CROYDON - READING (2)
CROYDON — READING (2)
JT It seems as if we should go on with this epistle, although it had not been intended to go beyond the third chapter, but it has occurred to me since the morning meeting here that, in view of what preceded in the first epistle and so far in this epistle, the thought before us should be preparation for heaven rather than fitness for testimony here on earth and the service of God here upon earth. The first epistle seems to have in mind the service of God here upon earth and all that is suitable to it, but it seems now as if this second epistle should be in mind. It is not to ignore what has gone before in the first epistle, but the thought of our going to heaven and fitness for that is in mind now. It may seem a rather high intention, but I believe the Lord will help us at this time to consider it. The Lord’s coming is so near that we should all be thinking of our fitness for heaven. Oftentimes it has been stressed that fitness for earth is more important, but I think it is due to God that we should have fitness for heaven in mind too, because it is a question of what God has prepared for those that love Him. “Things which eye has not seen, and ear not heard, and which have not come into man’s heart, which God has prepared for them that love him, but God has revealed to us by his Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God”. So that it is thought that this chapter would help us. First there is the idea of our tabernacle house, which is liable to be destroyed, and in view of the building from God eternal in the heavens, we can well afford to accept it. Some are old and expect to go to be with the Lord, but as far as one is concerned the thought has come that instead of death we should be [p. 114] thinking of preparing for the translation. It says in 1 Thessalonians 4: “The Lord himself, with an assembling shout, with archangel’s voice and with trump of God, shall descend from heaven; and the dead in Christ shall rise first; then we, the living who remain, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air; and thus we shall be always with the Lord”. It seems as if the brethren should have it pressed upon them that the Lord’s coming is very, very imminent. Of course, that has been said constantly for many, many years, but it looks as if we ought to have a little insight into the signs of the times, and see that it must be; it must be very, very imminent. Hence it is due to God that there should be preparation for it. There is, of course, preparation for the service of God down here, because that is also due to Him. There is that service and there is what is to be for Him eternally. He must have something in mind for Himself, and He has too, and so we have the idea of the “minister of the holy places and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord has pitched, and not man”. Although that may be for the present time, yet it still bears on the thought of going to be with the Lord.
PL Would the experience of Paul and the thought of “a man in Christ” fit into your suggestion?
JT The reference to the “man in Christ” is the end of the whole book, and what you quote is in entire keeping with the remarks that have been made.
HH Should we not then keep in mind that a good bit has to be done after the rapture? I mean in the millennial ways of God on earth, and so on.
JT Quite so.
HH Might we refer to Habakkuk. It says the vision is written on tablets that he may run that [p. 115] readeth it. That implies moving quickly. It also says the vision hasteth to the end. Does not that justify what you have been saying that there has got to be quick movement with the saints at the present time?
JT Just so, in view of readiness.
HGH So this scripture refers to that which we know? Should it suggest that there should be definiteness in our thoughts in relation to it?
JT It is a statement of assurance. It is a sort of winding up of things to a finish. “For we know that if our earthly tabernacle house be destroyed, we have a building from God”. A building from God — there is a sure end to the thing both for God and for us. As regards ourselves, therefore, the thing is readiness.
WS Does the use of the little word if mean that the apostle had the possible coming of the Lord in mind?
JT Quite so, but it is the idea of assurance, “If our earthly tabernacle house be destroyed, we have ...” Now the ‘if’ bears on that; we have something certain, and that certainty often works out in the sense of being assured by being ready for translation, because it is due to God that we should be ready and not be careless.
AJG Is “the earnest of the Spirit” brought in as helping that?
JT Just so; I thought that, and I suppose the bearing of the earnest is eternity — eternal conditions that we are going into. He is the earnest of that.
PHH Is this entirely from the divine side, or does responsibility enter into it?
JT I think responsibility does enter into it, because the word bears on that. “For we know that if our earthly tabernacle house be destroyed, we have a building from God”. What we know affords [p. 116] certainty, but still it is the certainty that requires preparation.
Ques Does it not flow out of the previous verses at the end of chapter 4?
JT It is a steady working up of a system of truth. The “for” refers to a sequence in connection with what preceded it.
Ques It says: “For our momentary and light affliction works for us in surpassing measure an eternal weight of glory; while we look not at the things that are seen, but at the things that are not seen”. Is that not Paul’s outlook?
JT Very good.
FCH Does the thought of destroying include that the power of Satan may go to that length in regard to the believer’s body?
JT Well, I think it is not simply the power of Satan, but what may happen in the sense of death, falling asleep.
FCH I was thinking of what is said in the previous chapter, “cast down, but not destroyed”. I wondered if the word ‘destruction’, or being destroyed, is stronger than dissolution.
JT It is the sequence, I think. “For we know that if our earthly tabernacle house be destroyed” — that is what might happen through death — “we have a building from God”. It is what we have in view of that: “A house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens”. That is, we have that for our eternal portion.
RWS The apostle Paul seems to have had the decision in his own hands as to whether he would depart or whether he would remain for the progress of the saints. Is there something in that?
JT Just so. In Philippians, he decided in favour of the saints, that he would stay here for their sake. Is that your thought?
[p. 117] RWS And I wondered if it does not work out today, if the brethren value a minister and ask the Lord to retain him with us, He will hear us. Is that going too far?
JT Just so. I do not see why any of us — if we are assured and it is proved that we are of usefulness in the Lord’s service and of usefulness to the saints — might not confidently expect that God would answer our prayers. I certainly think so myself, as far as I am concerned. I can count on God for what is right to be done, and seek to promote it and to be ready for it, and not in any way to interfere with it. Why not? We ought to be confident, and have confidence in God as to all matters. We are about to enter into eternity and we ought to have confidence in God to be ready, and that He will help us. At the same time, as far as we are concerned, we ought to be doing all that is within our reach to be in accord with the mind of God. Why should we not? It is a question really of responsibility.
FCH Is that seen in verse 9, “Wherefore also we are zealous, whether present or absent, to be agreeable to him”?
JT Exactly.
PL So that Enoch, pleasing God, was translated.
JT Just so. He was the seventh from Adam, which is a matter of account. Would you kindly quote that passage, please?
PL Genesis 5: 21: “And Enoch lived sixty-five years, and begot Methushelah. And Enoch walked with God after he had begotten Methushelah three hundred years, and begot sons and daughters. And all the days of Enoch were three hundred and sixty-five years. And Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him”.
JT God was thoroughly with Enoch, and Enoch was thoroughly with God too. “He was not, for God took him”. God worked out the thought exactly according to Enoch’s plan. Why should we not expect that? I do not see why we should not, but then the idea or element of responsibility must not be forgotten, and it runs on to the last moment of our history here.
PHH What was in your mind in relation to Enoch being the seventh from Adam?
JT That is what Scripture says. It was a question of time. He had come on from the first man that was created, he had come on from that time, and now the question is what the result was in his case; not in Adam’s case, but in his case.
PHH You mean it would represent a perfect result?
JT Exactly. It began early that believers should have the idea of responsibility always before them, and therefore the end should be according to the mind of God, and, of course, God will be with us in doing that. So that God took Enoch; God finished the matter, but it was in accord with Enoch’s thought too.
PHH Because he prophesied?
JT Quite so; he was a prophet.
PHH It says, He “prophesied also as to these, saying, Behold, the Lord has come amidst his holy myriads” and so on.
HH The saints are heavenly, would heaven therefore put in its claim for them? They belong there.
JT Quite so. Hebrews 11 would show that — “of whom the world was not worthy”. There is a place for them elsewhere; this world is not worthy of them. Nor is it worthy of us today. The world is not worthy of the saints, who walk in the truth, in the light of the gospel and in the light of the assembly, and in the light of the coming of the Lord. The world is not worthy [p. 119] of us.
HFN Is the same thought as you have been speaking of given us by Peter when he says, “All these things then being to be dissolved, what ought ye to be in holy conversation and godliness, waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God”. Is that the same exercise in Peter?
JT Quite so; and so we have the idea of counting, or length of time. It says a thousand years is as one day, and one day as a thousand years; that is to say, it is the idea of counting time, so that we can come into accord with the mind of God as to it.
Ques Why does it say in Hebrews, “By faith Enoch was translated”? How does faith enter into it?
JT I suppose the idea is to stress what characterises our own period; that is to say, the period in which Paul wrote. It is the faith period. In the chapter we have read it says, “we walk by faith, not by sight”, but presently, in the millennium, it will be by sight, because there will be measurement of time.
AJG Enoch walking with God would certainly be occupied with unseen things and not with seen things.
JT Just so, and then there is the time — he was seventh from Adam. He does not say that himself, it is a question of God, and it says, “God took him”.
HH Would the light of these things in the souls of the saints at the present time be faith?
JT Certainly; it is the characteristic of the whole dispensation in which we are. It is the dispensation, not of sight, but of faith.
AB Is the pleasure of God always to precede the thought of translation?
JT I think so. I think God would say that they are worthy. That is how God would reckon, but then He reckons that according to what we are, our conduct and walk, “We walk by faith”, it says,
“not by sight”. So in Ephesians 2 there is something that would bear on that. It says there “For we are his workmanship, having been created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God has before prepared that we should walk in them”. That is the idea, that the whole matter will be worked out according to God.
AJG Is the light of the judgment-seat of Christ brought in to help us in that, as regards our conduct?
JT That is the next thing we have to come to. So it goes on: “For indeed in this we groan, ardently desiring to have put on our house which is from heaven” — we are desiring that house — not death, but we are desiring that house. “Ardently desiring to have put on our house which is from heaven; if indeed being also clothed we shall not be found naked”. That is to say, we will not be found naked, we will have a body from God from heaven, if we have not got this body. “For indeed we who are in the tabernacle groan, being burdened; while yet we do not wish to be unclothed, but clothed, that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life. Now he that has wrought us for this very thing is God, who also has given to us the earnest of the Spirit”. The earnest of the Spirit refers to an eternal portion — we have the earnest of that.
Ques Is there a reason why the believer’s body in this passage is called a building and a house?
JT I think it is the thought of God. There is a similar word in Genesis 2. Adam was caused to sleep, but then a rib was taken out of him and out of that rib God built a woman — He built it — that is the idea, and that refers to the assembly and runs right through Scripture.
AJG Does it include the thought of permanency in contrast to what is provisional? It is called a building, “a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens”, in contrast to an earthly tabernacle house.
JT Quite so.
PHH The term ‘house’ is used in the setting of weakness in the end of Ecclesiastes — the break-up of the body — “in the day when the keepers of the house tremble”, and so on, and “those that look out of the windows are darkened, and the doors are shut toward the street”.
JT That is written for old men, of whom there are several here.
PHH But what you are saying now about the building would be in contrast to that — it would be the eternal thing?
JT The eternal thing — just so. We are going on to permanency. It is wonderful that we have such a prospect and it is so near to us. “Now he that has wrought us for this very thing is God” — that is not simply apostolic; it is all of us who are christians — “who also has given to us the earnest of the Spirit. Therefore we are always confident” — that is the state of our attitude — “always confident, and know that while present in the body we are absent from the Lord”. When present with the Lord, we shall be in our future bodies, that is, the bodies we are coming to.
FCH Does “this very thing” refer only to the body of glory, or does it comprise more than that?
JT I think it refers to the body of glory; that is the idea. God is working in us for what is permanent, not for a moment, but what is permanent. That is to say, God has had in His mind throughout, from the start in creating man, what is permanent, and in view of the Son becoming man, that everything would be in keeping with Him, in due time.
HH Is not the thought of the Holy Spirit in us a side of the truth which has been revived within [p. 122] the last year or so, and is not that an important feature in connection with the nearness of the end?
JT I think so, because it is just about two or three years ago since the full thought of the Spirit has been revived. It was taken from Numbers 21, because the Spirit can be spoken to as well as that He should speak to us. It has been strenuously resisted by some, but I think the resistance is gradually disappearing.
HH I thought too, the Holy Spirit in us is so set against what is not of God in us. We are in a mixed condition, and there is that which is not of the Spirit in us. Is not the Spirit of God setting Himself very definitely against that, in order that we might be ready for glory?
JT Just so. He is the great Occupant of our house; I mean of those who have the Spirit.
AJG Is this thought of the “house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens”, the idea of a body that is capable of expressing the treasure that is in the believer, the knowledge of God?
JT I think so, I just wonder how it is going to be, and whether we are quite equal to it when it comes, and what we are going to be according to the mind of God; what we are going to display; what He is going to display in us. We ought not to be beyond thinking of it, so that we will be ready, in some sense, for it when the time comes, because “we are members of his body; we are of his flesh, and of his bones”, we are told. Each one of us is a member, but still it is all one idea. It is a question of Christ’s body, and the fulness in which He is to be expressed.
JP Is the house a collective thought?
JT I think so. It is not our houses, but our house. That is to say, the believer’s house, taking in the whole idea of christianity, the whole idea of the assembly. Think of the vastness of it — the work [p. 123] has gone on for nearly two thousand years and it is still proceeding.
HH If you think of this, say, on the one hand the apostle Paul, and on the other hand a man like Mr. Darby, in what relation would they stand the one to the other in the eternal state? I mean there is an individual distinction, is there not, between the saints?
JT Surely. I suppose you would hardly say that any two are exactly alike, because the variety of God is wonderful. Even in the stars there is variety, and then there is all the variety on the earth, too, and it is all of God.
HWA In connection with these three chapters, would it be right to think of the one we had this morning as transformation, and then chapter 4 as transparency, and now this one to be viewed more in the light of translation? I was thinking of chapter 4 — commending the truth to every man’s conscience; he was a citizen of God’s city.
JT That is what was in mind when I started to speak about this chapter, and so we will read the end of the chapter again: “Be reconciled to God. Him who knew not sin he has made sin for us, that we might become God’s righteousness in him”. I should really have begun earlier, but that is the idea — it is to prepare us for heaven and to make us ready for heaven. All this that we are speaking of has all that in view; it is not simply what our service is to be actually here; that is more in the first epistle, especially beginning at chapter 11, but what is more in mind is preparedness here in our bodies for heaven.
PL Would the heavenly city be included in that thought, “we might become God’s righteousness in him”? It says of the city, “having the glory of God”.
JT Just so; answering to “him who knew not sin he has made sin for us”. Think of the wonder of that passage: “Him who knew not sin he has made sin for us, that we might become God’s righteousness in him”. That, of course, is an eternal thought, for the idea of God’s righteousness is to go on eternally. Why should the word ‘righteousness’ be used? I think God so values righteousness that He has kept it and He is going to keep it; it is simply what is right, but it is God’s righteousness.
PL “New heavens and a new earth, wherein dwells righteousness”, 2 Peter 3: 13.
JT Just so.
HH That idea, being made sin, could only have come from the divine mind.
JT I would say that entirely.
WSS Would the constraining love of Christ and the light of new creation be important elements in the preparing for the heavenly condition?
JT Surely.
HPW You spoke about star differing from star in glory. You had some thought in that. Are there not to be all kinds, yet will not every star have a glory of its own?
JT That is just what I was thinking might come out. There is a great variety in stars.
HPW I had in my mind the very precious thought that not only will the Lord come out in a glory all His own, but that He will be glorified in His saints, in the variety of glory seen in them.
JT “Glorified in his saints” — that is a wonderful expression.
Rem So that the assembly is one thought, one pearl, but the brethren of Christ and the sons of God bring in this great thought of distinction.
JT Quite so.
AJG And yet, by divine workmanship, are they not so set together that there is nothing superfluous and nothing lacking?
JT [p. 125] Just so. It is due to God that we should recognise that with Him everything is perfect.
WF It says of Moses and Elias that they appeared in glory. Does that show that the distinctiveness of the believer remains?
JT Quite so. The disciples could discern Moses and Elias. They could discern the distinctiveness of each one. Think of those two expanded into myriads of people, and all like Christ! Think of the magnificence of that!
PL Would each star having its name fit in? It says “He counteth the number of the stars; he giveth names to them all”, Psalm 147: 4.
JT Just so.
WC The Lord speaks of those that are “counted worthy to have part in that world”, and then He speaks of God as “the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob”, Luke 20: 35, 37. God is mentioned in relation to each name.
JT Just so. It says, “God ... is not God of the dead but of the living”. We are all living, for all live to Him. That does not mean the wicked dead live to God, surely; but those that are alive and according to His purpose all live to Him.
PHH One of God’s early words to Abraham was about numbering the stars. It says, “Look now toward the heavens, and number the stars, if thou be able to number them”. But this is an additional thought, bringing in their glory as well as their number.
JT So that we might well look at 1 Corinthians 15 to get a word on that.
AJG 1 Corinthians 15: 35 - 50, “But some one will say, How are the dead raised? and with what body do they come? Fool; what thou sowest is not quickened unless it die. And what thou sowest, thou sowest not the body that shall be, but a bare grain: it may be of wheat, or some one of the rest: and God [p. 126] gives to it a body as he has pleased, and to each of the seeds its own body. Every flesh is not the same flesh, but one is of men, and another flesh of beasts, and another flesh of birds, and another of fishes. And there are heavenly bodies, and earthly bodies, but different is the glory of the heavenly, different that of the earthly, one the sun’s glory, and another the moon’s glory, and another the stars’ glory; for star differs from star in glory. Thus also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruptibility. It is sown in dishonour, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body: if there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual one. Thus also it is written, The first man Adam became a living soul; the last Adam a quickening spirit. But that which is spiritual was not first, but that which is natural, then that which is spiritual, the first man out of the earth, made of dust; the second man, out of heaven. Such as he made of dust, such also those made of dust; and such as the heavenly one, such also the heavenly ones. And as we have borne the image of the one made of dust, we shall bear also the image of the heavenly one. But this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit God’s kingdom, nor does corruption inherit incorruptibility”.
JT We have already touched on this same chapter in what we said at the beginning, as to our being prepared for the heavenly, so I think you might as well read to the last verse of the chapter.
AJG Verses 51 - 58: “Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all fall asleep, but we shall all be changed, in an instant, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must needs put on incorruptibility, and this mortal put on immortality.
[p. 127] But when this corruptible shall have put on incorruptibility, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall come to pass the word written: Death has been swallowed up in victory. Where, O death, is thy sting? where, O death, thy victory? Now the sting of death is sin, and the power of sin the law; but thanks to God, who gives us the victory by our Lord Jesus Christ. So then, my beloved brethren, be firm, immovable, abounding always in the work of the Lord, knowing that your toil is not in vain in the Lord”.
JT I hope the brethren were all following in the great appreciation that there should be with us of this wonderful chapter, and all these wonderful things we have been able to say about 2 Corinthians 5. It is a question of what we have been able to say, because all is written for our learning. We are now dealing with the things that are peculiarly for us, and so I believe the Lord has led us, without our thinking of it at the beginning of the reading, to all these great things that we have come to now, and the question is therefore whether we can go on further in the chapter so as to get all that there is in it. We might therefore proceed from verse 5: “Now he that has wrought us for this very thing is God, who also has given to us the earnest of the Spirit”. We have the Spirit already in us, so that we are well capable of dealing with these things in that sense.
NKM Would you say a word as to the bearing of the judgment-seat of Christ upon what you have been drawing our attention to.
JT We might as well proceed, if you will read on a little further in the chapter, because there are so many things in it — so glorious.
AJG 2 Corinthians 5: 6 - 10: “Therefore we are always confident, and know that while present in the body we are absent from the Lord, (for we walk [p. 128] by faith, not by sight;) we are confident, I say, and pleased rather to be absent from the body and present with the Lord. Wherefore also we are zealous, whether present or absent, to be agreeable to him. For we must all be manifested before the judgment-seat of the Christ, that each may receive the things done in the body, according to those he has done, whether it be good or evil”.
JT The point, therefore, in view of the last question that has been raised is this matter of the things done in the body; what is available to us and what is possible to us, as the word is here: “We are always confident, and know that while present in the body we are absent from the Lord, (for we walk by faith, not by sight;) we are confident, I say, and pleased rather to be absent from the body and present with the Lord. Wherefore also we are zealous ...” Now that is the point, that we are zealous, “whether present or absent, to be agreeable to him”. That is the great point; to be agreeable to God, just as Enoch had the testimony, that he pleased God.
Ques So that there would be a present correspondence to what would come out at the judgment-seat of Christ?
JT Just so. So that when we come out in glory we shall not be very different from what we are down here, because we have been walking according to this chapter.
ECM The woman in John 4 in going back to the city says, “Come, see a man who told me all things I had ever done, is not he the Christ?” Would that suggest something of the present aspect of the judgment-seat of Christ?
JT I would say so. She had come under the Lord’s touch, and everything had been changed for her. But then she left her water-pot, meaning she is leaving things here for the things that are there — the coming glory.
[p. 129] PHH What is the thought of receiving the things done in the body?
JT I suppose it is the idea of reward; the things done are to be received in that sense, as a reward. But you had something in your mind.
PHH The saints will be in their glorified condition, so that it is not in any sense a question of penalty, you would say?
JT God will know exactly how to measure things, and you may come short in that sense. You may come short in the sense that you might have been more. Therefore there is always the suggestion of responsibility to acquire all that is possible.
PL And a sense of loss, do you think?
JT Well, just so.
HH Would the judgment-seat bring in the kingdom side of things?
JT I suppose so. It is the judgment-seat of Christ; not of God, but of Christ.
HH You will not be rewarded for what you never did, I mean, would not some be higher up, so to say, on the kingdom side of things than others?
JT Quite so. Although there will be no room for regrets, yet, at the same time, there is the actual fact that there might have been more. But still I do not believe there is any idea of room for regrets at all in eternal conditions.
Rem So that Paul said even to the Philippians: “I pray, that your love may abound yet more and more”.
JT Quite so; that is good, “More and more”.
EuR He says the same to the Thessalonians in the chapter that gives us the rapture. “Even as ye have received from us how ye ought to walk and please God, even as ye also do walk, that ye would abound still more”.
Ques Why does he bring in the terror [p. 130] of the Lord?
JT It would be the negative incentive, I suppose, of the very things we have been talking about. What do you say yourself?
Rem He brings it in in connection with persuading men, not exactly as applying it to himself.
JT Quite so, but the saints might be said to be the men, too. “Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord we persuade men, but have been manifested to God, and I hope also that we have been manifested in your consciences. For we do not again commend ourselves to you, but we are giving to you occasion of boast in our behalf, that ye may have such with those boasting in countenance, and not in heart. For whether we are beside ourselves, it is to God”. He is speaking of himself now, but then he is blending it with the general ideas that are before him, “For whether we are beside ourselves, it is to God; or are sober, it is for you. For the love of the Christ constrains us, having judged this, that one died for all, then all have died; and he died for all, that they who live should no longer live to themselves, but to him who died for them and has been raised. So that we henceforth know no one according to flesh; but if even we have known Christ according to flesh, yet now we know him thus no longer. So if any one be in Christ, there is a new creation; the old things have passed away; behold all things have become new, and all things are of the God who has reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and given to us the ministry of that reconciliation, how that God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not reckoning to them their offences; and putting in us the word of that reconciliation”. Well now, I think we have a wonderful line of things here to fill out our chapter, because there is so much in view of our being translated to heaven. It is really one of the most [p. 131] glorious chapters.
PHH Does the thought of the judgment-seat enable us to pass over into the atmosphere of what is eternal, without any sense of being wrongly there, or unsuitably there?
JT I think we ought always to challenge ourselves, at least from time to time, as to whether we are conforming to what is set out before us. Christ is the pattern and we are to be conformed to the image of God’s Son. We should therefore have these things always before us, and, of course, Philippians helps us greatly, as we have already remarked, but this chapter is quite enough. As we are here today I think we should keep ourselves to it, because it is so full of glory, and expectation in view of the Lord’s coming. In fact, I have been impressed all this afternoon, since I left the house where I was, until now, that the Lord would have us to look at all this in view of the imminency of the Lord’s coming, and to be ready for it.
HH Christ is there in the new condition. Would that apply to where it speaks of our not knowing Christ after the flesh? Does the thought of new condition come in there?
JT “So that we henceforth know no one according to flesh; but if even we have known Christ according to flesh, yet now we know him thus no longer”. I think the apostle Paul is really speaking of his own experiences, and anticipations, too. But he is also speaking to the saints at Corinth, and he wants them to get all his mind, and to come into it, and be conformed accordingly.
Ques Would you say a little on the difference between reconciliation and new creation?
JT It is a comparison that we have often had. Reconciliation is one thing and new creation is another. Reconciliation is to be conformable to the mind of God; we are conformed to the mind of God — [p. 132] that would be reconciliation; but new creation is absolute; it is finished.
AJG So that reconciliation has reference to a past history and condition of things?
JT Just so. New creation, of course, is new creation; it is a finished idea.
Rem It never was anything else but of God.
JT Just so — “all things are of the God ...”
WS Would it be right to say that reconciliation is objective, and new creation subjective?
JT In a certain sense I think I would go with that. We had a good deal of it in Mr. Raven’s time that illuminated us all.
PL And a helpful reading in Park Street in 1922 on this subject. You urged that reconciliation was in the mind of God. Mr. Raven having presented it to us that where there was distance now there is complacency.
JT That is good. I think I remember it now, as you go over it.
ESH Does the “in Christ” enable us to pass into what is wholly new creation?
JT Well, just so. The acceptance of the idea of “in Christ” in the mind, would enable us to lay hold of things, especially when we remember that the Spirit of God indwells us, for He is operating all the time in us; that is, if we let Him.
FCH “Given to us the ministry of that reconciliation” and “putting in us the word of that reconciliation”, are they both apostolic or does the second one include the saints?
JT Verse 18 is apostolic.
FCH Yes, and then verse 19: “How that God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not reckoning to them their offences; and putting in us the word of that reconciliation”. Would you bring the saints in there?
JT The “in us” is a question of Paul’s ability and service, I would think. It says, “putting in us the word” — ‘the word’ there is the expression of that reconciliation and that really is a subjective idea.
Ques So that they were in accord with their ministry?
JT Quite so. And then the next verse says: “We are ambassadors therefore for Christ”. The word ‘ambassadors’ would mean they are representatives in the ministry — Paul was representative in his ministry — it is apostolic in that verse — “We are ambassadors therefore for Christ, God as it were beseeching by us” — God beseeching by Paul, in other words — “we entreat for Christ, Be reconciled to God”. That is what he is saying; he is entreating the Corinthians to be reconciled to God. It is a great and full thought.
Ques Would you say a word to enlarge the thought of “God was in Christ, reconciling the world”?
JT It is a glorious gospel thought, that is what I would say. It is the full glorious thought that was in Paul, “How that God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not reckoning to them their offences ...” and again “putting in us ...” that is to say the full idea of the gospel put into Paul; it is Paul’s gospel. Peter had a gospel, too, but Paul’s gospel is the supreme one.
PHH Does the idea of reconciliation enable us to enter fully into the counsels of God?
JT I think it does, because you feel that you are restful — you are at home, as it were, literally. You are at home in the full thought of God. You know Him so well that you are at home in His presence, and that, of course, leads you to heaven itself.
Ques Would the words ‘beseeching’ and ‘entreating’ show that this matter of reconciliation was a feeling matter, both with God and with the apostle?
JT I think so, I think Paul would reflect what was the mind of God, and what was in the heart of God. So that we are gradually coming into the fulness of things in the end of the chapter, the fulness of the gospel and then the fulness of the ministry of the assembly, too. That is, all would be in Christ practically in His service down here, and it is a question of how much we are getting out of it at a time like this.
JG Is the best robe of Luke 15 linked with reconciliation?
JT I think so. There are a good many dear brethren here who have preached from that chapter, and no doubt we can get a good word about it if we all say what is in our minds.
EuR I think you said in that reading referred to, that justification clears me but reconciliation retains me for the pleasure of God.
JT Well, that is good; that has added a little to what Mr. L. said.
PHH Would the best robe go further than reconciliation? Would it bring in the full thought of what Christ is in heaven?
JT Well, I think the best robe is Christ; it is what He is Himself. We are to reflect what He is. I suppose the assembly will be the full thought of what Christ is; she is said to be His fulness.
ESH Would it be reconciliation, when the father kissed the prodigal?
JT Well, I suppose it would be. There would be correspondence with the prodigal in every way, you might say, as in the presence of God.
HH He was fit to wear the best robe, was he not? “Bring out the best robe”.
JT Quite so.
PHH [p. 135] Were you going to say some more about the assembly being the fulness of Christ?
JT It says, “the assembly, which is his body, the fulness of him who fills all in all”. What do you say yourself?
PHH I was thinking something like that. Would it be the idea of the complete expression of what is in Christ coming out in the assembly, like Eve, for instance, the woman?
JT Quite so. Someone has referred to Adam saying, She is myself over again. That commends itself to me, and I was touched by it at the time. It is as if the Lord would say, It is myself over again.
FCH We were noticing in verse 5: “Now He that has wrought us for this very thing is God”, and then in the last verse we get, “Him who knew not sin he” — that is, God — “has made sin for us”. How wonderful it is that the same God who has wrought us for this very thing is the God who made Christ sin for us.
JT And the full result is for God too. “That we might become God’s righteousness in him”.
Ques Has that last statement reference to eternity, or does it include the present time also?
JT I think it is a full reference in a very wonderful way, to what was in the mind of God. “That we might become God’s righteousness in him”. So that we would reflect God Himself; what He is as righteous.
Rem What we are now and what we shall be.
JT It is a gospel statement, really, you might say, and it goes on — it is perfect. It leads on to the end, the fulness of the thought of God. It is God’s righteousness; it is a question of what answers to Christ being made sin, and reflects what God Himself is. It is, you might say, a finish to the whole subject [p. 136] here.
WSS Does it necessarily lead on to the thought of the new heavens and new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness?
JT I think so. It is in accord with that.
Ques I should like to ask, would the beseeching in verse 20 apply to man generally or to the Corinthians: “Be reconciled to God”.
JT It is really, you might say, abstract. It does not say definitely who it is. It just says, “Be reconciled”. This is what he says really in effect, “We entreat” — it does not say whom he entreats, it is a general thought — “we entreat for Christ, Be reconciled to God”. It is a general thought, I think, and you cannot fix it on any thing or person. It is a general thought conveying the mind of God as to persons, whoever they may be, and it shows that God has that in His mind for them.