the assembly the regulating principle is mind, so that you do not get in the assembly a scene of confusion. Supposing you are a gifted person; if you are going to address the assembly you have to well consider the matter. You have not to go off like a rocket. You have to put yourself in intelligent communication with others.
O Only by the Spirit of God.
FER I do not think you could do it very well if you speak of something that you do not thoroughly understand yourself. You utter a cloud of words and make no point at all.
O One might have things on one’s own mind that are not for the assembly [p. 387] at all?
FER I think so. All that kind of thing so immensely depends upon your own spiritual state. The mind comes in as a servant, but everything, in the assembly, depends upon your own spiritual state and the complete exclusion of the flesh, and the heart being animated by divine love.
Rem Then you will be able to understand things; put them in a way that will be a help to others.
ASL Many a time a man in seeking to edify others is greatly edified himself.
JMcK I suppose love has a wonderful way of expressing itself — no effort about it.
FER That it has! And I suppose people have put the Spirit in the place of love and made it a kind of Quakerism in that way. The Spirit is behind you; He puts you forward. Without love we are nothing.
H Then there is also a little item that we ought not to forget, “I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also”, 1 Corinthians 14:15. People ought not to give out hymns unless they have understanding of what they are giving out.
FER A man often gives out a hymn because it is pleasing to himself, but that is not understanding.
Rem And the meeting is all a jumble!
FER Understanding seeks to put yourself in contact with others. You must not isolate yourself in the assembly.
Ques The leading of the Spirit?
FER It is not the leading of the Spirit, it is the work of the Spirit in you that gives you to be up to the assembly.
JMcK “In the midst of the congregation will I praise thee”, Psalm 22:22. And the way in which the Lord teaches us in the assembly, and brings us into concert with Himself, is affection. We sing with Him. It is all a question of affection.
CG How does that come in when the hymns are addressed [p. 388] to the Lord Himself?
FER But are not you glad to sing to the Lord Himself? I would sing to the Lord out of affection for Him. You must not look at things as run in a mould.
Ques If you take part in ministry in the assembly and judge that you were led of the Lord and brethren judge that you were not led of the Lord, what would you do?
FER I do not know at all — I should be crushed and quiet, but it is not an experience that I have had much. My impression is this, that the bulk of saints are only too glad of any ministry that really touches them and they feel they get into.
H I have never myself seen it otherwise, that if people address themselves to the affections of God’s people, they are sure to find response.
Ques And do you not think that prayer comes in in the same way in the assembly — consideration for the saints?
FER I think so. You do not run off by yourself, you do not go off in your own prayer.
H It is a very serious thing to take part in the assembly because you make yourself the mouthpiece of the company for the time and if you do that without the Lord, it is a very serious question.
FER It is indeed.
O That is a very important remark. There is a great deal of individual utterance that is not in connection with the assembly at all.
ASL To give out a hymn is perhaps the most difficult thing in the assembly.
FER Well, then, do not give them out!
ASL It is often looked upon as a very simple thing, and the meeting is often spoiled by it.
H Anybody can spoil a meeting, but it is not everybody that can help.
FER We all know that pretty [p. 389] much.
McK Was this chapter written to govern ministry in the assembly?
FER Yes, but the detail will not help us because we are placed in different circumstances; but the principles of the chapter will help you frequently if you can get hold of them.