THE ABUNDANCE OF THE SEAS (4)
[p. 65] THE ABUNDANCE OF THE SEAS (4)
JT We were dwelling on chapters 5 and 6 this morning as indicating the wealth accruing from ministry in relation to the sea. We left off at the Lord walking on the sea at the end of chapter 6. The Lord increases in the minds of the disciples as His ministry proceeds, so that the end of chapter 6 records that “On their coming out of the ship, immediately recognising him, they ran through that whole country around, and began to carry about those that were ill on couches, where they heard that he was. And wherever he entered into villages, or cities, or the country, they laid the sick in the marketplaces, and besought him that they might touch if it were only the hem of his garment; and as many as touched him were healed”. We can thus see how the Lord increased in their minds, even His garments being recognised as emitting virtue. Chapter 7 brings out the opposition seen in the Pharisees and some of the scribes in Jerusalem. We are not yet in the area of condensed opposition, that comes in in the second section; but Jerusalem’s influence is in evidence, and we have the question of ceremonialism.
EuR Would the city of Jerusalem suggest organised opposition to the line that was coming in?
JT That is it exactly, and we have to face it. We shall see it in the second division of the book, but already it is stretching out its hand.
HES Do we learn from chapters 6 and 7 that the servant needs to be delivered from every natural and spiritual feature of the present scene?
JT Quite. Ceremonialism is a very potent weapon in holding people’s minds. There has been a great effort put forth in this country during the past few years to enlarge on that side, as strengthening the accredited Establishment, appealing to the religious element in the [p. 66] human mind. Observing the great success of superstitious ritualism in Rome, the Establishment is seeking to utilise it fully here.
Ques What would the hem of the garment suggest?
JT It was power going out from the Lord in His immediate circumstances; the circumstances themselves emitting virtue, shewing the excess of power. Power is used ordinarily by the intelligence, the hands but when it is emitted from the garments, the thing itself is there in excess. It is all around, so to speak, so that as many as touched Him were healed.
HES Would it be right to say that in the gospel of Luke we have the excess of grace, and in this gospel we have the excess of power?
JT Exactly; power in the testimony is what Mark would emphasise.
JJ I suppose what comes out in Colossians 2 would correct ceremonialism. Would that go along with this?
JT It does. The Lord meets it by saying, “Well did Esaias prophesy concerning you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honour me with their lips, but their heart is far away from me. But in vain do they worship me, teaching as their teachings commandments of men”. That is what has to be noticed now. “For, leaving the commandment of God, ye hold what is delivered by men to keep”, He says, and then, “Having called again the crowd, he said to them. Hear me, all of you, and understand: There is nothing from outside a man entering into him, which can defile him; but the things, which go out from him, those it is which defile the man. If any one have ears to hear, let him hear. And when he went indoors from the crowd, his disciples asked him concerning the parable”. The Lord would lay; it upon us a little to think of the crowd. The crowd is the general public, the general profession, who may turn an ear and pay attention. The Lord pays particular attention to them,
[p. 67] and He would suggest that to us. They deserve attention especially in view of this increase of ceremonialism. There may be an ear, it may be very little, but I believe it should be attended to, if there be any interest. In the prophet Amos we have the suggestion of a shepherd taking out of the mouth of the lion two legs or a piece of an ear. Whatever there be, it should be attended to. Then there is the private side, verse 17, which embraces ourselves; the disciples inquire inside.
HH Your thought is that ceremonialism would nullify power?
JT It would; the enemy has a great advantage in it in regard of the multitude. At Colosse it was creeping in amongst the saints, although marked by order. The Colossian assembly was not like that at Corinth; it was marked by order, and the apostle rejoices in the order, but they were exposed to philosophy and worldly ordinances. But here it is rather the crowd.
HH Would that bring in the gospel? In appealing to people generally you would move on gospel lines.
JT Exactly; whatever ear there is. It may not be much now; the ear of the public is becoming less and less attentive, but whatever there is, I am sure it should be ministered to. Then “when he went indoors” that is another thing. The Lord graciously helps us indoors to a right understanding of everything. Here it is really a question of the state of the heart of man; it is not what goes in, but what comes out of a man, what comes out of his heart. There are thirteen things mentioned by the Lord, not simply in the man’s heart, but that proceed out of it.
HH Shewing that the heart is dreadfully defiled.
JT That is the idea, what man is at the core; and the things are not inactive. They “proceed out” of him. So that the woman’s daughter next mentioned is to remind us of this evil; she was possessed with an unclean spirit. “Whose little daughter”, it says, “had an unclean spirit” a very sorrowful thing; a different state to that of Jairus daughter. And then there is the man who had an impediment in his speech. It says, “They bring to him a deaf man who could not speak right”. I mention these things in the order in which they appear in chapter 7 in view of the emphasis laid on ceremonialism lately in this country, and the awful moral conditions that exist in the increasing looseness. We see the great expression of it in this little daughter with an unclean demon.
RB Why does the question of His not being hid come in connection with Tyre and Sidon? “He could not be hid”.
JT I suppose it is in keeping with Mark; we do not need to advertise if the power is there. Not that we should hide ourselves away; the Lord did not do that. He was in the house, that is, in a place of sympathy, but “he could not be hid”, need finds Him. “Having entered into a house he would not have any one know it, and he could not be hid”, verse 24. It is to call attention to the power of the servant.
HES Do you think if the kingdom of God is come in power it will be manifest without any such thought as advertisement?
JT I am sure human methods in advertising would be condemned by the spirit of Mark; and yet the truth should be known. It will be known as there is power in the ministry.
JCS Do you regard the little daughter as representative of what ceremonialism has brought forth? There is affinity between it and the unclean spirit.
JT Yes; and the evil condition of the heart of man, proceeding out from it, is covered, over with a cloak of ceremonialism. It was a dreadful state of things here, and the demon is operating in one who ought to have been protected. It shews there must have been great domestic derangement, for the little girl ought to have been protected. Evidently she was not, for the unclean [p. 69] demon got in. The mother felt it, which was good, but apparently there had not been protection.
EuR Along with these terrible things in the human heart, there is a natural religiousness that can go on with a formal condition of things.
JT Exactly.
EuR We have to beware of the influence of what proceeds from Jerusalem, in that way.
JT Ritualism will just cover over the awful condition that is below, the vicious state of man’s heart, and the consequent result in the unclean demon in a little girl — one who ought to have been the object of the tenderest care and protection, indicating the sad state prevalent now throughout the christianised world.
EuR Do we have to learn to judge these things at the root that are mentioned here one at a time?
JT Yes. No doubt they are mentioned in order here. This chapter should be specially noted in the light of the modern development in this country of superstitious ritualism. Rome has succeeded on this line everybody recognises it is a marvellous success in maintaining a system of religion, whilst covering over the awful conditions in man’s heart. These things come out. Rome pretends to look after them with the confessional and all that, but there is no power to check them, they come out; they proceed out, the Lord says, and the effect is seen in that the family protection was not there. It is remarkable that it was in the neighbourhood of Tyre and Sidon; as if the Lord went there that this might come to light and that He might meet it; He met it in power, without seeing the girl at all. The demon went out of her; it was a question of His word.
EM Would ceremonialism be the enemy’s counterpart to what we were having this morning, the thought of refinement and perfection of the work which is being carried on at the present moment?
JT I am sure human refinement is nowhere more [p. 70] developed than in the ceremonial system. It appeals to the flesh; the flesh is developed in it. Agag is the flesh, but refined flesh. God ordered Saul to destroy the Amalekites, and he seemingly did; but he saved the king and the best of the sheep and the cattle. Agag represents the best. It says that he came gaily or delicately, he would put on the politeness of the flesh, and that is developed in the ceremonial system as nowhere else; it is very ensnaring and appealing. The fine arts are taxed to their limits in the cathedrals.
HD'AC The sweet music dulls the senses.
PL Do you get all this in the word to all servants of the Lord in the last days in (2 Timothy 3)? These various features of the natural heart are brought out to the full in the early verses of that chapter, “without natural affection”, and so on, then the ceremonialism, “Having a form of piety but denying the power of it”; and then what is said in regard of the households in connection with the little girl, “Leading captive silly women, laden with sins, led by various lusts”.
JT That is very true. It shews the awful conditions that exist underneath all this recent effort in this country. Rome has succeeded in it, and we, as seeking to serve, ought to take account of the enemy’s effort. The Lord shews how to meet it. He would bring the woman down, for there was also pretension to national advantage. It says in this gospel that she “was a Greek, Syrophenician by race”, to suggest that she would consider that as of importance, because next to the Jews the Greeks had a renown in the world. They are so regarded in Romans; they are put alongside the Jew, “Jew and Greek”, shewing that as a nation they had distinction; so she is said here to have been a Greek, but she had to come down. Deliverance from this unclean system is in acknowledging our true state; and the Lord says to her, “Suffer the children to be first filled; for it is not right to take the children’s bread and cast it to the dogs. But [p. 71] she answered and says to him. Yea, Lord; for even the dogs under the table eat of the children’s crumbs. And he said to her. Because of this word, go thy way, the demon is gone out of thy daughter”. You see thus how to get at this state of things in service as depicted in this chapter, and how we may serve in it. It is by bringing in the light of what belongs to the children, and that no national distinction is of any value at all.
EuR And by the admission that one is simply a dog, that is, with these unclean things in one’s heart and mind, however refined. Is there import in the fact that this is in the borders of Tyre and Sidon, two seafaring places?
JT Exactly; commercialism fosters this sort of thing, affording the means for the gratification of the human heart.
JJ It is well that we have (Matthew 16) following chapter 15, where this same incident is brought out, because over against ceremonialism the Lord is building the assembly, what is solid and marked by spirituality.
HH And is it not serious, looking at it from a national point of view, that ceremonialism tends to produce this kind of thing? I mean, it forecasts serious things for the nation.
JT The prospect is dreadful yet Amos 3 encourages us, that God does nothing save that He makes it known to His servants the prophets. The Lord would draw us into his confidence as to what is coming. In the meantime the shepherd takes out of the mouth of the lion two legs or a piece of an ear. That is the kind of service that is suitable, you rescue when you can.
WL Will not ceremonialism produce apostasy and the Antichrist?
JT I am sure that is true.
PL It is interesting to see at Tyre in (Acts 21) the wives and the children kneeling down on the shore and praying. Has this service at Tyre been continued, and are there many houses now cleansed from all [p. 72] this?
JT That is good. It shews something had been learned. The wives and the children are in sympathy with the apostle.
EuR This was a territory that yielded a good deal of material for the temple.
JT And the Lord is indicating here that He is going to draw upon it again, but on this line the national claim is disregarded.
JJ Would you just say what relation this gospel has to the assembly, in contrast to Matthew?
JT As has been remarked, this is the, servants gospel, but it necessarily bears on the assembly. What we have said all through bears on the assembly, for the wealth of the seas embellishes the house of God. Thus you have stated the amount of gold brought in in Solomon’s day and the other things for the embellishing of the house; so that this gospel would bear on the assembly in that way.
EuR This woman would become a lover of the true David, and so would be material for the assembly.
RB Is it not encouraging that in spite of the awful state of things you have drawn attention to, the power was such that the demon was gone out; it is not cast out.
JT It is very remarkable. The Lord said to the woman, “Because of this word, go thy way, the demon is gone out of thy daughter”. I suppose the position was made untenable by the power of Christ, and being at a distance would indicate the power of His word, how He can act at a distance.
HES In 1 Corinthians, in the light of all that the Jew and Greek were seeking, the apostle brings in Christ as God’s wisdom and God’s power.
PL Would the young girl now be like those half-opened lilies in the house of God, bursting forth into grace and life?
JT What follows would be the development of what [p. 73] is seen in her. The demon is gone out: “And having gone away to her house she found the demon gone out, and her daughter lying on the bed”. Then the next thing is, “And again having left the borders of Tyre and Sidon, he came to the sea of Galilee, through the midst of the coasts of Decapolis. And they bring to him a deaf man who could not speak right”. She is in a way continued in this next case, and this further operation is needed, but what comes out in this section is the Lord’s profound feelings. We are coming now to something that should touch our hearts in service, that is, deep feelings so as to feel things as they are. It says, “Having taken him away from the crowd apart, he put his fingers to his ears; and having spit, he touched his tongue; and looking up to heaven he groaned, and says to him, Ephphatha, that is. Be opened”. We have not only the Lord’s power, that He can act at a distance, so that the demon has to go out without His even seeing the girl, but what the Lord feelings in all this; what the effects of sin were to Him. One would seek to enter into this a little in the Lord’s service.
EuR Do you mean because the man had his ear closed to God?
JT Quite. What an advantage it was to the enemy when Eve gave her ear to Satan, and Adam was brought into that! What widespread disaster resulted! The Lord goes back on all that. It is now a question of the whole race of man, and the power that Satan had over it. Think what it involved for Him if an ear is to be opened and if the mind of God is to be heard and enter into a man, so that he is able to speak right about God, and there is complete deliverance in intelligence. So you see the feelings of Christ here. He put His fingers mark, His fingers first to his ears, and then He spit and touched his tongue, and looking up to heaven He groaned. Consider what all these things mentioned meant in the Son of God, for I suppose the spitting means [p. 74] what He was essentially as coming into all this, and how infinitely.
MWB Do you think the Lord’s feelings stand in direct contrast to the ceremonialism of the early part of the chapter?
JT I do.
MWB It is just a reference to what is going on today; very perfunctory and formal service in contrast to these deep feelings.
JT Yes. Of course the Lord does certain things formally, but power is in everything that He does. We are not Quakers; we do not disregard certain things that may be called formal, but power should mark them; power is behind every movement here, the fingers, the looking up to heaven, the spitting, and the groaning — the power of God is in everything.
FHB The order too is remarkable. He touched his ears first before his tongue, as if the ears had to be set right first.
JT That would be the order in which man was lost to God.
HH There would be a very close relation between the Lord and the man in that way.
HPW Is it not so in the presentation of the gospel, that the spirit in which it is presented, reflecting in some way the feelings of Christ, is as important and often more so than the actual words themselves?
JT It is. I am sure the Lord would impress us as to feelings. There are religious feelings and so on, but to have feelings like His is what should be desired.
HPW His feelings would have an effect upon our spirits, and in that way affect the persons ministered to.
FSM Would there be an intimate relation between the Lord’s feelings and the Lord’s touch? Is it not striking that the touch is emphasised? Is not the way we are able to touch souls dependent on the measure in [p. 75] which our souls sigh and cry for all the abominations that are done?
JT I believe where you get the original words of Christ, the very words He used, what is in mind is to bring His own feelings to you. This gospel is somewhat distinguished in that way by the recording of words actually used by the Lord, such as “Talitha koumi” and this one, ‘Ephphatha’, and ‘Abba’. We are let into His own feelings in what He said to the Father, Abba, Father.
WC Is the climax at the cross in the Hebrew being given in the forsaking? “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?”
JT It is. One would love to thus get near to the Lord, and I believe that is the suggestion in His very words being given. The very words are handed on, suppose, in all languages into which the Bible has been translated.
JCS So we come close to Him and imbibe His feelings.
Ques Can we have those feelings if we remain in Tyre and Sidon? Commercial feelings tend to harden.
JT That is so. He came back into Decapolis, a hard soil, but another person is delivered there.
HES In the statement, “He does all things well”, is there emphasis not only on what the Lord did, but on the manner of His doing it?
JT That is the point; He did all things well. That is another expression peculiar to Mark.
JJ Were not those feelings continued very much in Paul in his service, both in the gospel and in relation to the saints in a special way?
JT I am sure they were.
PL He was “painfully excited” at Athens. (Acts 17:16).
Ques Was God securing a public response to refinement in perfection here?
JT I think the result here is most important. “Immediately”, it says, “his ears were opened, and [p. 76] the band of his tongue was loosed and he spoke right”. It is more than the previous man. The man out of whom the demons were cast was sitting, clothed and in his right mind, but here you have the power of hearing and speaking.
EuR The man in (Acts 3) began immediately to praise God. That would be speaking right.
JT Quite.
HD'AC The Man who opened this man’s ears was the greatest listener that had ever been on the earth. “Morning by morning” He listened to God and got His word; He was not deaf to God.
JT And the greatest speaker too. They “wondered at the words of grace which were coming out of his mouth”, (Luke 4:22).
EJM Do you think those that brought him had some sense of the feelings of the Lord Jesus in regard to these conditions? It says that they brought him.
JT No doubt. And “they beseech him that he might lay his hand on him” they felt for the man. The Lord values this.
MWB You referred just now to the Lord’s action in spitting, implying what He was essentially. What had you in mind in that?
JT It refers to what He is essentially. Though He had come into those circumstances, it was Himself. I think. His deity is involved in it.
MWB Implying incarnation.
JT Yes; coming into manhood He remains what He is ever “the Same”.
MWB There must be great importance in this, as so much detail is given with precision.
JT Yes; it is a marvellous grouping of actions by the Lord; and I am sure it is so comprehensive that His own essential personality is implied, that He entered into these circumstances. It is marvellously touching to my mind that He should put His fingers in the ears and [p. 77] spit and touch the tongue, and then look up to heaven and groan. It is very wonderful the more one dwells upon it, and the more what entered into it is seen, in the One who was there.
JJ Would it be illustrated in the feelings of the two prophets Elijah and Elisha with the two boys?
JT I think that is good. You mean the prophet Elijah stretched himself on the lad; that is to say, he identified himself with the state of the boy, in the house of the widow of Zarephath, and Elisha did the same thing in the house of the Shunammite. It is the Lord’s complete identification with the person.
HPW Would you say a word as to the looking up to heaven.
JT That is to bring out His dependence, which is most interesting. We have in this gospel two feedings of the multitude, as in Matthew. In the first, the Lord looks up to heaven, that is, He recognises heaven as a dependent Man here. In the second. He does not look up to heaven. In the first you have the order, fifties or hundreds in ranks; but in the second there is no specification for any such divisions, because it is a question of the power that is already there, that is, the Spirit^ You may minister the word by the Spirit to any number; but when He looks up, then the idea is the assembly as representative of heaven here, and you have specification as to numbers, that is, the fifties or hundreds, in this gospel. So I think looking up to heaven would mean an acknowledgment of heaven; the Lord’s dependence on it when here, and the order corresponding with it.
JOS In the first feeding it is said that the Lord blessed, but in the second feeding He gave thanks only. Is there any special reason for that?
JT In the second feeding the number seven refers to what is here. It is a divine Person here, and we must respect the Holy Spirit. It is a divine Person here, and I believe that is the import of the second feeding in [p. 78] chapter 8. The first feeding refers to heaven; that is, administration from heaven in the twelve, and the consequent specification as to numbers. Blessing comes in there.
JJ How does the blind man of Bethsaida, who sees men as trees walking, come in in chapter 8?
JT That is an additional thing. We are now nearing the climax in this course of instruction. We are nearing the mount of transfiguration; and before you get to it there must be the principle of seeing everything clearly; for we are going to see great personages on the mount, and our minds must be disabused of ordinary men of earth. So the second touch, I think, is Colossians. The Colossians were in danger of the influence of men; and this second touch is to disabuse the mind of men as such, and enable us to see all things clearly.
JHT Is this on the line of the Son setting you free? Would the truth setting you free be Romans, and the Son setting you free be Colossians?
JT Just so, and I think that fits here. It says, “And he comes to Bethsaida; and they bring him a blind man, and beseech him that he might touch him. And taking hold of the hand of the blind man he led him forth out of the village, and having spit upon his eyes, he laid his hands upon him, and asked him if he beheld anything. And having looked up, he said, I behold men, for I see them, as trees, walking. Then he laid his hands again upon his eyes, and he saw distinctly, and was restored and saw all things clearly”. I think that is the effect of the epistle to the Colossians, in the sense that it delivers you from man; you see everything in clear perspective.
EuR And then the one loaf in the next chapter would suggest the sufficiency of Christ, would it?
JT Yes. They had one loaf. Chapter 9 confirms that: “Jesus alone with themselves”; that is all we need, and it corresponds with [p. 79] Colossians.
EuR Clarity of vision would be evidenced in the recognition of that.
JT And hence the next thing is, “Who do men say that I am?”
EM Is not verse 14 the last allusion to the ship in this gospel, where the one loaf is mentioned? I wondered whether there was any significance in that whether their education was complete on that line, reaching now toward the mount?
JT I am sure that is what is indicated. The sea is mentioned later, but not in the sense in which we have been considering it. It is a question here of a clear apprehension of the Person of Christ.
HES Are you suggesting that before we come to the mount of glory, a process of moral adjustment goes on with us?
JT Exactly; so that we may get an apprehension of the personality of Christ and then of personality generally in the divine realm.
EuR On the one hand. God has come near to us in Jesus to open our ears and loose our tongues, and that would enable us to take account of Him as the Son of God.
JT Up to this point His Person is gradually coming into view. At the end of chapter 6 He is greatly enlarged in their minds; and in chapter 7 you have the spitting, the further thought of what He was essentially; and then in this chapter the one loaf, and then His question, “But ye, who do ye say that I am?”
EM What they discover on the mount was really true in principle in the one loaf — who He was.
JT Quite; it was there all the time; but on the mount they saw “Jesus only with themselves”. That is the position of christianity; you have the true idea of His Person and that Christ is sufficient; so the mount means that we have a clear perspective as to everything on earth. That is Colossians, that no man is obscuring [p. 80] your vision, and perhaps if we were free to admit it, it is not so easy to get clear of the influence of man. How easily one gets an undue place among the saints, and a whole district is ruled by him. That is a thing that has to be guarded against. To see men as trees walking leads to being absorbed with some particular person; but when you see all things clearly, you are adjusted in regard to the whole position on earth. Now the next thing is, what do you think about Christ? He certainly has distinction. It is of the very greatest importance to acquire ability to take account of Him who He is.
EuR Why is Peter’s confession here simply, “Thou art the Christ”?
JT It is in keeping with the teaching of this gospel, not to shut out the full confession of Matthew. What you need here is the anointed Man, that is, a Man to whom God can commit Himself; “the Christ” One who accomplishes things for God.
MWB With regard to what you were saying, do you think the adjustment of the epistle to the Colossians would prepare for the knowledge of the Son of God that is referred to in Ephesians?
JT I am sure of it; it prepares the way for the “fulness of the Christ”. You can thus take account of His fulness, what has shone out, what was ever there. What He is essentially is there, and you find it throughout. There are indications of His Person all along from your first acquaintance with Christ. Now you come to the point of ascension and you are challenged as to what your conception of Christ is. It is not only what you think, but what you say. What are we saying about Him? We surely ought to speak about Him, and in doing so make plain who He is.
Ques Did the writer of the epistle to the Hebrews get an impression of that? “Who being the effulgence of his glory and the expression of his substance”.
JT Exactly. The world’s history is full of so called [p. 81] great men how much do we speak of the Lord Jesus, and of His personal distinction?
FSM Would the epistle to the Colossians enable us to answer that question, “Who do ye say that I am?” “That he might have the first place in all things”?
JT Chapter 1 unfolds to us that the Father has delivered us from the authority of darkness and translated us into the kingdom of the Son of His love; and then the Holy Spirit proceeds to tell us about His Person. How great and glorious He is as presented there!
FSM If Peter had been instructed in the epistle to the Colossians he would never have said, “Let us make three tabernacles”.
Ques Do you think it would be possible for us to have an apprehension of Christ and not have the power of language to express it?
JT Peter had language enough. He says here to the Lord, “Thou art the Christ”. If our ears, have been opened by His touch, and our tongues loosed by His touch, why should we not have language enough to speak about His Person? Of what value is language if in it we cannot extol the Person of Christ? But the point here is who I am saying He is. Every one of us should be saying something about His personal greatness.
HD'AC And we ought to be able to say something about Him to Himself. When the Lord asks the question Peter does not answer to all the people, he says it to Jesus.
JT “Who do men say that I am?” People were speaking about Him, and none of them could say a right thing about Him. Peter’s answer shews the disciples knew something of His Person, because there is nothing said here about a revelation from the Father. It is more what any one of them could say about Him, because His works shewed He was the Son of [p. 82] God.
AM The man in John 9 says a good deal about him, and worshipped Him as the Son of God.
HD'AC He does not say anything about this at the beginning of His ministry.
JT He gave them opportunity to know. The Lord’s question was to bring out the apprehension they had acquired of Him.
Rem It is a matter of spiritual intelligence.
JT Just so. The point is, am I observing who Christ is in my spiritual history and taking in the teaching?
NMcG In doing that we should appreciate what the Father says about Him on the mount.
JT He made a selection according to the beginning of chapter 9 and took them up. “And after six days Jesus takes with him Peter and James and John, and takes them up on a high mountain by themselves apart. And he was transfigured before them: and his garments became shining, exceeding white as snow, such as fuller on earth could not whiten them”. Now, how are they to behave up there? As Moses prepared Israel to enter the land in Deuteronomy, so the Lord here, before taking them up, gave them abundant training; Now they are tested by what comes before them on the mount, and they fail. They do not know how to behave themselves up there. So if I talk about going to heaven or even having part in the assembly, the question is whether I can fit in, whether I can take in the kind of manners and mode of procedure there. So what you get is, “He was transfigured before them ... . And there appeared to them Elias with Moses, and they were talking with Jesus”. And note the appearing of Moses with Elias was to them. But they were not equal this scene; they talked about making three tabernacles. That will not do. It shews that they could not discern the greatness of Christ. No one could compare with Him at all. Peter had confessed the Lord’s Person below, but [p. 83] was unable to maintain this on the mount. All this is searching.
FHB Clearly they had not yet come to see all things clearly.
JT They had had adjustment on earth, but they were not equal to the scene of glory on the holy mount. They did not understand; they failed in the test.
JJ Would it be in Colossian language, “not holding the head”?
JT Quite. Not recognising the greatness of His Person.
PHW Is there a good example of a young man who discerned things in 1 Samuel, where he said, “I have seen a son of Jesse the Bethlehemite, who is skilled in playing, and he is a valiant man and a man of war, and skilled in speech, and of good presence, and Jehovah is with him”, (1 Samuel 16:18). He discerned it for himself.
JT That is it. He said, “I have seen”.
Ques Would the test come out in the Song of Songs? The bride reaches the point that He is the altogether lovely One.
JT Just so.
PL Would you attribute importance to the special word as to Mark in Colossians? “Concerning whom ye have received orders (if he come to you, receive him)”. Would the Colossians be helped in regard to Paul’s ministry to them as to the glory of the Person, by Mark’s word, what he would compose as touching the King?
JT Mark’s gospel will help them surely.
EuR What is the great gain of this incident in regard to levitical service?
JT To get an idea of personality, because we want to see how things are in God’s realm, to get an idea of personality up there. So that you see those two great persons coming out and speaking with Jesus; the Lord, as one might say, taking the place of listening to them. They are speaking with Him, shewing the mutual feeling that exists up there, but with all that you must never [p. 84] forget in the scene of mutuality that He is supreme, Abraham excelled in a similar scene. He could discern who the Lord was of the “three men”; he did not put the other two on the same level with the Lord, whereas Peter did here.
HES Is the thought in (Numbers 3) on this line? “And the prince of princes of the Levites was Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest”.
JT Just so.
JCS It is very beautiful to see how Peter speaks in regard of this scene in his epistle. He changed his speaking then.
JT Yes; he speaks there of His majesty. I often question whether I have any idea of majesty. “Having been eye witnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honour and glory, such a voice being uttered to him by the excellent glory: This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight; and this voice we heard uttered from heaven, being with him on the holy mountain”, (2 Peter 1:17,18).
EuR So the gain of such a scene as this is very great to those who would serve. The impression received there would affect us, especially in our service.
JT That is it. Peter makes no allusion to Moses and Elias when he speaks of the holy mount afterwards. The disciples were not to speak of it till He was risen. His resurrection and the coming of the Spirit were needed to make them equal to such majesty and glory.
EuR They would speak better and serve more efficiently as having been on the mount with the Lord, but for this they needed the Holy Spirit.