CROYDON - READING (1)
[p. 94] CROYDON — READING (1)
2 Corinthians 3: 1 - 18; 1 Corinthians 11: 25; Jeremiah 31: 31 - 34
JT The subject I have in mind is the new covenant, and the idea before us at this time is to call attention to the full thought of the Scriptures, every Scripture, including Old and New Testaments, and their value. It was, therefore, thought that the idea of the new covenant would aid us in this respect, so that we may see how well off we are as in this dispensation that we are in, as compared with what was before. We have to see, at the same time, that what was before was essential to what is now, but it is all one thought. “Every scripture”, it says, “is divinely inspired, and profitable”. Nothing, therefore, is to be despised, and certainly not neglected. There should be a constant thought of it, and we should read the Scriptures in the order in which they are written. That is, to take them beginning with Moses and the Psalms, and then the prophets, and so forth, so as to get the order in which they should be read. There is order in which they are written, and the New Testament too, of course, each book in its own place beginning with the Gospels, and then the Acts, and then the Epistles. It is thought now that the third chapter of 2 Corinthians will help us in regard of the epistles and enable us to link on with the Old Testament where the covenant, or the new covenant, is drawn from, because it is a question of comparison between the Old and the New. It was once stated by Mr. Raven, and it may be well to record it here, that the new covenant is the forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. It might be as well to keep that in mind in all that we may have to say.
Rem Having the knowledge of God in mind? It says “They shall all know me”.
JT Quite so, “From the least of them unto the greatest of them”. Then, as it says elsewhere: “They shall be all taught of God”. That is another thing that runs through Scripture, being taught of God. It is not simply reading the Scriptures literally, but being taught of God as to their meaning. Hence, we have prophets, and evangelists, and shepherds and teachers, and so forth, and we would now specially recall the idea of teachers. There are, of course, at the present time, a good many capable men, thank God, and these meetings — and three-day meetings especially — are being greatly increased, not only here but in America and in Australasia. It is not simply week-end meetings, but three-day meetings, in which there is ample room to work out a principle or a subject.
HH Is it to be noted that Jeremiah lived at the time when Jerusalem was captured by the enemy? I mean the whole thing was, in a way, wrecked; so that over against that the thought of the new covenant would be full of meaning.
JT Yes, so that God has begun anew. It says in Revelation 21, “Behold, I make all things new”. He has begun anew now, in the New Testament, and, of course, it is connected with the incoming of the Son, the Son of God become Man. That is the beginning and basis of everything.
HGH So do you consider the old covenant as a forerunner of the new?
JT Well, as to its general character or manner, but, of course, the contents of the new are very different from those of the old. We must however bring in the old so as to get the good of all the types and all that is mentioned before. Paul says in Galatians that the covenant was “ordained through angels in the hand of a mediator”, and we thank God for the Mediator. The Mediator is Christ, but then Moses was also a mediator, and there is some
[p. 96] idea of mediatorship in those of us who are, in any way, capable or qualified to minister the truth, so that there is a go-between amongst us, involving confidence and consideration all round. There would be no idea of partisanship, for it is a question of what God has provided, and all the details are to be observed.
WJ Are the three Persons required for the development of the new covenant?
JT ‘Three’ is a numeral which is much used in Scripture, and when we think of the divine Persons, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, one name covers them all, according to the end of Matthew.
HWA In John 6 the Lord brings in what you have already quoted, in referring to the Father taking the initiative in the sense of teaching in the economy. He says, “They shall be all taught of God”. He refers to this very thought.
JT Just so, “They shall be all taught of God”. And remember that the sisters are included in that; but the question is whether the sisters take it on, and whether the responsibility attaching to them is taken on by them, because they ought to follow things with the brethren. But you had something more to say?
HWA I was thinking what an important thing it is to get into our souls that, in this great economy, the Father teaches as well as the Son and as well as the Holy Spirit. The word is in that same chapter, “every one that has heard from the Father himself, and has learned of him”, as if to indicate that the Father takes the initiative in the sense of teaching and drawing to Christ.
JT Quite so.
PL In regard to this ministerial service in mediatorship, is it seen in Moses? It says “The skin of his face shone”, and then it says “Moses called to them; and they turned to him — Aaron and all [p. 97] the principal men of the assembly; and Moses talked with them. And afterwards, all the children of Israel came near”, Exodus 34: 30 - 32.
JT Very good. They all came near, but then there was the idea of Moses and the place he had as the mediator. No one had a place such as his. He is therefore a type of Christ in that sense. It says “The mediator of God and men one, the man Christ Jesus”. So that the full thought is carried down to Christ Himself in manhood. It will not do simply to think of God as in the Old Testament, but we must think of Christ in manhood. He, of course, was in the Godhead before He became Man, but in manhood all things are carried down and made intelligible in Him. The Spirit too is here, sent down by Him, as if He accepted the obligation of looking after things and opening up things and teaching.
ECM Is that supported in Exodus 24, where it says, “He took the book of the covenant, and read it in the ears of the people; and they said, All that Jehovah has said will we do”? Would the book of the covenant, and reading it, be connected with the thought of teaching the people?
JT Just so. And so we rightly stress the fact that in Luke 24 it says of the Lord, “Having begun from Moses and from all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself”. So that there you have the full thought, “in all the scriptures the things concerning himself”.
PHH Is it remarkable that this finds a place in the things we have come to in Hebrews 12? It says “Ye have come ... to Jesus, mediator of a new covenant”.
JT Yes, there are eight of them, and we might as well read them.
PHH Hebrews 12: 22: “But ye have come to mount Zion; and to the city of the living God,
[p. 98] heavenly Jerusalem; and to myriads of angels, the universal gathering; and to the assembly of the firstborn who are registered in heaven; and to God, judge of all; and to the spirits of just men made perfect; and to Jesus, mediator of a new covenant; and to the blood of sprinkling, speaking better than Abel”.
JT There are eight; it is beyond seven. It is the full idea, and indicates what we have come to. It is what we have come to; not what they came to in Old Testament times, but what we have come to.
AJG Is it significant that in that scripture the word for new covenant is ‘fresh’, stressing the freshness in the Spirit which you were mentioning in your prayer.
JT Just so, I felt I needed it, because we came through crowded streets in the heat. Of course, we thank God for it, I do, because the heat is surely good for us. What God gives us is good for us.
PHH “And to the blood of sprinkling”. Would that add to the thought, “speaking better than Abel”? Does that link on with the spirit of the covenant, which you have in mind?
JT Quite so. It is better things too. The word ‘better’ is a comparative idea, and it shows what we have come into. Whether we take it on and enjoy it is another matter, and that is what these meetings are for, to stir us up and stimulate us into the enjoyment of what is available to us.
AJG Have you in mind that new covenant ministry is intended to set us free in the assembly?
JT That is just what I think it is intended to do; and Hebrews, I suppose, would be the suggestion of it. We have the volume and the variety of the things we have come to, and the quotations from the Old Testament are generally from the Psalms, which shows that experience is the great point in mind.
HH It says, “the assembly of the firstborn”. That would come into line with your thought?
JT Quite so.
HGH So in verse 6 of the chapter read it says, “made us competent, as ministers”. Is the assembly in mind there, or is it only apostolic, do you think?
JT It is apostolic. Will you please read it again.
HGH 2 Corinthians 3: 5, “Not that we are competent of ourselves to think anything as of ourselves, but our competency is of God; who has also made us competent, as ministers of the new covenant”.
JT Well, as I said, I think that is apostolic.
PHH Would you say a word as to the new covenant in this setting? Is it a description of ministry, or is it a setting out of the new covenant? I am referring to the note to that verse which has just been read. Mr. Darby says, Perhaps it may be rendered ‘competent as new covenant ministers’, as if that were the description of the ministry and the ministers. Would that be right?
JT I think so, covering the whole idea, so that, we might say, if the apostles were together at any given time, as in Acts 15, they would be in the full sense of that, and they would contend for it too. Acts 15 is the scripture that covers all that.
PHH The council about the circumcision?
JT Yes.
PHH There was a question about it, the enemy was attacking, and that chapter is to reach the whole thought of the truth, and the apostles were all there. Peter was the first one to speak and then James afterwards.
AJG So that new covenant ministry, as brought into christianity, is really part of the ministry of the gospel, is it not?
JT Quite so. So we certainly do well to adhere to the idea of the gospel, however few the attendance [p. 100] may be, and to have it at least on the first day of the week, because God is blessing it. However much weakness there may be, God is blessing the gospel, and I think He is going to continue it. There is remarkable interest universally, as far as I can see, now, and I think God is showing that He is approving it, and the Lord is thinking of it because He is about to come. The reference to the appearing of Christ is to be specially noted, and we have a reference to those who love the appearing of Christ.
Ques Is it to be noticed that in the passage that has been quoted in Hebrews 12, it does not say that christians have come to the new covenant, but they have come to Jesus, the Mediator of a fresh covenant? I wondered if we could get some help as to the fact that the new covenant is not formally made with the church.
JT Quite right. What help can we get from that? The reference is to the old covenant, of course, but the truth is that Christianity is in mind and nothing less than that.
EuR Would the expression “we all” in the last verse involve that? Is that universal?
JT The “we” is emphatic. Quite so, “we all, looking on the glory of the Lord, with unveiled face, are transformed according to the same image from glory to glory”. It is a magnificent finish to the chapter, because it is a question of glory — “glory to glory”.
EuR It is no longer ministerial, but the apostle would draw all the saints into this liberty?
JT I think so.
Ques Would you say a word as to the force of the expression; “the glory of the Lord”?
JT Well, we could easily say that the new covenant implies that, but glory is a question of what there is, what a thing is. Here it is a question [p. 101] of the authority of the Lord, and at the end of the verse we have “the Lord the Spirit”, showing that the Spirit of God is involved in the whole passage as to glory. “From glory to glory” refers to the Holy Spirit really. The chapter, we might say, deals with the great subject of the gospel, the Spirit being the power in which it is presented, and not only preached but ministered. The ministry is through the Spirit.
HH In 2 Corinthians 4: 6 it reads, “It is the God who spoke that out of darkness light should shine who has shone in our hearts for the shining forth of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ”.
JT That is just what I was pointing out, that the idea of glory is immense, and then the idea of three divine Persons is more than immense; it is unspeakable.
HH I am sure you are right. We do well to pay much attention to it.
PHH Do you take “the glory of the Lord” in the first part of verse 18, “we all, looking on the glory of the Lord”, to refer to the Lord Jesus?
JT I think so. And then the glory of God in the next chapter, of course, is God Himself.
Ques Has not the Person of the Lord Jesus a distinctive place as the Mediator?
JT He has, certainly. There is only one divine Person said to be made Lord, and that is the Son. The Father is not made Lord, nor the Spirit; it is the Son that is made Lord.
Ques With regard to your remark as to christianity being in mind, is that why the apostle uses the letter as a negative matter to bring into relief the Spirit in a positive way? He says “The letter kills, but the Spirit quickens”.
JT Just so. It is to set out the greatness of the Spirit. The word spirit, however, does not [p. 102] always refer to the Holy Spirit, it has to be looked into, as to the setting in which it is presented.
PHH You are referring to verse 6 where it says, “not of letter, but of spirit”? That has a small ‘s’. Then it goes on to say, “For the letter kills, but the Spirit quickens”. That is a capital ‘S’. That would be the Holy Spirit.
JT Yes, quite.
Ques Does that not raise the question of the character of any ministry? Paul in speaking of his ministry says, “God ... has also made us competent, as ministers of the new covenant; not of letter, but of spirit”.
JT I suppose Paul put the whole matter into both his ministry and the way he carried it on.
PL Would “death works in us, but life in you” suggest the quickening power of new covenant ministry?
JT I think it would. Just so.
SR Does the ministry of the Spirit enable us to behold the glory?
JT I think that is right.
Ques Could we have a word as to why the new covenant has such prominence at the Supper? “This cup is the new covenant in my blood”.
JT That is the first epistle. Well, I think it is the great idea of the ministry of God. It is the ministry of the Spirit, of course, but the Lord’s supper is the beginning of everything in the sense of ministry. Everything begins with the Lord’s supper. Then we are led on to the thought of the Minister of the sanctuary, and, as it says, “of the true tabernacle, which the Lord has pitched and not man”. That is to say, which God has pitched and not man, but the Lord Jesus is the Minister of it. He is the Minister of the sanctuary. All that begins with the Lord’s supper.
RSW [p. 103] Would the shedding of His blood be an outstanding part of the glory of the Lord?
JT I should say that. Only one of the divine Persons died, and we cannot but be touched as we think of that. One of the divine Persons died. The others give support. Of course, the Father is first, and then the Son, and then the Holy Spirit, but then, as I said before, only the Lord Jesus Christ is said to be made Lord. He is made Lord and Christ.
FCH Is not the Lord Jesus the only One of the Godhead who is said to be made anything? And that must be as Man.
JT It must be as Man. “The man Christ Jesus” is therefore so distinctively prominent, and should be prominent with us today, because it is peculiarly in this chapter.
HH A divine Person giving His life gives us such a sense in our souls of what love means, does it not?
JT Just so. Right up to the point that “God is love”. You could not get anything better than that, “God is love”, and then again, “Love is of God”.
HH “Hereby we have known love, because he has laid down his life for us; and we ought for the brethren to lay down our lives”. That is a good word for all of us here this morning, is it not?
JT Quite so.
Ques As to the thought here of looking on the glory of the Lord, would that be characteristic or is it specific? Does it enter specifically into our assembling together?
JT It is a very wide thought. Think of the wideness of it; all the divine Persons are in it, yet the Lord having become Man, is the great vessel of the display of all these things. But then we cannot ignore the other Persons, because God is love, as we have said, and the love of the Spirit is mentioned [p. 104] too. All the divine Persons, in a certain sense, therefore, are love, for God is love. I do not know that we should say, or that we could find in the Scriptures, that Christ is love, but God is love, and the word God there would imply the Father, the Son and the Spirit, as I understand.
WJ Are “fleshy tables of the heart” capable of taking in divine love?
JT We would have to use that carefully, because ‘fleshy’ is apt to divert our minds, but it is just a figure, used in contrast to stone, to imply that they are impressionable. “Fleshy tables of the heart” mean that the heart is the centre of love.
ECM Would you say a word on being “transformed according to the same image from glory to glory”? Do you connect that with the thought of change which you have spoken of?
JT Yes, “from glory to glory”. Divine Persons are capable of change, and we have to be very careful to speak reverentially of it. They are capable of change, but even we are too. John the apostle says “I became in the Spirit on the Lord’s day”. He was capable of change in the Spirit on the Lord’s day.
Ques Does the ministry of the new covenant bring us into liberty? “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty”.
JT I think it would, but then we ought to be as wide as Scripture, and grasp a thing, and deal with the thing in that sense. There are so many things said which are alike, or more or less alike, but we have to grasp each one in its own setting and in its own meaning.
HFN Would you kindly say a word in regard to the four thoughts. “Now the Lord is the Spirit”; and secondly, “where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty”; and then “looking on the glory of the Lord”; and the fourth “transformed ... from glory [p. 105] to glory, even as by the Lord the Spirit”, as to which apply to the Lord, and then how the Spirit is brought in, so that we might have the truth definitely before us in relation to each expression.
JT Well, you can give us help, Mr. N. Just break it up yourself into small parts.
HFN In connection with the first, “The Lord is the Spirit”, it has been so often spoken of as the spirit of Scripture, but is there more in it than that?
JT I think Mr. Raven said that, but I doubt that, I think we had better keep to what we have here.
HFN That was what one would like to get help on, that it is something more than the spirit of Scripture.
JT I think that is right.
HFN Then the second reference is “where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty”. Would that refer to the presence and operations of the Holy Spirit as introducing liberty?
JT Yes. Quite so.
HFN Then finally, “transformed according to the same image, from glory to glory, even as by the Lord the Spirit”. The question is, does that refer directly to the Holy Spirit?
JT I think “the Lord the Spirit” is the Holy Spirit. You have noticed, of course, that the article is left out in both cases, before ‘Lord’ and before ‘Spirit’.
PL Is the new covenant ministry the great formative power to furnish and fill the saints as the vessels of the sanctuary? Are the saints, in relation to the service of God, formed and furnished through the new covenant ministry?
JT Therefore you have to include all the sisters as well as the brothers, who have the Spirit. Although the sisters, of course, are not to speak in assembly, but at the same time, they are members,
[p. 106] for they are of the assembly, they belong to the body of Christ. They would, therefore, be vessels even though they do not speak, because they can express themselves in many ways, in their looks and in many other ways. The Spirit is the power for the operation of all that.
PL I was thinking of David as the one in whom the covenant was set forth, typical in that way of the Lord, preparing the vessels for the sanctuary, that is for the service of God.
JT Yes. Just so. You refer to the vessels; that is to say, every member, or person, is of the body, because he has the Spirit.
Ques Will you say a word as to why, at the Supper itself, the cup of the covenant is emphasised?
JT I think because it is the drinking that is in mind. I think it is alluded to in 1 Corinthians 12, “so also is the Christ”. ‘The Christ’ there covers not only the Lord Himself as Head, but all the members of the body. It is “the Christ”.
Ques Would it also cover verse 13 of chapter 12? “For also in the power of one Spirit we have all been baptised into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether bondmen or free, and have all been given to drink of one Spirit”.
JT I thought that was the thing that touches us, because of the idea of drinking. The idea of drinking, I think, is satisfaction, so all that would come in, and then the power of the Spirit would make all that effective in us. At a time like this, what are we doing, what are we taking in, what are we absorbing? Well, it is a question, of the Spirit, for the Spirit enables us to take in things that are said.
Rem I was thinking of the peculiar place that the Spirit would have at that moment in the Supper.
JT That leads to the thought of what the Supper really means, and what enters into it. With [p. 107] the systems around us, of course, the Supper is, you might say, abrogated; it is nothing; they have not the true thought of it at all. Everything depends on the teaching of the truth as to the Lord’s supper. It all depends on that, and then our making way for it in ourselves, so as to be effective in the use the Lord would make of us, at any given time, because it is a question of the divine service, the service towards divine Persons.
ECM So that we become glorious ourselves. It is not only that the Lord Jesus is glorious, but the saints become increasingly glorious, would you say?
JT Quite so. So that when the Spirit has His place we can see things. The term ‘the Christ’ would include, not only the Lord Himself, but all the members of the body, for it is a question of the body of Christ. Now something comes into my mind as to the use of the word in chapter 10. “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of the Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of the Christ?”. Now the blood is placed before the body, and that has to be observed too, because the Spirit has put it before the body, “The cup of blessing which we bless”. That is at the Lord’s supper.
ECL Is that because it may have to do with the relations we have with one another, how the spirit of forgiveness is connected with the covenant. 2 Corinthians 2 has to do with forgiveness.
JT Yes, of course, but the idea of forgiveness in the covenant, in the true sense of the word, is more what Christ does. He forgives us.
ECL I was wondering whether, as brought in here first, it would have to do with the way in which we appreciate it, and hence how we look upon one another.
JT Yes, only I think we might as well make a difference between that and what Christ does in the [p. 108] sense of forgiveness. The full thought is that repentance and forgiveness of sins is to be preached among all the nations. Well, that is a full thought; that is not the question of our forgiveness of one another, it is a question of what Christ forgives.
PHH Would it be right to say that it is the cup as used at the Supper, but not exactly in the Supper setting. Is it in the setting more of fellowship?
JT Quite so, but still it is the cup. We only have one cup in the celebration of the Lord’s supper. The unity in the bread should also be seen in the cup. It is one loaf and one cup.
Ques Would you say a word as to the force of the word, “Which we bless”, not ‘which we drink’ there, but which we bless. Is it on the occasion of the Supper that we bless it?
JT That is just what I was trying to say, I think it is what is seen in the Lord’s supper.
PHH The word bless means that you speak well of it.
JT Just so. That is the idea of blessing, speaking well of it.
PHH So has the drinking an internal effect, and then the speaking relates to what comes out of us, the external side?
JT Quite so. At the Lord’s supper the bread represents His own body, and that is the main thing. But then the cup is wine, of course, we might say, but it is the cup that is stressed, as conveying the idea of oneness.
NKM Would you say a word about verse 29 of chapter 11, “For the eater and drinker eats and drinks judgment to himself, not distinguishing the body”. Do we understand that you include all the saints in that reference to the body, or does the body allude to the Lord’s own body?
JT That is the Lord’s own body, I am sure. But then it says earlier, “This is my body, which is for you”. That is also the Lord’s body.
Ques Could we have a further word as to the remark on verse 25 of chapter 11, as to “This cup is the new covenant” as referring to the peculiar place the Holy Spirit may have at that time in the Supper?
Rem We were speaking of the link between the Spirit and the cup, and I think I remarked, Would not the Spirit have a peculiar place in our minds at that time, as bringing in the glory system with all its liberating power.
JT Well, it is a question of seeing how the Old Testament is brought in in a favourable time to the New, and the Lord Himself brings in the covenant in relation to the Lord’s supper. Therefore the chapter in 1 Corinthians that we have read becomes very precious as to the heart. Really the section begins with verse 17, but I was thinking of the heart. It says “I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus, in the night in which he was delivered up, took bread, and having given thanks broke it, and said, This is my body, which is for you” — I take that to be the Lord’s own body — “this do in remembrance of me”. That is the memorial, “In like manner also the cup, after having supped, saying” — the word ‘supped’ there means a meal, a full meal — “saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye shall drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye announce the death of the Lord, until He come. So that whosoever shall eat the bread, or drink the cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty in respect of the body and of the blood of the Lord”. So that it is the Lord’s own personal body.
AJG Would you say what was in your mind in having Jeremiah read?
JT [p. 110] Well, to show that the Lord Himself referred to it. That the Lord Himself should introduce this remarkable passage is very striking, and I think it points to the wonderfulness of the dispensation in which we are. We can hardly refer to anything fuller than that. What a time we are in, and what enjoyment we should have, this very moment, in the Lord’s supper, and what flows from it.
Ques So that joy and love are combined in relation to the cup of the new covenant?
JT Just so, and the order of things too. God takes occasion, so to speak, to stress the idea of order, for He is the God of order.
AB Would the writing on the heart have in mind permanent impressions on the saints?
JT That is what I was thinking, the heart being the centre of affections.
RWS What is the point of “after having supped ...” — for ourselves?
JT ‘Supped’, according to the foot note, means a full meal, and that is what the Corinthians were doing; they were eating a meal, which was very wrong; it was disorderly. They should not have done so; they should have done what we are doing now, and rightly doing, and that is just taking a very small part of the bread, and drinking a very small part of the cup. It is not the idea of a meal at all. Meals belong to our houses. The Corinthians were having a meal, and, in fact, it would seem that they were really getting drunk; they were getting under the influence of liquor. It would seem so.
WSS Is it necessary to keep in mind in what we are considering, that the new covenant was made with Israel and not with the assembly, except that the assembly comes into the spirit of it now?
JT Just so. We have it, thank God, and the devil is not taking it away from us. We think of what has taken place during the last 130 years, and [p. 111] the devil has sought to break it up, but God is helping us to hold to the truth of the Lord’s supper, and all that enters into it. I believe we have been helped greatly in the last forty or fifty years as to the details of the Lord’s supper.
FCH You used the word ‘salvaged’ some years ago in regard of the truth in the Old Testament, how that the assembly is the depository of what is salvaged from the Old as well as having the light of all that is coming in.
JT Yes. ‘Salvaged’ is hardly good enough. If I used it then, well, I would not use it now, because the question of the Spirit is the point. The Spirit holds things together, so we have the whole idea, and I do not think the word ‘remnant’ is suitable, it is not really great enough. The whole idea of the Lord’s supper has been revived and God is helping us to keep it.
Ques I notice that at the Supper the expression “the cup of the Lord” is seldom or never used. Brethren often speak of the cup of the new covenant, which actually is not a scriptural expression, but why is it that “the cup of the Lord” is not used?
JT I think it should be, because it is the Lord’s supper, and the cup of the Lord too, “The Lord’s supper” and “the cup of the Lord” are both right scriptural terms. Do you use it here, in this meeting?
Rem No. The expression ‘the cup of the new covenant’ is often used, but I do not find it anywhere. We get “the cup of blessing”, and “the Lord’s cup”, and “the cup of the Lord”, but not actually ‘the cup of the new covenant’.
JT Well, I expect if you lead in that, you will be helped, and the brethren will follow you.
AJG Does not the apostle stress the lordship, of Christ in relation to the cup where things were being allowed that were a denial of His [p. 112] authority?
JT Just so, I think the lordship of Christ is bound up with that expression.
HAH Does the mind come in in relation to the new covenant? Here in Jeremiah it is “inward parts”. In Hebrews it is “mind and heart” and “heart and mind”. Would the mind link with the calling of the Lord to mind at the Supper?
JT Just so. The mind is used earlier in the book. It says in 1 Corinthians 2, “We have the mind of Christ”. The mind, therefore, should be greatly stressed as to the Lord’s supper. It is largely a question of the mind, although, as we have also mentioned today, the heart is the centre of affections. We have just mentioned that, but the mind is very important; I can see that clearly.
Ques When Jeremiah 31 is quoted in Hebrews 8 it says, “because all shall know me in themselves”. Does the added thought — “in themselves” — include the inward consciousness of the mind and heart?
JT Just so, and it would show the working of the Spirit in us. The Spirit of God is in us, and the temple of the Holy Spirit is the body of the believer, so that “in themselves” would mean that. How closely the thing comes to us personally!