THE LIFE WHICH IS IN CHRIST JESUS (14)
[p. 292] THE LIFE WHICH IS IN CHRIST JESUS (14)
John 3: 35, 36; John 4:1-14; John 4:31-38
JT The reason for referring again to these chapters in John is that we have in them the divine economy: in chapter 3 it is formally introduced, and in chapter 4 it is seen in function. Evidently this is with a view to the inclusion of the subject of life in the administration involved in the economy. The place the Spirit has in chapter 4 is essential to the understanding and realisation of life, which is the subject before us, for it implies the subjective side of the truth with which we are engaged. Then, too, it is thought that certain features of the early part of chapter 3 may be touched on again profitably; that is, the change in the Lord’s discourse with Nicodemus. He had said, verse 11, “Verily, verily” — this phrase occurs frequently in John’s gospel, stressing particular truths — “I say unto thee, We speak that which we know, and we bear witness of that which we have seen”: stressing what gives character to His witness, how reliable it is, and especially because He is about to give a new turn to His remarks. He had been speaking of earthly things, but now He is about to speak of heavenly things, connecting eternal life with these. And then He adds, verse 13, “No one has gone up into heaven, save he who came down out of heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven”. He introduces this great fact to strengthen what He had said as to the reliability of His testimony.
And then the Lord refers to Numbers 21, saying, “And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, thus must the Son of man be lifted up, that every one who believes on him may not perish, but have life eternal”, John 3: 14, 15. Following this we have the well-known verse 16, which stresses divine love in relation to the gift of eternal life. All these remarks [p. 293] are intended to make clear the significance of verse 35 which implies administration, and to show that chapter 4 enlarges on it.
APT Would the continuation of the truth you have been suggesting as coming from the Lord Jesus Himself be remarkably followed up by John the baptist in verse 27 where he speaks so wonderfully of the Lord Jesus? He says, “A man can receive nothing unless it be given him out of heaven”, and then, verse 31, “He who comes from above is above all ... . He who comes out of heaven is above all”. Would John be ready to take on the Lord’s thoughts in verse 11? Ought we to be like him, to take on the heavenly truth?
JT These words are evidently to be linked with what the Lord Himself had said, as we have just quoted from verses 13 and 14. It is said in verse 24 that John was not yet cast into prison. In the synoptic gospels the Lord did not begin to serve until John was cast into prison. Therefore, as seen in John 3, He is speaking unofficially, because John is still on the ground in his ministry. It seems as if John is allowed to bear this wonderful testimony as to Him, which is, you might say, that in which he disappears. It is the very top note of John’s ministry, and it confirms what the Lord said in verse 13. It should help us as to our subject — how eternal life is an out-of-the-world condition of things; not stated exactly to be in heaven, but linking up with it, and on the way to it. And then the administrative position, placed by the Father, in His love for Him, in the hand of the Son (verse 35). Thus the economy, as we have said, is seen functioning in chapter 4, so that we might come into the position in real power, and not simply as a matter of light, but a well springing up into — not heaven, exactly, but — eternal life.
JTJr Would the administrative side be marked, not only by intelligence, but by affection?
JT [p. 294] Yes. That is what every one who loves God and who loves Christ appreciates. “The Father loves the Son”, and what has been ministered to us is the fruit of love; and surely as we have come into the system, love should be characteristic of us, in our service especially.
EMcK Is this the first thing that the Lord administers after the statement, “The Father loves the Son, and has given all things to be in his hand”? Is eternal life peculiarly important in that way?
JT Yes. The Lord is also telling the woman about the Spirit, but under the designation “living water”. Eternal life is brought in incidental to the truth of the Spirit in this chapter. In chapter 3 eternal life is more definitely the main thought, but the Spirit, chapter 4, necessarily is greater. The Spirit enables us to appropriate it. The Spirit makes it effective, for the water Christ gives becomes in the believer “a fountain of water, springing up into eternal life”. That would imply the sphere of eternal life. It is not simply a matter of light or theory, but touched in a real way; touched in some degree, for instance, as we are together now; not, of course, in the sense of physical elevation, but moral elevation, that we are outside of the course of things in this world.
AR Like “days of the heavens which are above the earth”, Deuteronomy 11: 21?
JT I think that helps us as to the position of eternal life; lest it be regarded as identical with heaven. It is kept by itself, the elevation being moral rather than physical, ‘an out-of-the-world order of relationship and being in which eternal life consists’.
AR Would you tell us what are the features of the sphere that we see?
JT There are several features or viewpoints which, as together received into the mind, aid it as [p. 295] to the whole position. John 3 and Romans 6 tell us it is the gift of God. The believer has it as a divine gift of love. And we learn from 1 John 5 and Romans 6 that this life is in Christ, that is, in God’s Son. And John 4, as we have seen, shows that it is by the Spirit we reach it and appropriate it. But the idea of rule must enter into it, as well as love. Love enters into it, but the idea of rule must enter into it also. Romans develops it in relation to the kingdom: “So also grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord”, chapter 5: 21. And then in chapter 6 it is “in Christ Jesus”.
AAT You used the word ‘economy’; are you including it in these remarks?
JT The word ‘economy’, of course, refers to administration, and it is implied in the two verses read from chapter 3: “The Father loves the Son, and has given all things to be in his hand”. That is the idea of the economy. It is a matter between the Father and the Son. The Father loves the Son. The form of words, “to be in his hand”, refers to mediatorial economy. We shall see in chapter 4 how this works; how this woman coming into contact with the Lord comes into it. She is already in an economy, in some sense, because she has a waterpot. She had come to draw water, which would imply that she was looking after her house. She is not drawing for herself alone, but for others; and the Lord infers that. He says, “Give me to drink”, meaning that she is in an administrative position; so that the subject is clearly introduced and carried through in chapter 4, and the waterpot is a sort of symbol of her administrative service. But that waterpot is left; meaning that she has been drawn into the new administration. She says to the men, “Come, see a man”. She is now active in helping others.
EEH Would you say that the means of appropriation of this new life would involve subjection to [p. 296] the Administrator, as seen in the end of chapter 3? There are those who would not be subject. “He that is not subject to the Son shall not see life”.
JT Subjection to the Son is essential, and implies the economy. The woman is in principle and practice in it. Chapter 4 is instructive in detail as to how this was effected.
J.van Z. What is the difference between believing on Jesus, and believing on the Son? Why is the thought of the Son stressed?
JT The appellation ‘Son’ conveys the thought of Christ’s Person in this gospel. The Person of the Son is the great feature of it, and He is here presented so as to be apprehended and to become an Object of faith to men. He is the gift that is given: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son”. Then, as we have noted in verse 35, “The Father loves the Son”. The Person of the Son is stressed in chapter 3, as demonstrating the love that entered into the gift; showing the greatness of it. Paul says, “He who, yea, has not spared his own Son, but delivered him up for us all”, Romans 8: 32. It is to stress the greatness of the gift, and, therefore, the love involved in it.
WWM Do you think that the woman of Samaria leaving her waterpot would mean that she is now becoming that herself? She is the vessel now.
JT That is the idea, and I hope that chapter 4 will open up to all of us how, as believing on the Lord, we come practically into eternal life. We get other things too, but they are not stressed here. It is indicated, however, that believers also become part of the new system, and that normally they are used so that others should have part in it. Hence the woman goes to the men, having left her waterpot; meaning, as we have said, that the character of the new administration involves herself as a vessel.
[p. 297] Normally, each of us becomes usable as he has the Spirit.
AR The woman is now operating in relation to a new centre.
JT Yes; it is a question of a Man. “Come, see a man”, she says. She is delivered from what she had been in. But she is not merely delivered; she is usable to the Lord. He does not, however, send her; she goes. It is a voluntary thing so far, and I think we shall all understand that. God looks for voluntariness in us, although service involves conscription. Yet there is primarily the thought of offering oneself as Isaiah did; “Here am I; send me”. However, we ought to get the basis of the economy more clearly before we come to these details. The first is that the Father loves the Son. A great thought to come into our souls! And then. He “has given all things to be in his hand”. And then, “He that believes on the Son has life eternal, and he that is not subject to the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides upon him”.
JTJr Would Solomon, as a type, come in here? He administered in the position given over to him by David. That is, all that had been acquired under David comes under Solomon’s administration. Would that fit in here?
JT I think so; and if we have time to look at 1 Chronicles 29 we shall see the transition from David to Solomon. David says, in chapter 28: 4, “And Jehovah the God of Israel chose me out of all the house of my father to be king over Israel for ever; for he has chosen Judah to be the prince; and of the house of Judah, the house of my father; and among the sons of my father he took pleasure in me to make me king over all Israel; and of all my sons, (for Jehovah has given me many sons,) he has chosen Solomon my son to sit upon the throne of the kingdom of Jehovah over Israel. And he said to me,
[p. 298] Solomon thy son, he shall build my house and my courts; for I have chosen him to be my son, and I will be his father”.
Now that is the general thought of the transfer. God had pleasure in David, but now He is having pleasure in David’s son in view of the building; and then in chapter 29, verses 23 - 25, “And Solomon sat on the throne of Jehovah as king instead of David his father, and prospered; and all Israel obeyed him. And all the princes, and the mighty men, and all the sons likewise of king David, submitted themselves to Solomon the king. And Jehovah magnified Solomon exceedingly in the sight of all Israel, and bestowed upon him royal majesty such as had not been on any king before him in Israel”.
Now these are the facts of the type. David being the father, and Solomon is brought in to be king. Solomon sat on the throne of Jehovah. I think all that is implied in the verse, “The Father loves the Son, and has given all things to be in his hand”. Everyone submitting himself and believing on the Son has eternal life, but “he that is not subject to the Son shall not see life”. This clearly is the position now, and chapter 4 opens it up — how the true Solomon proceeded; for the Lord, in speaking to the woman, said, “If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that says to thee, Give me to drink, thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water”. Who is He? That refers to His Person. The woman had to know, and so has every one, to apprehend Him according to the greatness of His Person.
EEH Would you say that, in the type, Shimei was one not subject to Solomon, and he suffered consequently? 1 Kings 2: 36 - 46.
JT Yes; there were several others. The passage here would refer immediately to the Jews that were then insubject. The Jews as a whole were insubject [p. 299] to Christ, but there were others who believed on Him and had eternal life.
RWS Is there then something moral in the introduction of the Pharisees in the first verse of chapter 4, and the fact that Jesus left Judaea? Is there a moral touch in that as over against chapter 3: 36?
JT Yes. I believe that leaving Judaea would be a sort of judicial action in view of what was said in verse 36, that “he that is not subject to the Son shall not see life”. In chapter 11 He spoke of going to Judaea and Thomas said, “Let us also go, that we may die with him” (verse 16). Leaving Judaea evidently implied that hostility to Christ, involving murder, was there. That would amplify what is said as to wrath abiding on one not subject to the Son. John anticipated the rejection of Christ from the outset. “He came to his own, and his own received him not”, chapter 1: 11. The geographical reference here meant that. Jerusalem was the centre of opposition and, of course, Judaea included it.
AR Does chapter 8 show that the Jews were apostate? The Lord said they were of their father the devil.
JT Yes. He said earlier, “for unless ye shall believe that I am [he], ye shall die in your sins” (verse 24). Then He says, “Ye are of the devil, as your father, and ye desire to do the lusts of your father” (verse 44). John’s writings help us peculiarly, because we are at the end of the dispensation, and it is gradually, but surely, becoming apostate; we may as well accept that and face it. But over against that we have eternal life as believers on the Son, which is an immense thing, and should calm our fears. The Lord says, elsewhere, “Be not afraid of those who kill the body, but cannot kill the soul”, Matthew 10: 28. Eternal life affords us victory in the presence of death.
J.van Z. Is your thought that eternal life should [p. 300] be laid hold of now amongst the saints, in view of the rejection and tribulation through which they are passing?
JT Exactly. God is blessing meetings such as this. These special meetings are increasing in number, and in attendance, and in blessing. I believe the Lord is thus fortifying us in view of the last days; that we should not be overwhelmed by circumstances, such as we are going through now. We have an outlet in coming together, for we come into the region of the Spirit and eternal life.
APT Are verses 35 and 36 of John 3 clear and distinct truths that the Lord gives in regard to this great matter? There is no middle line. All as to this great subject is settled — the Father’s love, and believing on the Son, and being subject.
JT Yes. Definite revolt from it, or disagreement with it, eliminates us from the blessing.
Chapter 4 is the subjective side of the position; chapter 3 is the objective side. Christ seen as a definite Object of faith — One on whom we are to believe — and certain things accrue from faith in Him. But then that, in itself, is only light. Life realised now is by the Spirit, and that is chapter 4. And as has been suggested, the Lord left Judaea, and went away again into Galilee — the place of reproach — Judaea and Jerusalem being the official position. The truth of chapter 4 evidently involves our acceptance of reproach, and also of the kind of people that we may have to company with in the blessing. The woman of Samaria is an outcast; she has no status at all among the Jews. She is accepting that. She is accepting that she is a Samaritan, and she says, “Jews have no intercourse with Samaritans”. She did not tell all the truth, however. She was claiming Jacob, but she was not really a Jewess. So the details of the chapter will help us to humble ourselves, and accept reproach, and tell the whole truth about ourselves.
[p. 301] If we are to share in these good things we must be transparent.
SL Is that what is involved in being subject? The footnote in the New Translation suggests that it is more than obedience to command.
JT It is the thought of subjection — that you are thoroughly subject. The note says, ‘It is the obedience of submission to his person, not practical obedience to his commands, whatever proof this may be of the other; but it is not exactly the same thing as believing on him as an object revealed in grace’. So that it is submission to His Person. The Person of the Son is stressed. The present attitude of the Jews is in mind, and its most solemn consequences.
FNW There would be reproach attached to the sixth hour?
JT I think it would involve reproach, because of her history. It was an unusual hour for women to come and draw water; and possibly it was chosen by her to avoid those who came at the ordinary time. At any rate, the idea of reproach runs through the chapter, and it is a question of the truth, each one acknowledging the truth relative to himself, whatever the detail may be. The woman says to the Lord, “Sir, give me this water, that I may not thirst nor come here to draw” (verse 15). She has come to the crucial point. The Lord, in what He had been saying, intended her to come to it; and immediately, as she asks for the water, He says, “Go, call thy husband, and come here”. The Lord meant the whole truth to come out. It is a question of exposure. If we are to come into the full truth of this great matter of eternal life, and the worship of God, the whole truth must come out, because christendom around us is full of lust and show; reality is hardly found in it.
WR Salvation lies in the whole thing coming out. The same thing is evident in the woman who [p. 302] had the issue of blood; Mark 5. The Lord says, “Who has touched my clothes?” (verse 30). Knowing what had taken place in her, the woman came immediately and fell down before Him, and told Him all the truth.
JT That scripture corresponds, but here the person involved is a Samaritan and hence under reproach as an alien from the commonwealth of Israel. And not only so, but she is under reproach because of her personal history; she is under reproach among her own people. That all has to be faced and the Spirit of God is telling us here that the realisation of the truth under consideration depends on reality with us. So that the Lord says to her, “Go, call thy husband, and come here”. And then she says, “I have not a husband”. Well, the whole story has often been told in our hearing, and it means that the woman is forced by the Lord’s way with her to tell the whole truth. That is the point.
CN Is the way this woman is reached suggestive in the fact that there is no sign done by the Lord to bring her to this great point? Does it show that His Person is regarded as causing the change in her — this being stressed in the truth of eternal life?
JT It is a question of Who was there — the Person. Office usually adds to him who has it, but no office adds to Christ, I mean as regards His Person. You cannot add to Deity; and the administration here is by a divine Person. The Person is greater than the office. That is what the Lord says: “If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that says to thee, Give me to drink, thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water”. That is, it would stir up confidence in her heart that God Himself had come so low as to ask a drink of water from a poor outcast of Samaria. That tells the whole story and we have to come to it and understand it so as to enter into what flows out from [p. 303] it.
AR Does she, as having had five husbands, represent religious looseness?
JT Yes. The divine marriage bond is not considered to be necessary. Certainly it would represent christendom, corresponding with the five porches in the next chapter — five entrances, as if one can go in anywhere.
EEH How do you regard the idea of Jehovah commanding the blessing in relation to John 3: 35, and “If thou knewest the gift of God ...”? Does it involve the economy of which you have been speaking?
JT Psalm 133 is millennial — the position of eternal life. “There hath Jehovah commanded the blessing, life for evermore”; although the characteristics seen there help us as to our coming into it. But, as already alluded to, John 3: 13 implies that before touching on this great matter of eternal life, which has a place in the millennium, according to Ezekiel, we are turned aside to the position of the Son of man who is in heaven. Of course, Ezekiel is frequently called son of man, which is prophetic, alluding to the coming day. But in speaking to Nicodemus the Lord turns aside deliberately to the heavenly side and we are dealing with that now. We are dealing with eternal life and how we have it in christianity. “And these shall go away into eternal punishment, and the righteous into life eternal” (Matthew 25: 46), contemplates the millennium. But in christianity eternal life is a question of faith and the Spirit. It is not an external, visible blessing; our coming into it is by the Spirit.
JTJr Chapter 3: 35, 36, therefore, is in the present tense, which would allude to Christ’s present place in heaven; and in the next chapter it is a question of the Spirit enabling us to enter into eternal life.
JT Quite so. We must bear in mind the coming in of the Spirit from heaven, which happened historically.
[p. 304] Christ went up and He sent the Spirit here, so that the position is a heavenly one now. In the future the saved nations will go into it. They will not need the Holy Spirit, as we have Him, to do that. It will be more or less that they go into it in a physical sense. Certain changes will take place, but now it is entirely dependent on the Spirit.
AI Would you regard the Spirit in chapter 4 as given to energise the affections of the believer?
JT Yes. There are two words used: one is ‘well’ (verse 11), which would allude to the whole matter including the shaft of the well, whereas the word ‘fountain’ (verse 14), refers to the water itself gushing up. It is energetic. It is, figuratively, the Spirit of God in us, and if the brethren will compare Matthew 25 with what we are saying, the force of it will be clearer — that we come into eternal life by the Spirit, whereas the nations will go into it in an external way.
TEH Would this woman be a sample case; the Lord teaching us through her how this truth works out amongst us?
JT Yes. This chapter is exemplary of the truth of coming into eternal life. It is not an external matter; it is an internal matter. When you come to the crucial point as to how you come into it, the Lord will bring up the whole question of your history. That has to be told out, because He will have transparency. When the woman says, “Sir, give me this water”, He says, “Go, call thy husband, and come here”. She makes no comment beyond that she has none. But that is not just the whole truth, and the Lord exposes that, too. He says, “Thou hast well said, I have not a husband; for thou hast [p. 305] had five husbands, and he whom now thou hast is not thy husband: this thou hast spoken truly” (verse 18). The Lord is saying, in fact, What you say is literally the truth, but it makes your case worse. You have had five husbands, and he whom now you have is not your husband. She says to Him, “Sir, I see that thou art a prophet”. That is where a real change is noticeable in her. It is what she saw. She says, “I see that thou art a prophet”. Certainty marks her.
WWM Is there a difference between her and Simon? She says, “I see that thou art a prophet”; he says, “If he were a prophet”, Luke 7: 39.
JT Quite so, she is certain of it.
AAT Is that where her conscience is reached?
JT I would say that. Well, some might say, it is incongruous for Him to be speaking about worship to a woman like that, but the Lord’s attitude is different. He implies, in what follows, that the woman is touched; she is now discerning as to Him. Even Nicodemus did not say the Lord was a prophet. He said, however, something that was akin to it: “We know that thou art come a teacher from God”. This was a conclusion already reached involving others, no doubt, but that of the woman is different. It was evidently an immediate result in her soul of what the Lord said to her as to her history. It was a direct shaft from God. The Lord accepts that. He does not hesitate to converse with her about worship. He says, “Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when ye shall neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem worship the Father. Ye worship ye know not what; we worship what we know, for salvation is of the Jews. But the hour is coming and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth; for also the Father seeks such as his worshippers. God is a spirit; and they who worship him must worship him in spirit and truth” (verses 21 - 24). Did He not mean something in answering her thus? He certainly did! He is now dealing with her as a subject of the work of God, worthy of being spoken to in this [p. 306] way.
AS Would that be the reason why He addressed her, Woman?
JT Maybe. It was certainly an honourable designation, extending far back. It was the first word Adam used as to his wife. “This shall be called Woman”, Genesis 2: 23. The Lord now calls this person, Woman, and maybe He has in mind that she is to be in the assembly.
RWS It may be that the shallowness that marks many of us is because we are not thorough enough in dealing with our moral histories as before God.
JT I am sure that is true. We probably all feel it, as we are speaking to one another, that we have not been transparent enough and therefore we are not as happy as we might be. We may have largely denied ourselves the blessedness of eternal life and of the privilege of worshipping the Father in spirit and truth.
TEH Would a meeting of a prophetic character come to the same result? The person convicted falls down and says, “God is indeed amongst you”.
JT Yes. That man, however, would go further than this woman is going. He is convicted of all, he is judged of all; the secrets of his heart are manifested; and thus, falling upon his face, he will do homage to God, reporting that God is indeed amongst the saints; 1 Corinthians 14: 24, 25.
SL It would have been a personal thing with the man coming into the assembly at Corinth.
JT He is said to be a simple person, or unbeliever. Apparently one who had not hitherto made any profession of christianity, but the power of prophecy would affect him as has been mentioned. I think it is to bring out the simultaneous effect of the truth where genuineness exists. The same thing is seen here, only the woman does not go so far.
AI Have you in mind that the prophetic [p. 307] word as coming from God, thus reaches the conscience of a person?
JT That is what it is for. The meetings we speak of as “ministry meetings” are intended for that — to convict and instruct us as to current matters.
J.van Z. What may we learn from the Lord’s word, “Behold, I say to you, Lift up your eyes and behold the fields, for they are already white to harvest” (verse 35)?
JT The Lord brings in the question of reaping. The paragraph beginning with verse 31 reads, “But meanwhile the disciples asked him saying, Rabbi, eat, But he said to them, I have food to eat which ye do not know. The disciples therefore said to one another, Has any one brought him anything to eat? Jesus says to them, My food is that I should do the will of him that has sent me, and that I should finish his work. Do not ye say, that there are yet four months and the harvest comes? Behold, I say to you, Lift up your eyes and behold the fields, for they are already white to harvest. He that reaps receives wages and gathers fruit unto life eternal, that both he that sows and he that reaps may rejoice together. For in this is verified the true saying, It is one who sows and another who reaps. I have sent you to reap that on which ye have not laboured; others have laboured, and ye have entered into their labours”. The paragraph was proposed to be read because it introduces life eternal as in keeping with the way it is treated in the chapter; that is, the fruit that we gather is “unto life eternal”. The sowers were earlier. The disciples are viewed as entering on other people’s labours. The Lord says, “I have sent you to reap that on which ye have not laboured; others have laboured, and ye have entered into their labours”. Now that is a word for us, because we have come in after a sowing time. Others laboured earlier and we have come in for the reaping. But the point for us [p. 308] now is that our reaping is unto eternal life. The labourers of a hundred years ago did not make much of it; they made a great deal of prophecy, the general truth of the gospel and the assembly, but fruit has been borne. The seed was sown then, and now we are gatherers; we are reapers, at least in principle, and the point is that it should bear on eternal life. By God’s help eternal life has been made much of since. About fifty years after the revival began it was much stressed and from that time interest in this great truth has, through divine grace, been maintained, and no doubt the prayers and exercises of the brethren will be that it should continue.
RWS Is the suggestion in our chapter that the disciples were not following closely in what the Lord was doing, and that that should be a voice to us?
JT Clearly He is intimating that they were not very efficient in the position that they were in. They had rather disqualified themselves in all going to the city — one or two could have secured the provisions. What happened at the well was an administrative service of the Lord, and fruit came out of it immediately, but they did not see it at all. They wondered that the Lord spoke with a woman. Why did they not think that He might be looking for fruit? They disqualified themselves. I think we have to take that to ourselves. There is much that has disqualified us and is disqualifying us for the reaping. But, still, I believe that the Lord is saying to us that it is the time of reaping, and that we are not to think of persons and increase of meetings only, but to gather fruit unto eternal life.
DP Why did they all leave Him and go away?
JT They went into the city to buy bread. Surely they all did not need to do that. They are administrating in a way, but they are not in the true administrative service; and they are missing it, and now they come back and question in their minds as [p. 309] to what the Lord was doing. But as they request Him to eat, the Lord says, “I have food to eat which ye do not know”, which implied that they were failing to enter into His mind and service. And then He adds the important verses which we have already quoted, but He does not make much of them in what He says.
SL Would you say that in a certain sense we are gathering fruit this afternoon?
JT If so I trust it is “unto eternal life”. We do not get many additions to our meetings, alas! The Lord has promised it, however. But the point He is making here is not that. The point is eternal life. Whatever fruit you gather, let it be unto eternal life. We are, through grace, among those who in a practical way, form the sphere of it, where the Lord commands the blessing.
JAP Isaac reaped a hundredfold and he became continually greater; Genesis 26: 12. Is that your thought?
JT Yes. The Lord becomes greater in our eyes, and we become greater through the reaping.
AI You were speaking of the disciples going away into the city to buy meat. Would that, in any way, make room for this woman?
JT No doubt. That is a question of what happened. But we are speaking of what happened, and what, from the disciples’ side, should have happened. They should have stood by the Lord at all times, but they left Him, and then God sovereignly brought in this woman. So that we have opened up to us a great line of things, especially in relation to the Spirit and eternal life.
AR Boaz told Ruth to keep close to the reapers.
JT Quite so. And she ultimately came into union with him. I am sure we should have in mind, in all our meetings, that they should bear on the great [p. 310] matter of eternal life, which fits us for union with Christ and supports us in it.
SL It is not simply going over the doctrine, but bearing on eternal life.
JT Just so. We are sharing life which involves the Spirit. John 3 is the objective side, as we have seen — what God is in the gift, and to whom the gift is given; and chapter 4 is what you may call the “Amen” side. It is the Spirit that enables us to say “Amen” in the true sense. The Psalms are characterised by “Amen, and Amen”. The first three books have at the ends, “Amen, and Amen”, the fourth, “Amen. Hallelujah!” and the fifth, “Hallelujah!” What is in Christ objectively is one thing, and what is in us is another. What is in us by the Spirit expresses itself confirmatively in “Amen”.
APT The Lord says, “Verily, verily”, and we say “Amen and Amen”.
JT You only find the former in John. There are twenty-four of them and I think they speak for themselves as to the confirmative character of this gospel; that it is intended to make the truth good in us, especially the truth of eternal life.
AR Would you say that every locality should set out in some degree the truth of eternal life? Should every meeting reflect it?
JT The “Amen” should be there. The “Yea” is the objective side, in Christ, but the “Amen” is in us. It is confirmation, as Paul says, “For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, he who has been preached by us among you (by me and Silvanus and Timotheus), did not become yea and nay, but yea is in him. For whatever promises of God there are, in him is the yea, and in him the amen, for glory to God by us”, 2 Corinthians 1: 19, 20. The “by us” is involved in the “amen”.
WR Is that not shown here by the testimony of this woman? “But many of the Samaritans of that [p. 311] city believed on him because of the word of the woman who bore witness”, John 4: 39?
JT Quite so. But then they said, “For we have heard him ourselves”. That is, the full confirmation was in Christ.
JTJr As to this, do you get the idea of a circuit in which there is completion? The Lord looked around on the brethren in a circuit. Do you not need that in the meetings, involving a spiritual current?
JT That is good. The natural relatives were outside. Someone said to Him, “Behold, thy mother and thy brethren seek thee without”, Mark 3: 32. They are types. They stayed outside and the real ones were inside. “And looking around in a circuit at those that were sitting around him, he says, Behold my mother and my brethren: for whosoever [p. 312] shall do the will of God, he is my brother, and sister, and mother” (verses 34, 35). So that, as you say, the idea involves the circuit, and the word ‘circuit’ in electrical matters is very intelligible. We know how quickly it can be broken. The Lord would not have that. He maintained the circuit. Let them come into it; we are not to go out of it. “Let them return unto thee; but return not thou unto them”, Jeremiah 15: 19. Let us stay in the circle in which the Lord has His place. The Spirit is operating there.
DP “Behold, thy mother and thy brethren seek thee without”. Did they intend to break the circuit by that remark?
JT In a figurative sense. As Matthew records the circumstance, there was one in the circle who seemed to have more sympathy with those outside and made more of them than those inside. You often see that. The Lord adjusted the position: “And looking around in a circuit”, Mark tells us, “he says, Behold my mother and my brethren: for whosoever shall do the will of God, he is my brother, and sister, and mother”.
EEH The question has been raised. How is eternal life shown? Do you have in mind that there was in this woman something distinctive evidencing eternal life?
JT I think so. Of course the Spirit had not come and hence there was not much, but the work of God was manifest, and I might say, instantaneous, because the early part of the conversation shows she was a natural sort of woman; nothing more. But when the Lord raised the question of her history it was like an arrow that found its object. She says, “Sir, I see that thou art a prophet”. She is not guessing; she is certain of it. Then the question of worship comes up, and the manner of the Lord’s part in the conversation indicates that there was some response in the woman. And then she has to decide as to the waterpot. She does not take it back. She leaves it. That implies that she is spiritual. In both these features there is noticeable evidence of spirituality; and then she goes to the men. She does not go in by the back door, the weakest point in what might be opposed. She goes to the men and says, “Come, see a man who told me all things I had ever done”. She does not tell the men that she had been so greatly honoured, that such a Person spoke to her about worship, or about Jerusalem. No, she says that He told her all things she had ever done. She concludes, “Is not he the Christ?” The inquiry does not imply doubt; it is a reality in her soul, but it is for them to decide, too, and they did. I think that all these are marks of life, what you have in your mind, and what you and every young brother in the camps and training grounds ought to take to heart. It is a question of what is seen in you, the evidences of life that others can notice.
FNW This chapter is marked by emphatic personal [p. 313] pronouns. Would that indicate that the Person of Christ is before us? It says of the disciples that no one said, “Why speakest thou with her?”
JT Yes. The truth as to the Person of Christ is stressed as we have already noticed. “If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that says to thee, Give me to drink, thou wouldest have asked of him”.
TEH Is it right that Philip links on with the gracious work in this chapter in evangelising Samaria? There was great joy in relation to it, although the Spirit was not given immediately. However, Peter and John came down from the apostles at Jerusalem and through their prayers and laying on of their hands the Samaritan believers received the Holy Spirit.
JT All the facts relative to the ministry in Samaria help in what we are saying. The Spirit is stressed by the negative: that is, He was not received until the apostles at Jerusalem intervened, as you say. That fits in with the Lord’s remarks to the Samaritan woman. The priority of Jerusalem over Samaria had to be recognised.
AR The Samaritans said to the woman, “It is no longer on account of thy saying that we believe, for we have heard him ourselves, and we know that this is indeed the Saviour of the world” (verse 42).
JT The truth became enlarged, and the word of God spread itself. She did not say that He was the Saviour of the world. She said, in effect, that He was the Christ. They did not take up that word. They took up a wider word, Saviour of the world. “The Christ” would specially apply to the Jews, but “Saviour of the world” would take in the Samaritans, showing that the word of God was furthering itself. The Samaritans had gone out of the city and came to the Lord, and later asked Him to stay with them, and He abode there two days. This indicates that the truth unfolded in this chapter, especially eternal life, requires and induces hospitality among the saints.