THE ASSEMBLY IN RELATION TO DIVINE ADMINISTRATION (4)
[p. 385] THE ASSEMBLY IN RELATION TO DIVINE ADMINISTRATION (4)
Ques Would you outline for us what you have before you in connection with this chapter?
JT It brings in the heavenly side; not only the testimony of Peter, that Christ was the Son of the living God, but that those who are to take the lead, in a way, are to be in the light of heaven; so the Lord takes these three men, Peter, James, and John, up into a mountain, and was transfigured before them. What took place was for them. “His face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light”.
RD Was it that they might see the glory of the Administrator?
JT I think so. The reference to the sun takes us back to the first of Genesis. The sun was to rule the day; here the Lord’s face shines as the sun; we are reminded that the rule is to be beneficent. The rule exercised through the assembly is to be a benign rule, to be seen in those who are formed according to heaven, for this is really a heavenly scene.
ENH I suppose the glory of His transfiguration was so great that it excluded every other man; even Moses and Elias, so that we read, “they saw no man save Jesus only”.
JT Yes.
RD You mean that the reference to the sun suggests the bringing in of light and blessing into the universe?
JT It would be the reflection of all that God is; the glory of God shining in the face of Jesus Christ. Here it is seen because of what is in view in this gospel; [p. 386] that is, ruling.
EM Would you say that what is spoken of in chapter 16 entails this outshining?
JT The chapters are all educational. The three disciples who were taken up to the mount were permitted to see His glory in order that it might stamp their ministry afterwards, and that the whole assembly should get the good of what they had seen. Peter says, “but were eye-witnesses of his majesty”. (2 Peter 1:16). Their ministry was all to be coloured by this wonderful vision; after the Holy Spirit came, He would bring them into accord with it.
EJMcB The three men rather suggest two ideas; the thought that we have been having, and what is heavenly. Peter suggests the stone, and James and John the brethren. “The brethren” is a heavenly idea.
JT In Mark 9:8, what is said after the vision was past is “Jesus only with themselves”. That is the way in which Christianity began and it should continue so; Jesus only with themselves. Here it is “Jesus only”; the Lord Himself as the One who alone is to be heard is specially before us.
Ques Is this in connection with the previous chapter, the Son of man coming in His kingdom?
JT That is what it refers to. “There be some standing here which shall not taste of death till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom”. (Matthew 16:28).
GN Would you say you get the sun in this chapter and the moon in the next?
JT Yes, that is right. Chapter 18 is the assembly as reflective of what is seen in Christ in this chapter. We have the two great luminaries referred to in Genesis 1.
JM It is educational for us at the present moment, in view of the day of manifestation?
JT Yes, and in view of the function of the assembly now, as seen in chapter 18. If we are in the light of Christ, we reflect His light as the moon [p. 387] reflects the light of the sun. Christ is hidden for the moment, but as the Sun of righteousness He is about to appear with healing in His wings, but His saints are already in the light of the Sun, hence the light they have. Matthew 18 should be read with Proverbs 31; it is what the assembly is in the absence of her husband. “Tell it to the assembly” the Lord says; that is, the authority for the moment. If the Lord were here, it would be told to Him. This chapter 17 is to qualify them by their seeing His glory. It is not simply that He was transfigured as a fact, but He was transfigured before them; that was the point.
RWG What is the thought of Moses and Elias being in company with the Lord on the mount, and that they were known as Moses and Elias?
JT They represented the witness of the Old Testament; “the law and the prophets”.
RWG Is it the thought of the authority of a past dispensation, but now all is vested in this Person?
JT Yes. Moses represents the authority of God, and Elijah was the testimony to God’s faithfulness, calling the people back to that authority. Now they disappear and all is in the Son; there is not only authority, but the speaking; “hear him”. Rule is by speaking rather than by the sword. Moses in Exodus 17 was to take the symbol of his authority, his rod, and smite the rock, but in Numbers 20 he made a mistake in smiting the rock; he should have spoken to it. So here, it is not the rod of authority but the word of Christ. “Hear him”; refers to Christianity. The regulation is by the word of Christ.
RWG Moses and Elias have passed off the scene, and all is now vested in this One who is to effect everything for God?
JT Yes; so He is [p. 388] to be heard.
ENH I suppose Moses was quite content to withdraw. He himself had said, “A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you ... like unto me”. (Acts 3:22).
JT Yes. John the baptist’s ministry was the termination of what these two men represented, and John disappeared in joy; he said, “this my joy therefore is fulfilled”, (John 3:29) because he had heard the bridegroom’s voice. There is a connection between the bridegroom and the sun. The sun is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and as a strong man running a race, and there is a voice which is to be heard. Compare Psalm 19.
JS Is this voice the voice of revelation?
JT Yes; primarily, but there is a present voice for the assembly, “he that hath an ear, let him hear”. There is the Lord’s authority in the messages to the assemblies, and then there is what the Spirit says.
HH I thought there was just a little connection between what we have been having about the master of assemblies and the angels of the assemblies.
JT Yes, I think so, only the angels are representative. The Lord speaks to the assemblies as being Himself in the position of Master of assemblies. There is His authority, also what the Spirit says. What the Spirit says has to be distinguished from what the Lord says.
WK Just another word as to the distinguishing?
JT Turn for a moment to Revelation 1. In verse 11 the Lord speaks, and in verse 12 John turns when he hears the voice, “And I turned to see the voice that spake with me”. That is a remarkable expression, but evidently it was to see the Person who spoke; then it tells us what John saw; being turned, he saw Christ clothed with official garb, and he is seen as armed with judicial authority to enforce His rule in the assemblies. It is not one [p. 389] speaking in love, ministering to the needs of the assemblies; but asserting His rights to rule, and showing that He has power to enforce the rule. “Out of his mouth went a sharp two-edged sword”. (Revelation 1:16). That refers to what He says. Then in chapter 2:1 John is told, “To the angel of the assembly in Ephesus write”. The One who has authority and supports the public assembly, the seven stars now speaks, and after He says what He has to say, the word is, “He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the assemblies”. (verse 7). The Spirit brings in another thought.
RB How do you distinguish between what the Lord says and the Spirit’s voice to the assembly?
JT The Lord’s word is according to His authority; from time to time He asserts it; things occur which bring out that it has been set aside and He reasserts it. He gives the saints to understand that they have disregarded His rights, but what the Spirit says involves what He ministers to the saints. The Spirit speaks to our hearts of Christ.
RD The Lord’s word in the main calls attention to the conditions, and the Spirit’s word would be a present ministry to meet the exercises that such a word would produce.
JT I think so. The Lord in what He has to say speaks with the utmost discrimination as to what is to be commended and what is to be condemned; it is a judicial message; He judges the thing with the most accurate discrimination. All that is creditable is mentioned first, but then all that is discreditable is also given, so that there might be a true conception of the conditions as the Lord sees them and His judgment about them. Then there is the voice of the Spirit which is continuous.
Rem All that refers to the present moment.
WK It is the present tense, what the Spirit says.
RD It is said in Timothy: “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly”. (1 Timothy 4:1).
EJMcB The overcomer is the consequence of the Spirit’s voice in the first three assemblies.
JV In John 16:13 the Lord says of the Spirit, “whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak”.
JT The Spirit, being here, has His own voice, and He ministers to the saints. In the addresses to the assemblies, the appeal to hear the voice of the Spirit in the last four assemblies is given after the reference to the overcomer; in the first three, it is different; see chapter 2, verses 7, 11, 17; but when you come to Thyatira you have the overcomer mentioned in verse 26, and verse 29 says, “He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the assemblies”. It is now supposed that there is no ear save as overcoming first. Apostasy had set in in Thyatira, and from that point onward there must be overcoming, otherwise there is no recognition of the Spirit. In the public body things are hopeless.
HH We have not the Ephesian phase of the assembly now in a public way. When the case of the assembly is hopeless in Thyatira, the Lord says to the overcomer, “I will give him the morning star”. There is recovery to the Lord, and, as you were saying, the order is changed.
JT The principle of speaking marks this dispensation, so in regard to the assembly, “If he will not listen to the assembly”; it is what the assembly says; authority is in the speaking; it is not a sword. By and by the Lord will rule the nations with a rod of iron, but now rule is to be exercised through speaking. When the assembly has to deal with one who is obdurate there is an appeal, every possible effort is employed to reach the man through speaking; even when it is said, “them that sin rebuke before all”. (1 Timothy 5:20). The point is to convict before all; that is, to bring the facts to bear that would convict of the sin.
RD [p. 391] For power to do that we must be hearing Him?
JT That is the point; we have to listen to Christ. If Moses and Elias are to be referred to, it must be through Christ. So in Luke 24:27, “Beginning at Moses and all the prophets ... he expounded the things concerning himself”.
JM You mean that the Old Testament can now be read in the full light of Christ, and it is not, in this sense, to be connected with the legal system, nor does it make souls legal.
JT Yes; we must begin with Christ, then it loses all its legal features and becomes spiritual, for the Lord is the Spirit of it. The spirituality is in the way the Scriptures are brought in by the Spirit; hence Paul says “Every scripture is divinely inspired”, (2 Timothy 3:16) but the Lord gives us the understanding of it.
Rem In the feeding of the multitudes, the Lord brake the loaves and gave them to the disciples and the disciples to the multitude.
JT Yes, that is what we get in the synoptic gospels, but in John it is not so; see John 6:11 (New Translation). It was Jesus who distributed to those who were set down, showing that a time was in view when they would look directly to Christ; the food would come directly from the Lord’s hands.
TMG In Matthew 5:22, the Lord says, in contrast to what Moses says, “But I say unto you”.
JT Yes; then He says, “Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled”. (verse 18). All is fulfilled through Him.
RB Had not the apostles a peculiar place? The apostle John says, “he that knoweth God heareth us”. (1 John 4:6).
JT Yes; they represented the Lord’s authority. Peter in Acts 2:14 stands up “with the eleven”, calling attention to the fact that these were specially delegated to speak on behalf of Christ. “Go, stand and speak in the temple to the people all the words of this life”. (Acts 5:20).
JMcM Would the result of hearing Him be that everything is done His way?
JT The point in this chapter is to prepare them for that, so that they might learn how to do things. In Matthew 18:21,22 Peter says, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? till seven times?” The Lord says, “until seventy times seven”. That is the principle on which things are to be done while the Lord is absent.
HH Is your thought, that in this chapter the assembly has a kingdom setting?
JT Yes, but I wish we could get the thought of the heavenly; this wonderful vision was special, and it is what is special that gives character to what is general.
RD Have you anything to say about the garments here? I wondered if it had to do with what He was officially in administration.
JT I suppose it had. Garments are usually symbolical of surrounding circumstances; this whiteness marks the beginning of Acts. The oil descended to the skirts of the priest’s garments; the garments would be the saints as they were seen at Pentecost; the purity that marked the Lord shone there. In writing to Philadelphia it is the same thing; He is the Holy and the True.
RD So that what we see in the Lord in the gospels comes out characteristically in the saints who have part with Him in this administration. He associated Peter with Himself in the end of the chapter, in saying, “Lest we should offend”.
J .T. He brings Peter into associations as one of the “sons”.
RB How do you carry the thought of the garment as having reference to circumstances?
JT Jude says, “hating even the garment spotted by the flesh”; (Jude 23) if there is even a spot of the flesh on it, it is to be hated.
RD Speaking practically, one could not take part in the working out of chapter 18 unless one’s garments were in correspondence.
JMcG It has a bearing on our walk and ways.
JT Here His garments became white as the light. There was no disparity between what shone in His countenance and His garments. If we are to have moral authority, we must correspond with what is presented here.
ENH Is it like Hebrews, where you get the speaking from heaven?
JT Yes.
GN The garments He wears in Revelation 1 are suited to the conditions to which He has to say.
JT Yes, but the garments here had reference to what He was about to bring in as we see at Pentecost. What He set up then was in accord with Himself; what is presented in Acts 2; that is the saints as seen there, corresponds with this scene.
GWW What you are saying really runs through the Old Testament scriptures. Wherever there was a change of circumstances, there was always a change of garments. Joseph, when he came out of prison, changed his garments.
JT Yes; so with Joshua the high priest; “Take the filthy garments from off him”. (Zechariah 3:4)
GWW Circumstances were changed, and that necessitated a change of garments.
JT So that it is a great thing to have suitable garments; in fact, you have in Scripture the idea of a wardrobe. Huldah, the prophetess, was keeper of the wardrobe. You cannot get your coat anywhere; a goodly Babylonish garment will not do.
RB When the disciples were sent out, they were not to have more than one coat.
GWW [p. 394] Is it not therefore important that we should see to it that we have changed our garments in accordance with the present way in which Christ is presented?
JT I think we have to be in accord with Christ in His judicial attitude in regard of the conditions that exist around us.
GWW Yes, in Revelation we have to apprehend the changed position which He takes, and adjust ourselves accordingly.
JT Romans brings us into accord with the light; the putting on of the armour of light is protective. The reference to the garments in the transfiguration scene has a voice to us. “His raiment was white as the light”. “If we walk in the light as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another”. (1 John 1:7).
Rem “Put on therefore, as the elect of God”. (Colossians 3:12). You have there the idea of putting on.
ENH The garments of course take in the way we present ourselves: “be clothed with humility”. (1 Peter 5:5).
EJMcB What was in your mind when you drew attention to the importance of getting this heavenly vision? Am I right in thinking that the import of the close of chapter 11 governs the situation in a way up to chapter 16? Now I am to get the import of Christ with His face shining as the sun.
JT It is no longer what He was here on earth; this chapter supposes what He is up there, and that is to give heavenly colour to all else. If we are to come out properly as in accord with Matthew 18 and 1 Corinthians, we must have Ephesians. We do not eliminate Ephesians for that is the heavenly side which lends colour to everything.
EJMcB That is what I wanted to get at, that we might get the benefit of what these three got. The voice would cause us to rise from among those who are sleeping and to get the benefit of [p. 395] the shining.
JT This would correspond with the royal priesthood, showing forth the praises of Him who has called us out of darkness into His marvellous light. This is the “marvellous light”. (1 Peter 2:9).
JM They are king’s sons too, at the end of the chapter?
JT Quite. The end of the chapter greatly helps us to understand the beginning of it. The Lord had in His mind that Peter should know that he was one of the sons.
SL You made reference to Ephesian truth. I would like to hear a little more in that connection.
JT It is what the saints are “in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus”, (Ephesians 2:6) and is in view of display in the ages to come, in view of public shining in the future. So the end of the third chapter is a doxology; it is an outburst of worship on the part of the writer; “to him be glory in the assembly in Christ Jesus unto all generations of the age”. (Ephesians 3:21) That is the shining then; but what is to be now? Ephesians 4, Ephesians 5 and Ephesians 6 have in view the shining here now, hence that section begins, “Walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, with all lowliness and meekness ... endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace”. (Ephesians 4:1 - 3). We are called back to the end of Matthew 11, to our model. “I am meek and lowly in heart”, (Matthew 11:29) but we take up that position as in the light of the heavenly calling.
TMG What it comes to is that we should be marked by the spirit of Christ.
ENH I suppose we should come out as being imitators of God, as dear children.
JT Ephesians and Corinthians go together. I think Romans and Corinthians go together as regards God’s ways down here, but Ephesians is a special thing; we come out in what we may have to do in the assembly in a heavenly way here.
GWW If we attempt to go through from [p. 396] Romans to Corinthians without the exercise of Ephesians, we cannot carry out the directions in the dignity and grace that become them.
JT If we rightly understood the magnitude of the assembly’s position here for God, we should understand the necessity for Ephesians. Divine principles were to be maintained in a company of men and women in a given locality in the Spirit and grace of Christ, and that in spite of all opposition and contrariety that might exist. If an angel, for instance, were seen in the most adverse circumstances, he would never lose his temper; he would maintain his balance; the heavenly would shine there. We are to be spiritual whatever happens; we have to be exercised to carry ourselves in heavenly demeanour at all times; when tested we are to be like Christ.
SL Peter, walking on the water, desired to get near the Lord, and he got the support of the Lord.
JT Just so. In dealing with things in the assembly you seek to be in the dignity that marks a heavenly man. I think Stephen is a typical Christian. Paul as a minister stands out, but I think that Stephen is designedly presented as a typical Christian; some one has remarked that he was stoned because Christ was seen in him. He was like Christ; his face shone as the face of an angel when he stood before the council; that is the idea. An angel represents what is heavenly, and if the spirit of Stephen is continued, we should not have any contention; things would be carried on in a heavenly way; there is moral weight in the newness and power in which things are done, so that the saints are preserved. We go by precedent in a general way, but every emergency calls for fresh exercises, and the Lord gives a new thought as to how to meet things. The heavenly man is never baffled. I am sure Ephesians is the special book for us, but I fear that as a study of the heavenly colour it is neglected.
GWW [p. 397] At the close of the epistle to the Romans Paul refers to the mystery; that was the way they had to come.
RD You were speaking about being equal to any contingency that arises; the two instances that follow in our chapter show that the disciples were not equal to the occasion.
JT So the instruction which the Lord gives helps greatly: “this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting”. Then the other instruction is that the sons are “free”. We are reminded of the necessity for prayer and fasting; they become a heavenly man; the Lord was marked by prayer; then we are reminded of our calling.
RD Peter’s answer indicated that he had not laid hold of that.
JT The Lord says, “Take the first fish that comes up”. Leave things to the Lord; take the first one; do not use your own judgment, but act according to His instructions; that gives Him His place; you recognise Him. You will find what you need; a piece of money, “When thou hast opened his mouth thou shalt find a piece of money”.
GWW Have you any thought as to why the fish comes in?
JT It indicates the Lord’s right over the fish of the sea. What do you think?
GWW It is in connection with the temple. I wondered whether the Lord would bring up from the vast sea of the nations the resources for the effectuating of His purpose, and He indicates this to Peter.
JT I think so. The Son of man is put over the fish of the sea; (Psalm 8). It is really a vision of the Son of man coming into His kingdom; the nations are available to Him.
GWW It would have been just as easy for the Lord to say to Peter, ‘Under the first stone that [p. 398] you come to you will find a piece of money’; but the fish of the sea has a special significance.
HH One who commands the fish of the sea ought certainly not to be under tribute.
JT The sons are to accept that outward conditions remain unaltered. We do not want to alter them; the point is to know how to act for God in them; so the Lord says, “Lest we should offend them”; that is important, they were to avoid being an offence.
RD That is to say, with the light of sonship in our hearts, we accept the present conditions and limitations, lest we should offend.
J .T. I think we should be sufficiently dignified spiritually to do that.
RB Would you say in connection with meeting contingencies that might arise, that we take the first that the Lord gives?
JT Well, it would imply that you do not discriminate, you are acting under His word. The Lord knew that Peter was accustomed to fishing; He did not tell him how to do it. It helps us at the present time; we do not exercise choice, we take what the Lord gives as available. The hook may mean that we have our part to fulfil according to His word, but it is the Lord’s doing; the situation is met by Him.
ENH The Lord might just as well have said, take the second fish; but the point was to do as He directed.
JT Yes.
HH Peter asked the Lord’s permission to set up three tabernacles.
JT I think he had a very poor thought of Christ. Had he been instructed in Scripture, in the mind of God, he would have known that there was only one tabernacle — the tabernacle made in the [p. 399] wilderness, and that was for the Shekinah. Peter did not know what he said; he was ignorant.
ENH How did they recognise Moses and Elias?
JT I do not know, but the fact is stated that they were recognised. Peter’s speaking was ignorant speaking, and so, while he yet spake, a bright cloud overshadowed them. The cloud would remind Peter of the wilderness, only now it is a bright one instead of a thick cloud; this was, I suppose, because Christ had become Man.
ENH Is that what you connect with their entering into the cloud?
RWG Could you give us a little on the Father’s voice? We are privileged to hear that voice. Would you connect it with the end of Numbers 7? After the tribes are set in order Moses heard the voice of One speaking to him from off the mercy seat?
JT The voice here is really the Father’s, speaking about the Son. At the end of Numbers 7 the voice comes in where unity was established; God then communicated from off the mercy seat. This voice is from the cloud. I think it is a millennial scene; the Son of man coming in His kingdom. The heavenly and the earthly saints are both seen. Numbers 7 is typically, through Christ, the mercy seat; here the voice is about Christ.
RWG This is a privileged company, and it will be our privilege for ever to hear that voice.
JT No doubt.
RB You were speaking in your address about the administration being carried on by speaking. Not only the Spirit speaks and the Lord speaks, but we speak; the apostle says, “If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God”. (1 Peter 4:11).
JT The point is to learn how to speak in a divine way, so that what is said carries authority with it, [p. 400] as of God.
RD Peter was not speaking as “oracles of God” here when he suggested three tabernacles; he went before the Lord here.
JT Yes. To go before the Lord is a serious matter. It says about Stephen, that “they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake”. (Acts 6:10).
JS Death and life are in the power of the tongue.
Ques How would fasting apply now?
JT It is denying ourselves legitimate things. We can only do it according to the measure which God gives to us. We acquire the habit of fasting by spiritual power.
HH The disciples were not prepared for the voice from heaven, they fell on their faces and were greatly terrified. Peter does not say anything about that later on.
JT No, that had nothing to do with the ministry: “when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ”. (2 Peter 1:16).
HH How do you understand verse 20? “If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed ye shall say unto this mountain remove hence to yonder place”.
JT It was to remind the disciples that Judaism would disappear, to make room for the assembly.