THE GLORY OF THE SON OF GOD (2)

^[p. 405] THE GLORY OF THE SON OF GOD (2)

John 12: 1, 2; John 20: 11 - 18.

JT Nothing can be more interesting to us than to see how the Lord introduced into heavenly associations the family that He found here in earthly associations. The glory of the Son of God is seen perhaps more in that connection than in any other. These two scriptures that we have read serve to set forth how this has taken place; the pressure of death has to be removed before there could be any question as to entering upon heavenly relationships. The Lord found this family under the pressure of death; chapters 11 and 12 show how He removed that pressure off their spirits, and in doing that He secured their faith in His Person, because what is developed in chapter 20 assumes that they were believers in Him as the Son of God. I refer to the fact that Mary herself believed and John believed. We are told that, “he saw and believed”.

RSS Do you say that in chapter 11 it comes out that they believed in Him as Son of God?

JT I think that what is developed in chapter 20 assumes that the disciples believed in Christ as the Son of God; they believed in the resurrection. It is said of John, the “other disciple” who accompanied Peter, that “he saw and believed”. I think, that we have there the intimation that the disciples apprehending the fact of the resurrection believed in His Person.

JLJ Would you say they were led to that through His priestly grace in chapter 11?

JT No doubt that sustained them in it, and resurrection is what declares Him to be the Son of God.

GFW What do you say they believed in John 20: 8? It says in verse 9, “For as yet they ^[p. 406] knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead”.

JT But they “saw and believed”.

GFW But is not that in resurrection? I thought you said in His Person.

JT It does not say exactly what the “other disciple” believed, but I think the idea conveyed is that he believed in the Person.

WB Are not the signs in John’s gospel the manifestation of His glory? And is not the sign in chapter 11 the greatest sign? Resurrection is the great testimony as to His Person.

JT I think so. In chapter 12 He says, “Father, glorify thy name”. The reply is, “I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again”.

WB Does that refer to the resurrection?

JT I think so. What we ought to see is that the heavenly superstructure is reared up on the faith of the Son of God, so that the testimony of the resurrection is of all moment for us if we are to have part in that.

AFM Will you repeat your statement regarding the glory of the Son of God?

JT I think it is connected with the family of God.

AFM Is that family seen in type in chapter 12?

JT I think so. In chapter 11 they are seen under the pressure of death and in chapter 12 as relieved of the pressure of death, and the change is very remarkable. In chapter 12 Christ is now the centre and object, whereas in chapter 11 their thoughts are engaged with Lazarus as having died, but now they think of Christ; “they made him a supper”, showing that He now was their supreme object.

R Would you say that one serving Him, another enjoying His company, and another ^[p. 407] anointing Him represents what the Lord ought to have from His people?

JT I think that shows the change in the circle that the resurrection had brought in.

AFM I was wondering why you did not read verse 3, which brings in the anointing of Mary, and whether it would be right to regard that as a sample of what would take place at the breaking of bread, as realising these three things.

JT But this is strictly a Jewish picture. It shows what Israel will be brought into at the close. The feast is at Bethany, which place I think was the centre of the fellowship established with the Lord’s Person whilst here in the flesh, in contrast to chapter 20, where the centre is heaven; but the leading thought in chapter 12 is that He came to Bethany, “where Lazarus was who had been dead, whom he raised from the dead”. The Spirit gives us there in type a picture of the raised ones and how the Lord regards them, as if that were an order of man out of death. Do you see what I mean?

AFM And then in Christ being there, coming to Bethany, does He represent a new Head and Centre?

JT I think so. We have to note that He was specially in connection with Lazarus, “whom he raised”.

AFM They were a headless family and they now find their Head in Him.

JT And He takes His place there typically in regard to an order of man that is out of death. We have been dwelling on an order of man in whom righteousness is seen, but another side of the position is that the order of man which is to prevail is a man out of death.

WB-t Is that why Lazarus is seen sitting at the table?

JT ^[p. 408] Exactly. Lazarus is prominent, he is the one who sat at the table with the Lord. I take it that he is representative of the order of man which God had purposed for His world.

AAT And the point is that the Lord’s glory shines out in raising Lazarus, and thus representing the order of man which He would bring in.

JT That is it. He introduces the family of God into that position by the power inherent in Himself. That is one mark of the Son of God. It is an immense thing to see that He has brought in that order. Chapter 11 shows how He relieves them of the pressure of death; that is what will mark millennial times. The pressure of death will be removed, and Israel will be established on that principle, as an order of man out of death.

BTF Is that the order of Christ as the firstfruits?

JT I think so, and “afterwards they that are Christ’s at his coming”.

AAT Chapter 12 does not go beyond resurrection, but it shows the order of man.

GH Are these the conditions of eternal life here?

JT Yes. The Lord will reappear to Israel in this way, so that we have depicted here a millennial picture. The first thought to get hold of is that it is an order of man out of death. We read, “Where Lazarus was who had been dead, whom he raised from the dead”. That is what will mark Israel. “Can these dry bones live?” and they do live. It will be as life from the dead. That is what will be seen in Israel in the future.

JLJ Would you say that the eternal purpose of God goes beyond this? Did you not this morning connect the purpose of God with eternal life?

JT Eternal life is in His purpose, but it is not all of it. The epistle to the Ephesians opens up the purpose of God in regard to the heavens; but the ^[p. 409] point here that we have to get hold of is the resolving the question of life; how life is brought in, and in what order does man live? Now we have been dwelling on the side of righteousness, the true man, but then the man that is to exist before God is a man out of death. Israel were brought into Canaan. The wilderness was the place where righteousness was brought into evidence, where the question was raised as to what kind of people they were, whether they were to be a law-abiding people or otherwise; that is what the wilderness is for; for testing. Israel broke down in it, and Christ takes the responsibility up. Hence He was driven by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil, and He maintains in the wilderness what man should be before God. But when the people are brought into Canaan they are represented by twelve stones taken out of the bed of Jordan; and twelve stones were left in the bed of Jordan, signifying that the first order of man is left there, and the new order is brought up out of death; the new order is an order out of death.

BTF What moral correspondence do you attach to that? You speak of an order of man out of death, but is there not a moral thought connected with that?

JT Well, 1 Corinthians 15 develops that it is an order of man marked by power, and it is a spiritual order of man and a glorious order of man. “It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: 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”. All that indicates what the body is to be. You first have to consider the question of righteousness. The question had to be solved as to what God proposed in the wilderness. His law, and that tested the order of man that was there. Now Christ comes in to ^[p. 410] meet that because the law cannot fall to the ground; and He takes up the will of God and maintains it, so that He established man’s title, as the righteous One to live. He is the righteous One, and the righteous One is entitled to live in regard of God; but then there is the power of evil and the power of death to be dealt with, and that brings in the necessity for the power of the Son of God. The Son of God grapples with death; the Son of God annuls death; and so we see that in the outset of His ministry He entered into death’s domain.

AFM That is the Jordan.

JT Yes; then in His death He abolishes death, and He brings out of death an order of man that is to abide; man out of death, not simply a righteous man, but one out of death.

EHT Was Lazarus as raised up a new kind of man?

JT We may say that he was so in principle. The order of man that we are acquainted with here is the man born into the world, not the Man who had died and has been raised.

WB-t A remark was made this morning in regard to Joseph’s brethren. They said, “We are true men”; that could only be in the way you are now bringing it out, because the twelve stones must come out of the bed of the river before you get “true men”.

JT And then as coming out of death there is a new order. That is a very important thing to apprehend in regard to the development of God’s ways. He brought out a new order of man. We get the idea of that in the words, He “came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead”.

AFM Does that stand good for Israel as well as for ^[p. 411] the church?

JT I think so. All has to be established on the footing of resurrection.

AFM But when we come to chapter 12 there are relationships; it is a different idea, is it not?

JT That is the line I would like to pursue. Relationships are all formed on that platform.

AAT God is able to raise even the dead in their sins, but this is not simply raising the dead, but producing a new order of man.

JT Yes.

WLP When you speak of Israel in the future, do you allude to the millennium? Is the new order of man there?

JT It is in principle, because Ezekiel shows that the whole race of Israel are regarded as dead, and they are brought up out of their graves and made to stand on the earth as a great army. That is a question of resurrection power.

EHT Is your thought that the Lord introducing a new order of man produces a family?

JT I think the family relationships are all formed on that basis.

EPL I suppose that what we get in Hebrews as to the new covenant being written on the hearts of Israel shows that Israel in the millennium, as of the new order of man out of death, comes under the new covenant.

JT But that does not go beyond the maintenance of righteousness or carrying out God’s will, because it is a question of His law put in their hearts and minds.

WB-t You say that this sets forth Israel in a day to come. I think that makes it a little difficult to apply it to ourselves.

JT Chapter 12 is not a church picture. Chapter 20 is a church picture, but this passage serves the purpose of showing how the family are transferred from under the pressure of death into the resurrection ^[p. 412] sphere. It is easy to see the great difference there was at Bethany after Lazarus was raised from the dead from what existed when he was in the tomb, because it was not only that Lazarus was in the tomb, but the whole family were under the pressure of death.

WB-t So the illustration of the twelve stones taken out of the river naturally connects itself with this scene.

JT It does. It shows it is not the Israel that came out of Egypt that is brought into Canaan, but a race that in type was in death and was taken out of death.

BTF For us that is the man that we know as “in Christ”.

JT The question of resurrection is, for the moment, objective, not of a work in you. It is the light of what has been effected in Christ.

WB-t There is an important verse in Judges 2 in connection with the generation that went through the Jordan. It says, “They served the Lord in the days of Joshua, and all the days of the elders that outlived Joshua”. Would you connect that in any way with the passage of the Jordan?

JT No. The type of death and resurrection does not go beyond Gilgal. Mr. F. raises the question as to new creation. That is another thing. Before that can take place, before the divine superstructure can be built up in our souls, there must be the faith of the work of God; resurrection has no allusions to the work in our souls; it is presented as a matter of faith. It refers to what God has effected in Christ outside of us; but as light, it is the foundation that is laid in our souls on which the whole superstructure is reared, and if there is not that foundation, then the superstructure is not solid.

WB Before the rapture is stated in 1 Thessalonians 4, it is said, “If we believe that Jesus died and rose again”. Is that the thought you have now in mind?

JT Exactly. “If we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him”. That shows that if you have faith in regard to the death and resurrection of Christ you have no difficulty in regard to those fallen asleep, because it is a question of what God can do.

RSS The new covenant, on the other hand, is connected with the work of God in our souls. So there are two thoughts in resurrection, the one, that it is a question of power, and the other, that it introduces a new order of man. It is a great thing to have clearly in view that the man after the flesh does not answer to God’s mind.

WB Does that embrace the physical as well as the moral?

JT It does ultimately, as 1 Corinthians 15 shows, but Christianity is reared up in connection with us as we are now, and hence the importance of faith; we are raised “through faith of the operation of God that raised him from the dead”.

APM How about the Spirit in that connection?

JT The Spirit comes in to effect in your soul what corresponds with that. He works in accordance with that.

AFM Scripture views the Spirit in different lights. There are different expressions in regard to the Spirit; for instance, the Spirit of God, the Spirit of Christ, and the Spirit of God’s Son; they all have different meanings and refer to different operations in the soul.

WB Is that the order of man that we see in the Lord when He was here forty days after His resurrection?

JT He was always out of heaven, but He set forth the order of man in resurrection before He went ^[p. 414] on high. That is the thing for us to get hold of, because it is on that that the superstructure is reared up.

WB-t You would not limit it to the forty days, would you?

JT As to order the Lord was of the same order before as after resurrection. But the condition in which we are to live before God is only seen in resurrection. There is no change of order in Him. He was always the second Man out of heaven, but He was not in the condition that God intended man to live in before Him. He took up flesh and blood for the purpose that He might terminate that, and establish a new order in resurrection. We are told that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.

GFW It is a question of condition, not of order.

WB In Colossians 2, where it speaks of resurrection, is not that quickening?

JT We are raised by the faith of the operation of God, but we are also quickened; that is not said to be by faith; it is a question of God’s work in us.

WB-t May we go on to chapter 20 now?

JT It is clear that the order of man with whom the relationships are formed is a man out of death.

RSS So in principle it is just as applicable to us as to Israel, though this passage (John 12) is a millennial scene.

JT Quite so. Now God is free to bring in any order of relationships that may be according to His counsels; that is, He can establish the heavenly order, as with ourselves, and the earthly order in the future, with Israel; but underlying all that is the great fact of the resurrection, and both heavenly and earthly are established on that platform.

RSS That is very interesting. On the one hand, the condition in which Israel will be found,

^[p. 415] and, on the other hand, that in which we shall be found.

WCR And will it not be so with all the families that are brought into relationship with God?

JT I think God is now free to establish any order of relationship that may be in His counsels. What He makes clear is that He can do nothing with man in the flesh, but He can bring out the whole scheme of His counsels on the platform of resurrection; power is there, and God has now the order of man that He can use.

WB So you have the celestial and the terrestrial.

E You would not say that the Lord could not go back to the Father without death?

JT Certainly not. There was no obligation for Him to die.

AAT Do you distinguish between the new order and new creation?

JT Yes. The new order was seen in Christ personally, but you could not apply new creation to Christ; He is the beginning of the creation of God.

AFM Is the company in John 20 a sample of one of the families named of the Father? Ephesians 3:15.

JT Yes.

AFM The first family — the chief family?

JT I think you can see that God begins with this family, and what He begins with must have the first place. It is not as it was with Israel, a typical thing; it is now a question of the evolving of the divine scheme, a spiritual order of things; the new order is a spiritual order and heavenly. Those that the Lord takes up first have the first place.

AFM And what is the end in view in taking up this family? Is it for the glory of the Son?

JT It may be spoken of in many connections, but here in John 20, there is evidently the formation ^[p. 416] of heavenly relationships, the most intimate relationships with divine Persons. There could be nothing higher or more blessed than what is contemplated here.

JLJ They are to answer to divine affections. Now He comes into the midst in chapter 20. Could He not come into the midst in chapter 12?

JT He did come.

JLJ I mean in the same light as in chapter 20.

JT There is nothing intimated as to association in relationship in chapter 12, but there is in chapter 20.

JLJ But it is the same company in picture.

JT In chapter 20 Mary Magdalene is the representative of the family. We have seen that the family at Bethany were relieved of the pressure of death, and the Lord gives them to understand His appreciation of them as in the light of resurrection. Chapter 20 shows that they are to be on a higher platform than that.

LDT Is the family in chapter 12 a heavenly family?

JT They are not viewed in that light. The point there is the order of man that comes out of death. But then chapter 20 shows that for the heavenly ones the links are to be heavenly. The earthly links are to be resumed later on as we see in Thomas, but the Lord begins with that which is to have the first and the greatest place, so that it is the church that is here in view. Hence He says to Mary, “Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God”. He meant by that that the links that had been formed with Him as on earth were not to be resumed.

AFM He invited Thomas to handle Him in the scene which follows in ^[p. 417] that chapter.

JT That was anticipative of what would be later on.

WB Is there not a significance in the kind of messenger to whom this communication was made — Mary Magdalene? She was one out of whom the Lord had cast seven devils. She had been greatly relieved and her affections had been won. It was a great communication she had to deliver.

JT And we may be sure she was suited to be a messenger for such a message. The Lord would not have selected her were it not that she was morally qualified for the message.

WLP Her affection for Him fitted her for it. The whole story shows how she had the Person of the Lord before her, and that would fit her morally for it.

JT I think so. Our brother was pointing out that seven devils had been cast out of her by the Lord. She represents a remarkable company. The fact is that she is in the light of resurrection. She is a believer in Christ risen.

BTF This company goes beyond what we would call a resurrection company. The message which the Lord sent them through Mary constituted them what might be called a heavenly company.

JT I think so. It prepared them for the new relationships. Their moral characteristics are dealt with by three of the evangelists. Matthew speaks of the brethren of Christ as those who do the will of His Father. In Matthew 12 the Lord Jesus disowns His mother and His brethren after the flesh, and looking around on His disciples He says, “Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother”. That indicates that those whom He owns in relationship with Himself are those who do God’s will. In Luke He recognises them as those who “hear the word of God and do if”. But John gives the heavenly relationship, and his thought is that the brethren of Christ are believers in the resurrection. Hence they are morally of a new order. That which you believe gives character to you morally. As believers in the resurrection they are of a new order. If you are a believer in the resurrection you are not a believer in the man that is to die, but in an order of man that is out of death.

A.F.M. What about Mark?

JT There, as in Matthew, the relationship is based on doing the will of God.

RSS Your point is that in John they believed in One who arose from the dead?

AFM These are the features of Christ’s brethren.

JT And we have no title to lay claim to be brethren apart from these features. I am speaking now of our position here as assuming to be His brethren. Of course, every true believer has part in the relationship. It is our portion according to God’s purpose, but there are many who lay claim to be brethren without any regard or exercise as to the characteristic features which the scripture gives.

GFW Will you repeat what the characteristics are?

JT That you do God’s will, hear His word and do it, and that you are a believer in Christ risen. These are the kind of people whom God recognises. I think it is very searching and should exercise us. There are several companies of people known as brethren, but there is no virtue in the mere term, because in connection with some there is the greatest lawlessness. Their very position is founded on lawlessness. The Lord only recognises those who are doing His will and keeping His word and who accept the new order, the order of resurrection; those who have abandoned the first order of ^[p. 419] man.

EHT You can only tell what a family is by what they do?

JT Yes; and the brethren of Christ must be like Him or He will not recognise them.

AFM How do you use the word recognise? Do you mean that people are not converted?

JT I mean that He does not recognise them as His brethren. He may recognise them in another way, because He knows those that are His, but He is not ashamed to call us brethren if we are in the truth of the relationship. We learn from the Lord’s own words what the term signifies in His mind. It is true that He did not call His disciples His brethren until He rose from the dead, but in the days of His flesh, as we have seen in the first three gospels, He gave the characteristic features of those whom He would own in close relationship with Himself, and we should see to it that we are marked by the traits that He indicates.

WB The Philadelphia character is that they keep His word and do not deny His name.

JT That is just the idea.

LTF Are there any of His own, believers, that He recognises in any other way at this time?

JT I think that He cannot fail to take account of everything that is of God on earth. I see Him taking account of them and going after them and saving them, but for Him to recognise them formally as His brethren they must have the traits He indicates.

RSS I suppose Abraham and Lot might illustrate what you are speaking of now?

JT Lot was as much one of God’s people as Abraham, but Abraham was the friend of God.

GFW Do you make a distinction between that and Hebrews 2? It says because they are of His order He is not ashamed to call them brethren; it is not a matter of state there.

JT No; but it must involve state. “He that sanctifieth and they that are sanctified”. They are “all of one, for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren”. The church is the sanctified company in principle; she is of the same origin as Christ, though you could not say that every member is practically sanctified.

GH Do you think that there must be a corresponding state to take in the message, “I ascend”?

JT No one will take in the heavenly order unless he has these traits. You have not a bit of appreciation of the heavenly order if these are lacking, but if you believe in that Man out of death, God’s Son, then you are prepared to be with Him in any association, and certainly in the heavenly.

RSS That is clear, for otherwise your interests would all be centred down here.

JT Mary wanted the Lord, and how great was the message He gave her, that she and they would be in association with Him before the Father! When she went and told the others, we can understand that they would say, ‘What does this mean?’ for they had Messianic hopes, and the Lord did not say anything about those hopes, but about the Father, and going to the Father, and He addresses them as His brethren. We can imagine the apostles conversing with one another as to these wonderful things, and that they would say, ‘He means to have us in association with Himself in heaven!’ But, I fear, they took it in but poorly. The change in that company, if they had any appreciation of the message, would be very wonderful; the change at Bethany was very great; there it was a question, of relief from the pressure of death, and having a new order of man there, but now the message which the Lord sent to them involved that they were fit to be His brethren as the ascended One. If they had any appreciation of it, the change would be immense ^[p. 421] with them. How it would lift them out of the narrow circle of Judaism, and how it would direct their affections and minds heavenward.

GH In John 12 it is what they do, but in John 20 it is what He does.

WLP Is there not a difference between the Lord recognising brethren in the way we have been speaking of, and we recognising others as brethren in the Lord?

JT Yes. But you should never regard the brethren on any lower platform than that we are brethren of Christ risen and glorified.

AFM Why did the Lord come into the company in John 20 when the doors were shut, and in Revelation 3: 20 we see the church, and the Lord outside; the door is closed and He is outside, but here the door is shut and the Lord comes into their midst. Why is this?

JT I think that His coming into the midst when the doors were shut shows that whilst things are of a heavenly order they are also of a spiritual order; what is material has nothing to do with it. The closed doors did not prevent His coming in; He comes to them in spite of the doors being shut, showing, I think, that all was now after a spiritual order.

WB-t I fear that many here are not quite clear as to the characteristics of the brethren of Christ. Would you go over them again? We would all like to have the moral features of His brethren.

JT I was endeavouring to show that the characteristics of the Lord’s brethren are, first, that they do God’s will here on earth; secondly, they hear His word and keep it and do it. In Matthew 12 and Mark 3, we get the first, and in Luke 8 the second. In John they were believers in His resurrection.

WB-t I was thinking of John 17: “They have kept my word”, and “I have given them thy word”.

JT Yes. And in John 20 you have the fact that they are believers in Christ risen, so they are in the light of a new order of man, and that Man is God’s Son; therefore there is the disallowance of the moral structure of the man that is, the man after the flesh.

RSS Then this is what is normal, because that is the way Scripture contemplates things, and what is normal should be true of all.

JT Yes. That is very simple.

WLP The defect is that our standard is lower than the scriptural standard.

JT I think so, but the Lord never lowers His standard, and it is a very serious consideration if we do so.

RSS He says, “Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father”. He speaks of Himself as the ascending One, and He directs their minds heavenward; for He was One who was now no longer connected with earth, but with heaven.

JT Without the message they might have said, ‘Now that He is gone we must await His return’; but the message gives them to understand, that pending His return to Israel, they are to have Him and to know Him as the heavenly One; and they are to be His companions. So that it is distinctly the church position that is in view here.

WB-t And we ought to be very much exercised in regard to that.

JT That is why I press the point, as to whether we are marked by the traits of the Lord’s brethren.

WB-t You said that what a man believes affects him.

RSS And I suppose the great thing really to bear in mind is that we are the brethren of the Son of God. He is here in John 20 as the Son of God, and we have a pattern of the assembly; so that, as ^[p. 423] of the assembly, we are in relation to Him, not exactly as Son of man, but as the Son of God.

JLJ Would you say that He comes into the midst as the Son of God? In what light do we gather to Him to take the Supper in the wilderness As Lord?

JT Yes. It is the Lord’s supper, but what is contemplated here is the spiritual order of things; the material does not affect it; the closed doors did not affect it, so that it represents the spiritual order, and then the Lord confers on them what is most intimate. He breathes on them, thus conveying to them His own Spirit, so that they are qualified inwardly for the great position which His message gave them.

JLJ Would you say that we must know what it is to take the Supper before we can know Him in the midst?

JT The Supper is introductory to it. What we are down here in flesh and blood is provisional. The assembly of God viewed in Corinthians is provisional; it contemplates a company of people literally, in this world, but drawn out of the world morally, and having God before them. But what this chapter, John 20, contemplates, is an order of things that is to abide; that is what the church is really.

RSS And that is very important, and it is in that connection that we see Him as Son of God. It is really the great point that we have before us.

JT So ^[p. 424] that the display of the glory of the Son of God is in His having brought in a family, and established a relationship between them and the Father. “My Father and your Father, my God and your God”. That is the consummation of the Lord’s great work, and that sets forth the glory of the Son of God.

RSS Which will abide eternally.

JT Yes.

AAT Is that the highest glory of His work?

JT I think so. It is His glory in having brought in a family which is to continue, patterned after Himself as God’s Son.

RSS I had a little difficulty in connecting what you said that they saw and believed, but I think the end of the chapter makes it clear. There John says, “And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples [and the greatest of them was His own resurrection] ... but these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God”. It says here, “they saw and believed;”

JT It was true in principle. They believed.

RSS Have we not in John 20 that which is highest as to what God has for us as His people?

JT I think so.

RSS We have Christ, and His brethren in association with Him before the Father, which is really the ultimate end of all. I was thinking, in connection with what we had this morning on the subject of eternal life, that there is a certain order of teaching which it would help us to take note of, and here we have reached the end of it. Taking such a simple scripture as Romans 5, we there get, as Mr. Raven pointed out years ago, four things, the kingdom, the new covenant, reconciliation, and eternal life. Now these four things that come in order are given there, and there is an advance in each; and then I think we get in other scriptures how the way is opened up for what is beyond these, and that is our union with Christ and association with the Son of God. There are steps, and each an advance on the other, and that which brings us to the truth of association with Christ is the termination, and the greatest of all.