MANCHESTER - READING (3)
MANCHESTER — READING (3)
JT It is thought that the first day of the week ought to be signalised by what relates to the service of God. This chapter is therefore suggested, having in mind the idea of the Lord’s coming to us as seen in the chapter. It is not that He is with us all the time, as we see in Matthew 28. There is no reference to His ascension in Matthew, but John stresses the idea of ascension, and the chapter indicates that the thought of this enters into the service of God. The fact that Mary Magdalene is prominent seems to suggest that the assembly is portrayed somewhat in her according to the message that the Lord sends by her, so that there is a certain liveliness which should be before us on the first day of the week, in view of the place the assembly has in the divine economy. It is not a monthly idea now, but a weekly idea. In the old economy the monthly thought was more prominent, whereas in christianity it is the first day of the week; it is a weekly matter. The place that sisters have in the economy, I suppose, is also suggested in Mary, and she is selected by the Lord to take a message, and such a message as is indicated here, that is, the ascension to the Father and to God.
Ques Would it be right to say that she is trustworthy as a vessel and comely as a sister?
JT That is good. She must have commended herself. She is spoken of as one from whom the Lord had cast out seven demons, so that she must have been greatly indebted to the Lord for the sense of relief that He had brought to her. It would indicate that the grace that is brought to us and works in us is in mind; it ought to affect us in regard of what God receives from us, and what the [p. 39] Father receives from us. Here it is the Father and God: “My Father and your Father, and to my God and your God”. The position of the disciples is thus established in relation to God. Then, on the other hand, Thomas is discredited at first because he is not believing; he wants to see things instead of believing. It is not the time of sight; it is the time of faith at present. The Lord says in verse 29, “Because thou hast seen me thou has believed, blessed they who have not seen and have believed”. I suppose the future dispensation of millennial blessings will imply what is seen, whereas now it is the time of faith.
WSS Is ascension the dominant thought here?
JT I think so. The burden of the message through Mary is ascension to the Father and to God.
WSS Does that bring us into the true christian position?
JT I think so, although of course we cannot say that the full christian position is in the gospels. We must wait for the Spirit and for that we must wait for the ascension.
WSS I remembered you emphasised at Glasgow that resurrection is not the true christian platform.
JT Well, that is true; we must have ascension, and the message through Mary implies that; in fact it is the burden of it. Then added to it is the thought of the address to the brethren and the references to Christ’s Father and our Father and to Christ’s God and our God. That is to say the full result in the view of this gospel is not only resurrection but ascension. The truth of the resurrection is the guarantee of the solution of the question of power. The power of God is by the resurrection, but there has been considerable thought as to the Lord being here all the time. Some years back it was a great point that had to be contested about. We have the [p. 40] idea of His coming to us as well as coming for us. His coming for us is still a future thing, but coming to us is a present thing. We count on it on the first day of the week.
Ques It is not stressed that He ascends to heaven here, but to the Father and to God. Does that call attention to the Person of the Father?
JT Would you not say further, to family relationships between the saints and God. That is to say, His Father is our Father.
Rem I mean it is not the idea of a place here, so much.
JT Just so. It is to a Person.
WL Why does the Lord mention the Father first? We often say ‘Our God’ and then ‘Our Father’.
JT I suppose the best answer to that is because this chapter speaks of it so definitely. The message is that very thing. He says in verse 17, “Touch me not, for I have not yet ascended to my Father; but go to my brethren and say to them, I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God”. That is to say, we have the identity of the relationship between the Father and Christ, and between the Father and ourselves, so that the position is very intimate and very glorious too. The chapter is wonderful in that sense, as establishing the intimacy between Christ and the Father and between us and the Father. It shows that there is no discrepancy between the Lord’s relation with the Father and our relation with the Father.
Ques Would it be right then to say that family relationships are to dominate the position?
JT I would say that fully, and of course Matthew would suppose too that in some sense it would mark the coming dispensation. Matthew would indicate that, because the Lord says, “Be ye therefore perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect”.
AJG Is it the case that every family is named of the Father, and thus has some relationship with Him, but that the assembly’s portion is distinguished by the Father being known as Christ’s Father and our Father?
JT I should think so. It brings out the identity of the Lord’s relation with His Father and our relation with His Father. It is wonderful, I think, that it should be so presented; that the relation between Christ and the Father is identical with that between the saints and the Father. I think it is one of the most remarkable things in Scripture, and shows the wonderful relation in which we stand to the Father in christianity, as compared with what will be in the millennium, because that will not be on the same ground. We are the first family in the whole universe, indeed the greatest family.
PL The only family indwelt by the Spirit of God’s Son?
JT I would say that. So we have also the thought of indwelling in the first chapter of this gospel, “The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we have contemplated his glory, a glory as of an only-begotten with a father), full of grace and truth”. It seems to me that we should accustom ourselves to the thought of distinguishing the first day of the week and all that enters into it in this sense more definitely. “And on the first day of the week Mary of Magdala comes in early morn to the tomb”. It is not the first day of the month, but the first day of the week; and so it is in Acts 20 where the disciples were assembled to break bread.
AHG Do you mean that on the first day of the week we enter into these matters in a peculiar and distinctive way?
JT I think so, and surely the difference between Sunday and Monday, as we call it, should be observed. The Lord’s day has a peculiar place [p. 42] among the days of the week. I am afraid that saints take too much liberty in doing things on the first day of the week as if it were the same as any other day.
EuR It stresses it again in verse 19, “When therefore it was evening on that day, which was the first day of the week”.
PL “This is the day that Jehovah hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it”, Psalm 118: 24.
JT Just so. Why should we not? He has distinguished it Himself, and why should we not distinguish it and honour it, more than the other days.
Ques And if we do not take full advantage of our privileges would you say we become like Thomas who was sceptical?
JT Just so. We are dealing with the first day of the week, particularly as seen in this chapter, and it says in verse 19, “When therefore it was evening on that day, which was the first day of the week, and the doors shut where the disciples were, through fear of the Jews, Jesus came” — notice that, He came; He was not there all the time, He came, “and stood in the midst, and says to them, Peace be to you”. Then He proceeds to do things and to show them the greatness of their portion. “And having said this, he shewed to them his hands and his side. The disciples rejoiced therefore, having seen the Lord. Jesus said therefore again to them, Peace be to you: as the Father sent me forth, I also send you. And having said this, he breathed into them; and says to them, Receive the Holy Spirit, whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted to them; whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained”. And then we have Thomas introduced, showing that he was unbelieving; he had lost ground.
JTS What is the significance of the Lord showing to them His hands and His [p. 43] side?
JT I suppose the hands would indicate what He did for them, but then the side would be the actual giving up of His life. His death is involved in that.
JSE Does this allusion to His side give some inkling of what is in Ephesians 5? He “loved the assembly, and has delivered himself up for it”.
JT Just so. He gave Himself for it.
JTS Would the Lord detain us a little in this relation after the actual breaking of bread? I am thinking now of the place that the assembly is to have with Him and to Him.
JT Therefore you have the idea of brethren. Is that what you have in mind?
JTS Yes, and the assembly.
JT Just so. Well, the message through Mary implied that: “Go to my brethren”.
JTS What is in my mind is perhaps the tendency, after the breaking of bread, to move quickly to the Father.
JT I have noticed that, and I am not so sure that we did not have it today in our meeting. I think the same thing happened, and we proceeded too quickly. We did not give full time for the thought of the brethren, but would you say more what you observe, have you observed that?
JTS Yes, I think one has been in different meetings at different times and perhaps there is not just the definiteness always that there might be as to the place brethren are to have, and then particularly the place that the assembly is to have in her marital relations with Christ, before we move forward.
JT Just so, very good, so He calls it “my assembly”. He says to Peter, “I also, I say unto thee that thou art Peter, and on this rock I will build my assembly”. He is left with this special communication, “on this rock I will build” — not God’s assembly but — “my assembly”.
[p. 44] Ques It is quite a frequent thing for the thought of the brethren scarcely to be alluded to after the breaking of bread. Should that thought come in prior to proceeding to the thought of Christ and the assembly?
JT I do not just follow what you are saying. Can you illustrate it by what you have seen amongst the brethren? Did you see it this morning in our meeting?
Rem I think so. There was very little reference to the brethren before the marital thought was taken on, and I think you have stressed the importance of understanding that only those who are kindred to Christ as His brethren can be united to Him.
JT I think that is perfectly true, I suppose it might be seen in the type in Genesis 24.
Rem You have illustrated it previously from that section of Genesis.
AJG Does not the thought of the brethren from one point of view go right through the service, because the Lord says in relation to the brethren, “I will declare thy name to my brethren; in the midst of the assembly will I sing thy praises”, Hebrews 2: 12.
JT I think that is good. Will you enlarge a little more on it?
AJG I fully went with what our brother was saying, but I was just enquiring whether the thoughts of the brethren and the assembly do not go on collaterally right through, so that in Hebrews the Lord seems to take pleasure in them, as those who are worthy of Him, and then the response to the declaration takes form in this dignified vessel, the assembly.
JT Just so.
JTS Would the passage in the Song of Songs, chapter 4, set it out, “Thou hast ravished my heart, my sister, my spouse”? And then we have later another reference, “How fair is thy love, my sister, my spouse!”. Are the two thoughts of what is kindred and what is marital there?
JT It is quite clear; we have often had it before. A person must be a sister before she can be a wife. She must have the sisterly quality and relation before she can have the wifely quality and relation. That is as clear as anything can be in the scripture.
EJS Do we see the two thoughts in Psalm 45: 7, “therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy companions”, and then in verse 11, “And the king will desire thy beauty; for he is thy Lord, and worship thou him”?
JT Quite so, “He is thy Lord and worship thou him”, but let me get a little more fully what is in the Psalm as to marital relations. In verse 9 we have “Kings’ daughters are among thine honourable women; upon thy right hand doth stand the queen in gold of Ophir”. Well that is it; that is very full, and confirms what we have said. It says, “he is thy Lord, and worship thou him”, but her beauty is to be observed. He observes her beauty.
EuR In Genesis 24: 27 the nameless servant gives thanks, “I being in the way, Jehovah has led me to the house of my master’s brethren”. That seems to be the basis of everything in that chapter? Rebecca is before him, but he does not at this moment give thanks for her, but that he is brought to the house of “my master’s brethren”, I wondered if that did not suggest what you are saying, that we need to clothe ourselves with this great thought of Christ’s brethren before we could move on to the marital relationship with Him.
JT That is quite right, I am sure. I do not know that we need to proceed further on this point in our chapter.
EBS I was going to ask you whether you would say something more on our distinguishing the first [p. 46] day of the week. Is it that our behaviour outside the meetings, as it were, is going to have a bearing on the meeting as we come to it? Would you mind saying a little more on what you meant?
JT Well, I tried to show that we are not distinguishing sufficiently the first day of the week from the other days, because the first day of the week is distinguished in this chapter we have just been reading and then in Acts 20. Perhaps if we read Acts 20 it will make it clear to us.
EBS “And the first day of the week, we being assembled to break bread, Paul discoursed to them, about to depart on the morrow. And he prolonged the discourse till midnight”.
JT Notice the word ‘assembled’ too. It is to be noted. The word ‘assembly’, is implied, but then the assembly is a vessel in a marital relation.
WSS Should we understand this thought of brethren better if we had a better appreciation of what they mean to the Lord? It must have been a wonderful moment, for Him to say, “Go to my brethren”.
JT Yes, and that is what gives great distinction to John 20, “Go to my brethren and say to them, I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God”. Well, that is great distinction, I would say. It gives very great distinction to the first day of the week, that the message is sent on that day, as the word is at the beginning. “On the first day of the week Mary of Magdala comes in early morn to the tomb”. It was the first day of the week, so that that day has peculiar distinction above all the other days, and I do not know whether the brethren recognise that fully. There is a spiritual obligation, not to place the first day of the week on the same level as the other days.
Ques And does Mary therefore outshine the disciples, and does she receive a greater message?
It says in verse 10, “The disciples therefore went away again to their own home. But Mary stood at the tomb weeping without”. I was wondering whether the disciples in going away to their own home, missed something of what was happening on the first day of the week.
JT Mary did not go to her own home, but the others did and I think that ought to be mentioned too, that they did not maintain the full thought of the first day of the week. Of course, they had not got the Spirit yet, but still the principles of the Spirit are supposed to be in this chapter.
AJG So that John would have in mind to distinguish the first day of the week, when he said, “I became in the Spirit on the Lord’s day”.
JT Quite so, and so here it says in verse 22, “And having said this, he breathed into them, and says to them, Receive the Holy Spirit” and so forth. That happened before Pentecost and we have to distinguish between Pentecost and this chapter, because the Lord said, “Receive the Holy Spirit”. There are two ideas, the one in Pentecost in Acts 2 and the other one here.
AHG Would the Holy Spirit seek to energise us in a special way on the first day of the week?
JT I think He would. I think the Holy Spirit would not be behind in the actual features taught, especially this particular feature, as it says, “Jesus said therefore again to them, Peace be to you, as the Father sent me forth, I also send you. And having said this, he breathed into them, and says to them, Receive the Holy Spirit” — or ‘Receive Holy Spirit’, as it is literally — “Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted to them; whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained”. The Holy Spirit Himself is involved in all this, so that, I would say, He would afterwards always distinguish the first day of the week, in view of all the services that are entering [p. 48] into it. We lose a great deal as to the dispensation if we do not do this, because the Spirit of God speaks of it, and the Lord Himself shows that He has it in mind too.
Ques Do the appearings of Jesus give fulness to the thought of the first day of the week, along with the Spirit’s activities? The appearings of Jesus seem to come in distinctively on the first day of the week; in John 20 and also in Mark 16 it says, “the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary of Magdala”.
JT I think so. That is just what I am trying to say, because it says here, “Receive the Holy Spirit”. That is said by the Lord in verse 22, “And having said this, he breathed into them, and says to them, Receive the Holy Spirit”. I do not know that we could get anything more distinct or more definite than that, as to the place the first day of the week holds in the economy. Of course, the devil would destroy it all by the way the first day of the week is treated in the world. All sorts of things that are done on any other day are done on the first day of the week, and I am sure the saints should be a rebuke to all that.
AJG Do you mean that this would have in view our being enabled to move in heavenly grace on that day?
JT Quite so, I was just going to add “in heavenly grace”, and that our first day of the week implies that we are going to heaven. We are apt to go there any moment, and the first day of the week should distinguish us to that extent.
Ques We would like to see as many out to the Lord’s day afternoon reading as there are to the breaking of bread?
JT It is pretty well the same here now as I see! Very good indeed, I thank God I can say in New York we have the Lord’s day afternoon specially set [p. 49] apart for readings and we are greatly encouraged by that fact.
Ques In the Lord’s day afternoon reading, would you have in mind that it is very suitable to take up something related to the service of God or our heavenly place?
JT Well, I used to do it myself whenever I had opportunity to lead in a reading. I would say we should have something suitable for the first day of the week, and I have been encouraged to do that this very day. This chapter came before me and I ventured to have it read because we have already had a brief word on it this morning, and I think it is enlarged on now whilst we are talking about it and I hope it will continue to be enlarged in our minds.
Rem Sometimes the brethren are reading a book, perhaps from the Old Testament, that does not exactly bear on this.
JT Well, quite so, but you would not say very much. One would not like to criticise the brethren for a thing like that, for Scripture is Scripture, and every Scripture is inspired of God and has to have its place.
Rem I was thinking of what you started with, that on the Lord’s day we would expect to be capable of better things than at other times.
JT Very good, better things; the Lord Himself gives a suggestion of that when He says “Thou shalt see greater things than these”.
HC Would verse 16 bear on that? It says “Jesus says to her, Mary. She, turning round, says to him in Hebrew, Rabboni, which means Teacher”?
JT Jesus says to her “Mary”, calling her by name, but before that He called her Woman. Well that is to be noted too, that the Lord comes to the thought of calling Mary by name. It is a beautiful thought and the Lord sends a message by her immediately after [p. 50] that.
HC And Mary speaking to Him addresses the Lord as Teacher, that is what I was wondering. Is there in that a suggestion as to readiness for fresh light and help in relation to this heavenly thought of the ascended Man and the service of God?
JT Quite so, I think that is another point of great importance that she calls Him “Rabboni”, which means Teacher. The Spirit of God goes to the pains of saying “which means Teacher”, not only Rabboni, put in Hebrew, but we are told by the Spirit of God what it means. All that is mentioned in this chapter.
AHG Would the taking up of readings of this character on the Lord’s day test our faith?
JT Quite so, and test our love too, I think. It would test our love for the Lord, as well as respect for His directions. Paul praises the Corinthians because they kept the directions (1 Corinthians 11: 2) and in that chapter he says, “Be my imitators, even as I also am of Christ”, so that Paul is in line with Christ.
Rem What our brother referred to touches an exercise that arises constantly amongst the brethren as to whether on the Lord’s day afternoon we should expect the reading to develop out of what has engaged us in the morning or whether we should read a book regularly.
JT You think what we are doing today is right?
Rem What we have done today, as you have just remarked, is the development of something that was alluded to in a word in the meeting this morning. Some brethren have felt that we should be equal to that spiritually on the Lord’s day afternoon rather than reading a book, which, as our brother says, may often touch on things that are not very much related to the service of God.
JT Just so, and I think you could enlarge a little on what we had this morning as to the liberty,
[p. 51] at the particular time in the meeting, that is to be seen between the Lord and the assembly, and between the assembly and Him. I think that was a point of importance.
Ques Do you think if we relied more upon the Spirit, we should be more equal for this on Lord’s day afternoon?
JT Just so. The fact of the matter is I think that the Lord intends to make something of the first day of the week as bordering on ascension to heaven. It is a question of ascension as it says “I ascend”, the word ‘ascend’ is to be used and it bears on our ascension to heaven and that is imminent now at any time.
ACSP Is it significant that the passage oft quoted in 2 Corinthians 3 about looking on the glory of the Lord and being changed, comes at the end of a chapter where the contrast is drawn between what had gone before and what we have now in christianity?
JT I think that is good. Would you kindly read that whole passage in the second epistle as to what is said of the Lord Himself in the chapter?
ACSP “Now the Lord is the Spirit, but where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. But we all, looking on the glory of the Lord, with unveiled face, are transformed according to the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Lord the Spirit”.
JT Well, is not that bearing on what we have been having?
ACSP I thought so and I wondered if it linked with the first day of the week as starting something entirely new in contrast to all that had gone before?
JT “But we all” — that is a very beautiful expression — “looking on the glory of the Lord, with unveiled face, are transformed according to the same image from glory to glory”. I think it is beautiful, “transformed ... from glory to glory, even as by the Lord the Spirit”, and I think it helps too, as to the place the Spirit is acquiring Himself in the recent ministry.
RH I would like some help as to the way headship comes in at the Supper and the service of God. It says Christ is the Head of the body, the assembly, and I was thinking of this matter you have been referring to, as to the opportune moment when the Father should be before us.
JT I should think what has been said is true, that we should not be too quick in dropping the idea of the Lord’s brethren, “Go to my brethren”. We should not be too quick in just leaving that. We should proceed with it and give good time for it, and then we have further, of course, what has been said as to Hebrews 2, “In the midst of the assembly”. I meant to bring that forward too, in relation to what you are saying.
Ques Is it helpful to think that there is glory connected with the brethren too? All is glorious. So that we move “from glory to glory”?
JT There must be glory, for the brethren are sons. They are the same persons. God is bringing many sons to glory. Well, they are the brethren. “In the midst of the assembly” also points to the same thing, so that the brethren must have their place and their full place too. But then sonship is another thing as to it. It is a synonymous idea with brethren. It says, “For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to make perfect the leader of their salvation through sufferings”. It is showing what place the brethren have. The word brethren is there too.
AJG It leads on to the thought of brethren: “For both he that sanctifies and those sanctified are [p. 53] all of one; for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren”.
JT Quite so. That is what I thought.
EJB Would you say a little as to the two thoughts, or stages, in verse 17, “my Father and your Father” first of all; and then, “my God and your God”. I would like to understand more what was in mind; the Lord has the term ‘Father’ in mind first, and then the thought of God, and He connects the disciples with both, as the Father and God are connected with Him.
JT It is to bring out, I think, the great place that divine names have, the Father being the family term, God being a creative term. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”. The great ultimate of everything is God, not the Father, but God. “The Father” is a family name, and a name of the most precious relationship we can speak of. So that I think we ought to keep in mind that God is God, and He is the ultimate of everything, and He comes in after the Father. He is the ultimate of all, as has been said.
EJB In thinking of God you would not exclude any of the Persons of the Godhead?
JT No, not at all, because ‘God’ may cover them all, in some sense. In Matthew 28, we have “the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”. It is not ‘names’ but “name”, the one name covering them all.
Ques Would you distinguish for us between the Holy Spirit here and in Acts 2? Would this be a matter of inward feeling, and Acts 2 public testimony?
JT Well, just so. Acts 2 is public testimony. Acts 2 says that there was a blowing; if you will just read it please.
Rem “And when the day of Pentecost was now accomplishing, they were all together in one place.
[p. 54] And there came suddenly a sound out of heaven as of a violent impetuous blowing, and filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared to them parted tongues, as of fire, and it sat upon each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave to them to speak forth”.
JT So that this is God Himself. It is God that is in mind, and His action, “The day of Pentecost was now accomplishing, they were all together in one place”. And then it says, “there appeared to them parted tongues, as of fire, and it sat upon each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave to them to speak forth”. That is to say, God was there by the Spirit. Well now, in John 20, it is really a lesser thought, “As the Father sent me forth, I also send you. And having said this, he breathed into them, and says to them, Receive the Holy Spirit”. It is presented in a less important way, although, of course, it is important. It is important, but still Acts 2 is the great general, official thing (as you might say), that has happened universally, and it remains.
ACC In John 20 would it be the Spirit personally or would it be the power of Christ’s life in the power of the Spirit? Would it be the Holy Spirit personally, as in Acts 2, or is it characteristically?
JT I would say that it would be God. Of course, it is the Spirit of God, and it is the Spirit of the Father, but I would say that Acts 2 is, so to say, the official thought of the Holy Spirit coming down, being sent down from heaven, I am using the word, ‘official’ to make the thing simple. It belongs to the great system in which God is operating in this dispensation.
Ques And would John 20 convey the feelings of forgiveness, as in the Lord’s own [p. 55] heart?
JT Very good. As to the Holy Spirit and the forgiveness of sins and so forth, they had power to do it, “Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted”. They had power to do it.
AJG Do you regard this in John 20 as something more than pattern?
JT I do not think it is any more than pattern. It is not the official thing so to speak.
AJG That is what I thought, and what I wanted to make clear, because the Spirit was not yet because that Jesus was not yet glorified.