THE LIFE WHICH IS IN CHRIST JESUS (10)
[p. 163] THE LIFE WHICH IS IN CHRIST JESUS (10)
1 John 1: 1 - 10; 1 John 2: 1 - 18; 1 John 3: 1 - 3
JT In our last reading we looked at some scriptures relative to the reduction of the span of human life. Genesis 11, recording the generations of Shem and Terah, shows that human life was in gradual process of reduction, coming down to Abraham, who lived only one hundred and seventy-five years — a short period as compared with the longevity of those in the antediluvian world. And life was further shortened to one hundred and forty-seven years in Jacob and one hundred and ten in Joseph. Moses says by the Spirit in Psalm 90, “The days of our years are three score years and ten”. It is thought that all these facts bear on the question of life eternal; that is, human life becoming shorter, eternal life becomes greater in exercised minds. Psalm 133 says, “There hath Jehovah commanded the blessing, life for evermore”, over against the brief period of Psalm 90 already referred to. Psalm 90 is a matter of consequence, especially for young people — how brief human life is! Those of us who are older know it is so. So that all of these facts ought to affect old and young as to the great blessing of eternal life which God has secured through Christ.
It is thought now that we should go into the first epistle of John, the writer being the minister the Spirit of God has used so largely in unfolding this great subject. In this epistle he presents life in substantial evidence as it came out in Christ as a Man — heard, seen and handled. And then, God’s order was that it should appear in testimony in the graded circles of fellowship: first, the fellowship of the Father and Son; and then the apostles coming into that fellowship, so that we have fellowship with [p. 164] them. The truth of eternal life is thus seen in testimony on the most exalted platform. And then there is the fellowship in life which christians have “with one another”; and then life is seen expressed in family growth. So that the epistle sets life before us in a very concrete, orderly and beautiful way. Thus there should be no mistaking of those who are in possession, by the power of the Spirit, of eternal life in Christ. We have the expression in this epistle of eternal life not abiding in certain ones. The positive idea would be that in those that believe it does abide by the Spirit; and it gives character to them. Someone has said that eternal life is like an ocean and the believer like a basket in it — the basket is in the ocean and the ocean is in the basket!
JS Would the fellowship be in the light, and would life be expressed in love?
JT Fellowship is in the light. Spiritually life is light. In Christ, life was the light of men; John 1: 4. If we walk in the light as God is in the light, we have fellowship with one another. In our chapter the first idea of fellowship is in the Father and the Son, and then the apostles come into that (verse 3). And then christians have fellowship with the apostles — “that ye also may have fellowship with us”, the apostle says. So it is a graded matter. Finally, there is fellowship with one another. “If we walk in the light as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another” (verse 7). So the matter of fellowship in this chapter is remarkable and requires close attention in regard to our subject.
ANW In the better translation (verse 2), the article “the” precedes eternal life. Would you please say a word as to what that signifies — “the eternal life”?
JT Well, the article usually gives the whole idea, and that should be before us tonight. The Lord uses it Himself in John 17. “And this is the eternal life, that they should know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou has sent” (verse 3). The note tells us that the article is added because it throws the emphasis on “eternal” as in the Greek.
MDF “He that has the Son has life”, 1 John 5: 12.
JT Yes, that is stated, too. The subject is very great, clearly coming into the Scriptures in Genesis 2, including the tree of life, and it runs through to the last chapter of Revelation; in fact, it is stated that it was a promise before the world. In the earlier meetings we have entered into the subject largely as expressed in the idea of life as energy at the present time, but it is now thought that we should see it in its fulness, as has just been suggested. John here says, “We ... report to you the eternal life, which was with the Father, and has been manifested to us” (verse 2). So that nobody may be mistaken as to that expression, it should be remarked that it does not refer to what was before the world. It is a question of what Christ was as Man here; Christ was with the Father as a Man. As it is said, “And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we have contemplated his glory, a glory as of an only-begotten with a father)”, John 1: 14. Of course, He had part with the Father as in Deity, but this passage contemplates Him as incarnate.
CAM I think you have said that when the Lord Jesus was here on earth eternal life was here in testimony.
JT That is right. He was contemplated by the disciples as “an only-begotten with a father”. “The eternal life which was with the Father”; the allusion there is to what had taken form in Christ. “In him was life, and the life was the light of men”, John 1: 4. And so we have the idea of the manifestation of it in 1 John 2; but in chapter 3, we have the word ‘manifestation’ used in connection with another truth. It is said, “Beloved, now are we children of [p. 166] God, and what we shall be has not yet been manifested” (verse 2). The brethren will notice the word ‘manifested’ here does not refer to what is in chapter 1. What is alluded to here is not yet manifested, “We know that if it is manifested we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is”. That is yet future, but the manifestation in chapter 1 is what came out in Christ as Man here, with the Father, but made known, as John says, “We have contemplated his glory, a glory as of an only-begotten with a father”. Then what they saw in Him in that sense is reported to the saints. That is the graded way in which the truth is stated. What they saw is presented in the testimony to us that we might have fellowship with them.
RWS Do the words that Peter speaks of — “Thou hast the words of life eternal”, bear on this and follow what you said as to the Father and Son?
JT That would be the order of the truth. They were words the apostles had heard. The “words of life eternal” would render the great blessing intelligible — in language, not simply manifestation.
APT That is the “word of life” as in our chapter.
JT That is the same thing, but it is not ‘words’ here, but “word”. It is making known the whole thought by speaking or writing.
APT Would that be involved in “that which we have seen and heard”? Is that the result of what he says, “the word of life”?
JT It [p. 167] was concerning the word of life; the externals; that is, the Lord’s Person in flesh; but the word of life is to be regarded by itself, what was said: “Go ye and stand and speak in the temple to the people all the words of this life”, Acts 5: 20. That is more than eternal life. It is the life of Jesus as here on earth; but in that life eternal life was witnessed to.
WFK Is the word of life the Lord Himself?
JT Yes, in the sense that He expressed life — conveyed it in verbal testimony. It is not a title. But the formal statement, “The Word” in John 1 is a title. Christ was the expression of the mind of God; He was it and expressed it in His Person among men — by word and otherwise — and hence the Greek word logos was employed by the Spirit to designate His Person.
WFK It speaks of handling, concerning the word.
JT It is what they handled. “That which was from the beginning, that which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes; that which we contemplated, and our hands handled, concerning the word of life” (verse 1). It does not say that they handled the word of life. It was concerning. It refers to the Lord’s Person in manhood.
JTJr It is covered by the word ‘that’ throughout.
JT Yes; it is a question of what was there. It is the Lord’s Person as visible, but it was concerning the word of life. The word of life is the spiritual side. The other is what could be seen by human eyes. The wording is to show that it was real, tangible — in a Person that anybody could see as a physical object.
ABP Is it intended that the quality which is covered by the word ‘that’ continues now? Is the quality that was there — the thing itself expressed in Christ — continued now through the Spirit operating in the saints?
JT Yes. It includes “that which we have seen and heard we report to you” (verse 3). There is what was tangible and what was spiritual in the report. The ‘that’ in verse 1 is to bring out that what was testified to by the apostles was not a mere spiritual apparition, that some thought it might have been; it was a real tangible Person. That is really what is [p. 168] meant, that the Lord Jesus brought the thing in in that way so that there should be no question as to the reality of it. Of course the ‘that’ as applied to Christ could not be here in that sense now, because He is not here personally, but the idea of persons physically being affected by life is true. We ought to be affected by it so that anyone that sees the christian sees something tangible as to what christianity means.
JTJr Being with the Father would be something entirely new; it never existed before in that way? It is said of Enoch that he walked with God. That did not rise to this, did it?
JT No; this is what was with the Father. We have, for instance in Luke, quoting Gabriel, “The holy thing also which shall be born ...”. It is an allusion to the substantiality of Christ’s Person, speaking reverently, that the word ‘thing’ was used, but substantially holy. It grew up here into manhood. The neuter is used here — “that which”, but it alludes, in verse 1, to what was observable in Christ as a Man as a witness to this great matter of life.
ANW Is there more than what is recorded in the four gospels in the report? Verse 3 says, “That which we have seen and heard we report to you” — when did they do that?
JT That would be in the apostolic service. John may have done more of it than others, but it would be apostolic service. But what did they see? They saw before they began to report.
ANW I wondered whether in their ministry they covered more than is recorded in the gospels.
JT I would be doubtful of that, because I think the gospels go further in the sense that “in him was life and the life was the light of men”. That is not alluding to the apostolic ministry; it alludes to what had been seen in Christ as here. That was the old commandment — what they heard from the beginning. It was the same in principle as the new commandment. “Again, I write a new commandment to you, which thing is true in him and in you, because the darkness is passing and the true light already shines”, 1 John 2: 8. That is christianity. That brings christianity into accord with Christ personally. The passage in John 1 implies that “the life was the light of men”, was the old commandment; it was shining in Him, not simply through the apostolic ministry; and now the new commandment is true in Him and true in us. Thus “the true light already shines”. I think that ought to be clearly in mind because the testimony is light, but it is not simply that we have doctrine, but we have what is substantial in the sense of life; the life was the light of men, and I think that enters into the new commandment in chapter 2, and it still goes on. Christianity is the same light, in that sense, that shone in Jesus.
AR Would it be exemplified in Peter and John going up to the temple to pray and saying, “Look on us”?
JT Just so.
FNW Paul used the word of life in Philippians “holding forth the word of life”, Philippians 2: 16.
JT That enters into what we are saying. Christianity implies the new commandment in chapter 2, and is in accord with the old commandment which was in Christ. And the old commandment is what is true in Christ here; the new commandment is what is true in us here in the Spirit; so christianity is the new commandment.
AAT Do we not understand ministry much better if we listen to the minister? Seeing the Lord and listening to Him, you would get a better impression than simply reading about Him?
JT That is so because when enquired of by the Jews as to who He was, the Lord said to them, “... altogether that which I also say unto you”.
AR Paul says, “God is faithful, by whom ye [p. 170] have been called into the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord”, 1 Corinthians 1: 9. Does that fit here?
JT It is not the same thing as the apostles’ fellowship. Of course there is a link in the word ‘fellowship’. In Corinthians, however, it is the fellowship of God’s Son. Here it is “with”.
RWS Will you enlarge on the idea of gradations in fellowship.
JT I think it is very important, because I think we make it too general, whereas there are great niceties in the scripture that are food to us, and especially this great matter of fellowship in relation to life. It is set in graded positions; first the Father and Son; that is, the Son as Man here, with the Father; and then the apostles coming into what they had in the sense of fellowship; not simply that they had the light from the Father and the Son but there was fellowship in it — “and our fellowship is indeed with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ”; then thirdly that we have fellowship with the apostles; and fourthly, we have fellowship with one another. That is another thing. We might say the apostles are also in that, for John here says, “If we walk in the light as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another”.
AD Would it be diverting too much to distinguish between our position in sonship and this matter of fellowship that we are discussing?
JT John does not treat of sonship in the saints. He treats of sonship in Christ pre-eminently, but in us, very little; sonship is more what we are Godward, which is Paul’s line. The fellowship is what is before men. And chapter 2 is what we are as christians down here; that we have part in the new commandment, the new commandment being true in Him and in us. It is the old commandment in Christ, that is, what He was here as Man. Now He has accomplished redemption and ascended to heaven and the Spirit [p. 171] has come, the thing that is true in Him is true in us. It is a new commandment, so christianity is a new commandment. It never grows old but retains its freshness.
RWS Is the quality of eternal life on a lower level because of the gradation?
JT I do not think there is any change in the quality. The thing is true in Him and in us. It is eternal life in both cases.
RWS I was interested in the allusion to gradations, as if we were at a disadvantage because we were not in the position in which the apostles were.
JT Chapter 2 generalises. Verse 7 says, “Beloved, I write no new commandment to you, but an old commandment, which ye have had from the beginning”. Now, we will have to take that by itself. And what is that old commandment? Well, the apostle says, “An old commandment, which ye have had from the beginning”. That was what Christ was as Man here. And then he says in verse 8, “Again, I write”. I think that word ‘again’ is a new subject, as the Lord said in Matthew 18: 19, “Again I say to you”. Here in this word ‘again’, it seems to me, the Lord is coming into christianity. The position in which Christ was as Man here is terminated. He has died out of that and gone into heaven, and we shall never have a condition like that again. There never was the like of that before either; but this new commandment in verse 8 is christianity, and that holds the ground now. It really is the only thing that holds the ground now. The Spirit here holds the ground as to this matter; so that he goes on to say, “which thing is true in him and in you”. That is not what was true but is true; what He is now. And thus, “because the darkness is passing and the true light already shines”. It is passing in those who have the Spirit. Every person that comes into this is the termination of [p. 172] some darkness; a great substantial fact. Every real christian represents some darkness displaced.
WR Is this the same thought as the Lord Himself presented to the disciples in John 15, “This is my commandment, that ye love one another, as I have loved you”?
JT Quite so; that is a commandment that is translated into a message in this epistle (chapter 3: 11), that we should love one another. It is the second message in this epistle.
CAM Were you not stressing, in connection with gradation, the first thing was what this was to the Father?
JT Yes; what did the Father find there? He was with the Father, is said here. What did He have? I mean to say, that is a thought to arise in the heart. Considered as by Themselves, what was there? This is an historical fact, and it corresponds with John 1: 18, “... the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father”. It is an allusion to the same fact.
CAM What is so impressive is what you said that this was in a time condition; it was what took place after the Lord became Man.
JT That is right; it had taken form in Christ as Man as with the Father Himself; it was from the beginning, not in the beginning as in John 1. That is the order of the truth. What was eternal life in Christ to the Father? It was between the Father and the Son, you might say; and then the twelve are brought into it as John says, “We have contemplated his glory, a glory as of an only-begotten with a father”, John 1: 14.
JTJr Do you take the beginning to allude to His birth?
JT The allusion, properly, in John’s way of putting things, would be when He was actually a Man. It was there all the time, but I think God waited for testimony from fulness of manhood. I [p. 173] think what you say is right. The question was raised many years ago as to whether eternal life was in Christ as a Babe. Of course, it was. God was there, but then the time for display had not come. John here is referring to what was manifested.
APT The word ‘was’, verse 2: “... which was with the Father” — is that, as to time, what you are speaking about?
JT That would be in manhood; we have to leave the actual historical moment, but it certainly was something that came under the Father’s eye. There is a note there which helps somewhat. The original word indicates “the place where, or the state” — the most lovable One in the place of supreme love: “... the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father”, John 1: 18. In the epistle it is that which and with the Father. It is Christ as Man viewed as in the condition and character in which the life was manifested. The character of Christ as He came under the Father’s eye by Himself is set before us, also what the hallowed eyes of the apostles saw and what their hallowed hands touched. It is not simply that the Lord Jesus came under the Father’s eye at a given time. He came under it all the time. The Spirit of God is speaking, but He is speaking of Christ in the character of the manifestation of eternal life. He was with the Father, but manifested to the apostles — by them heard, seen and handled.
CAM There must have been something very special for the Father in this.
JT That is the point to apprehend; what there must have been for God there. What was there between God and Adam when He breathed into him the breath of life? There must have been something, but think of what there was for the Father with Jesus alone, as it were, before His eye and with Him in the character of eternal life. And then the life was [p. 174] manifested to the apostles in the most intimate and positive way and thus reported in testimony to the saints.
AR Is that why he mentions that our fellowship is indeed with the Father? Is that what He was as under the eye of the Father, and we are brought into it, too?
JT Yes. They understood what they were dealing with, and they were enjoying it, too, and then the saints come into it through their report, the Holy Spirit having His part in it.
JTJr Do you get the thought in the Lord’s own words: “... a man who has spoken the truth to you, which I have heard from God”. Is that the idea that eternal life is testified to in that way?
JT Just so; whatever it was, it is specially noted here, that eternal life which was with the Father. It was first with the Father, and then it was manifested to the disciples. Acts 1: 3 says, “to whom also he presented himself living”. That would be the fulness of it in Him as risen.
FNW What you say would be confirmed in the latter part of Acts 1: “... all the time in which the Lord Jesus came in and went out among us, beginning from the baptism of John”. Is it as if Matthias, in having part in this fellowship, must have seen Him from that point on?
JT Yes; that, however, is in view of assembling. This is in view of life. It is what God is bringing in for man according to His eternal purpose, and it is now taking form in Jesus under His own eye. Then the apostles were brought into that. I believe it required the Holy Spirit for them to understand it rightly.
TEH Do we see a foreshadowing of this holy life between the Father and Son, as seen between Abraham and Isaac in the conversation on the way to [p. 175] the mountain?
JT The types help. We are reminded of John 1 the “glory as of an only-begotten with a father”. How beautiful are the reciprocal affections expressed!
RWS Eternal life is not a quality; the allusion here is to a Person, is it?
JT It is “the eternal life, which was with the Father”. I would not make too much of terms, but on the other hand, we must not generalise too much and thus miss the gain of the food to be found in words used by the Spirit in such an exalted subject as the one under consideration. The neuter being used, it is not simply the Person of Christ that is in mind but rather the fact that what expressed eternal life could be handled; that is, it was a real material Person, outwardly like any other man that could be handled. John lay in His bosom and on His breast; John 13: 23 - 25. Well, there it is that. How accessible He was! How intimate were the relations between Him and the disciples! Thus it is “that which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes; that which we contemplated, and our hands handled, concerning the word of life”. That is, any one of the apostles could say (if, for instance, he were speaking to an interested man like Cornelius) I actually partook of the same dish at meals, embraced the Person who has brought eternal life into this world. How wonderful!
CAM Manhood did not add anything to the Lord in His own essential infiniteness, but coming into manhood must have brought out glories that only manhood could bring out.
JT That is right; certain things that God had purposed for man awaited the incarnation. A divine Person only could be great enough to display the things, to bring them forth so they could be seen in their glory.
AD Is that what is referred to as the glory which He has [p. 176] won?
JT Quite so; this is one of the glories. If you look at John 17, there are several glories, and of one of them it says, “the glory which thou hast given me I have given them”. I think that is sonship, although John does not in his gospel apply that word ‘son’, or ‘sonship’, to the saints. Sonship is greater than eternal life. Eternal life in John 17 is said to be given by the Lord to as many as the Father has given Him. Eternal life is what God has purposed for man as meeting death, but sonship is what we are as for God. “Having marked us out beforehand for adoption through Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he has taken us into favour in the Beloved”.
AR Would it be right to say that in contacting one another in holy greetings and fellowship we are, in principle, participating in life?
JT That is the principle of it. And how great and blessed were the intimate relations of the apostles with the Lord! Peter speaks of them as having “eaten and drunk with him after he arose from among the dead”. How real that was! Science would say that it is impossible, but it is quite possible. In this sense, what can God not do? So the Lord as risen actually ate and drank with the disciples. Peter brings that forward as a point of testimony. How real His humanity was! In resurrection He was as real a Man as He was before He died; Acts 10: 41.
FSC Peter realised the truth when he said, “Thou hast words of life eternal”.
JT That helps, “To whom shall we go? thou hast words of life eternal”. It is ‘words’ what the Lord said about it; but what did John realise when he lay in His bosom?
AR The christian circle is really a sphere of eternal life.
JT It is the circulation of it in the saints. The Lord looked “around in a circuit at those that were sitting around him”, Mark 3: 34. We have the idea of a circuit in the heavens, also in the earth, but the real circle is in the saints; the Spirit of God in the saints. It is the circulation of life as we are in touch with one another. That is the basis of the body, that we are members one of another. We have the theory of this, but the actual fact is the thing to get hold of, that the saints are members of one another.
JTJr The natural is excluded from all that. The Lord says to His mother, “What have I to do with thee, woman?” He excludes mere natural relationship and feelings.
JT All this enters into assembly service. It implies the relation in which we come together in assembly when, as there is power, we are outside of the realm of flesh and blood.
AI The apostle says, “I now live in flesh, I live by faith, the faith of the Son of God, who has loved me and given himself for me”. What life would that be?
JT That is a christian’s life in the wilderness. It is not properly eternal life. That is, “I now live in flesh”, but life eternal is really a wholly spiritual matter. It is over the Jordan; but the measure in which we enter into it we are affected in our ordinary life of faith down here.
In the end of chapter 1, the system connected with redemption is brought in so as to make the truth possible for us; that is, first the efficacy of the blood of Christ cleansing us from all sin, so we might have part in the great things mentioned, free from the influence of sin. And then the apostle proceeds to speak about the Advocate we have with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous — showing what we are speaking of is connected with the divine system set up in Christ. The Advocate is above, corresponding with the Spirit here below. The words ‘Advocate’ and ‘Comforter’ are the same in the original. Thus believers are wonderfully provided for in the system God has established for us; it supports us especially in this great matter of life, that we should enjoy it.
The apostle regards himself as a father and the saints as his children. This shows what a place he had, under God, in the service of the truth. And then he introduces the old commandment and the new commandment which we have already touched on, and from which we have to pass on now to the matter of growth that John here deals with. It also involves his great subject of life.
JS This precious life that John speaks of, is continued down here in the saints?
JT That is the point; what is true in Him is true in us. But when we come to the family of God, we have first all the saints viewed as children of the apostle. They are called “children of God” in chapter 3, but in chapter 2: 12, they are written to as children; that is, in the sense of all christians having their sins forgiven. But from verse 13 they are viewed in three distinct classes: fathers, young men, and little children. This classification implies growth. Verse 12 is all the saints as on the Lord’s day morning in assembly for the breaking of bread. We are all, old and young, on the same level. And then in verse 13, “I write to you, fathers”. We come now to the gradation in the family, not the fellowship but the christian family; the fathers first, and then young men, and then little children. I mention all this because it is so essential for young people to begin to look at themselves and say, Is there any growth in me at all? have I made any headway at all since I was converted? That is a question for everybody to ask himself.
AI What would be the thought of the fathers?
JT “Because ye have known him that is from the beginning”. That is what is said to them. And [p. 179] it is said to the young men, “Because ye have overcome the wicked one”. And the apostle says to the little children, “I write to you, little children, because ye have known the Father”. Notice it is not that ye have known Him who is from the beginning, but the Father; that is to say, the young christian has the place of a little child in the family. It is the saints viewed as in graded relations according to growth from verse 13 to the end of verse 27. We are looked at as in what I may call the family in its status down here; not the sons of God in heaven. It is what we are actually here below, and the question is, how real we are, whether we have come into fellowship because others have come in or whether there is any little bit of growth in us.
JAP Is Samuel an illustration of this, in his growth year by year?
JT Yes, the time came when Jehovah spoke to him, but in his mother’s mind there was the idea of growth in him. She made him “a little coat” every year. Christians ought each to look to himself as to what progress he is making, or if he is making any.
WR Is one of the features of a fit state for fellowship that we have a strong judgment about sin which ends in death?
JT Just so; the word about the children in verse 12 is that our sins are forgiven for His name’s sake. That refers to every one of us. The end of verse 13 is, “I write to you, little children, because ye have known the Father”. That means that I have the Spirit. It is by the Spirit I know the Father.
JTJr Do the affections enter into this — the children, fathers and young men, all suggestive of affection in movement?
JT That is the idea; what a circle of affection it is; the fathers, young men, and little children Active growth and the fruit accompanying it are contemplated.
AR [p. 180] Children are not very long in a natural family before they are saying, Father. Some of our children are in the family a very long time and never say, Father.
APT Isaac says, “My father!”
JT Quite so; the Spirit of God’s Son cries, “Abba, Father”. The believer by the Spirit of adoption also cries, “Abba Father”.
WFK Is this “pride of life” (verse 16) in contrast to real life?
JT Quite so. The Father is the antidote to all that in the young men.
The idea in this epistle is that what is in Christ is not growth; it is perfect; that is, there is no development of what is in Christ. It is Christ Himself as the eternal life; there is no development in that. It is what it is; it is perfect there in its fulness. In us there is growth; we grow up to it. But correlatively with that is the thought of sonship which John does not develop. He is developing the public living feature in christianity. There are those who have known Christ from the beginning; they are advanced persons; they are experienced persons. Then there are those who have overcome the wicked one. You can see it; they have an exercise about the world. And then there are little children. You cannot say anything more than that they have known the Father, which implies that they have the Spirit. For we are not taken into account unless we have the Spirit; one is not even one of the little children unless he has the Spirit.
WR Why do you think the apostle here addresses the little children in relation to the last hour (verse 18)?
JT Antichrists are in mind. They are a danger that besets young people. They are apt to be influenced by notable men; the world today is full of them. The little children are before us specially from verses 18 [p. 181] to 27.
TEH Do we come under the authority of Christ in receiving eternal life, as we have noted in John 17?
JT Just so, “As thou hast given him authority over all flesh, that as to all that thou hast given to him, he should give them life eternal”, John 17: 2. That would include the children here.
AR What do you have in mind in relation to chapter 3?
JT Well, we have already touched on it, what is to be manifested. It enters into the subject, because it refers to what we shall see when we see Him. What the disciples saw; what was manifested, spoken of in chapter 1, is another thing; it is what the Lord was down here. In this chapter, in keeping with that, we have: “Beloved, now are we children of God”. That is a present fact, and what we shall be has not yet been made manifest. “We know that if it is manifested we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is”. This refers to what Christ is now, according to Philippians 3. We shall have bodies like Christ’s body of glory. We are awaiting that. And it enters into this great matter of life, what we shall be in the bodies of glory we are to get presently; they will be like Christ’s body as it is now — His “body of glory”.
ABP Would that be different from Acts 1? As seen there He was not yet glorified.
JT I think there is a difference, only the word ‘glorify’, as conveying Christ’s position at God’s right hand, would be official. “His body of glory”, contemplated in Philippians 3, would, I believe, be constitutional. The chapter stresses the heavens and the calling on high in this sense. “Our commonwealth has its existence in the heavens” (verse 20). It is characteristically there. As in heaven, we are of heaven; we are constitutionally heavenly, and our bodies will be heavenly. Things will be transformed into conformity to Christ’s body of glory.
John says here, “What we shall be has not yet been manifested”. I believe this corresponds with Philippians 3: 21.
CAM Would “children of God” in 1 John 3: 2 lead into sonship in connection with this manifestation?
JT That is what we shall be when we shall see Him. What John alludes to is our glorious state and relation in the future in contrast with our present state and relation. The word ‘children’ does not run into eternity. Sons are brought to glory. But more than sonship is, I believe, contemplated in this passage. Sonship is manifested.
FSC The name of Christ is not brought into this section; I have often wondered why. Throughout these three verses the names given are the Father and God; the ‘him’ seems to be Christ.
JT It is. The same feature extends back into chapter 2 and indeed appears throughout the epistle. Life being the subject, it would seem that Christ in character was prominently in his mind as the writer, by the Spirit, proceeded in the work given him to do. Thus the pronouns ‘he’ and ‘him’ are sometimes used to designate Christ as God, and at other times to designate Him as Man without formal evidence as to which is meant. And sometimes God Himself is designated in the same manner.