THE WAY OF LIFE (1)
[p. 358] THE WAY OF LIFE (1)
John 2: 1 - 12; John 4: 46 - 54
JT This gospel is, we may say, “the way of life”. Proverbs 15: 24, says: “The way of life is above to the wise, [p. 359] that he may depart from hell beneath”. These two miracles are more on the negative line. If we are to know what life is, it helps to know where it is not found, and the first miracle, I think, is to remind us that is not found in natural relationships; and the second shows it is not found in connection with social relationships; a nobleman being mentioned. These things have their place in the governmental ways of God, but they do not involve life. These two signs are negative in that sense; but on the other hand, they afford evidences of how the Lord can bring in life even in connection with these things. He brings it in in recognition of these things; He brings in life in His own Person.
WB-s In these two cases you would naturally think there was that element there. I mean that in a marriage life would be in evidence. Naturally that is where the most enjoyment is found.
JT I think the first sign is to remind us that it is not there. And so in regard to social distinctions, although they have their place in the governmental ways of God, they do not aid you in regard to life. In fact the nobleman’s son was at the point of death. They are connected by the Spirit because they enter so extensively into human affairs. I think they are set down at the outset to remind us that the way of life is not in these things. They are not the bad things of the world, but the legitimate things.
AFM The verse you quoted from Proverbs is very helpful. “The way of life is above to the wise,
that he may depart from hell beneath”. Life is morally above.
JT In the third chapter the Lord reminds us that as having come down from heaven the Son of man is in heaven. Then in the fourth chapter there is the springing up; that is, we are reminded at the outset that we have to take the up-line. The government of God recognises conditions as they are on the earth, but we must not look for life there.
FL In the first of these signs the Spirit of God calls attention to the fact that Jesus “manifested forth his glory”.
JT I was saying that they afforded the Lord opportunity to bring in the thought of life in Himself.
EHT The negative side is seen in Luke 12: 15: “A man’s life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth”.
JT I think the Lord acquires a place in the soul. “This beginning of signs did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested his glory; and his disciples believed on him”. What is so essential to life is that the Lord should have His place in the soul. After young people get converted they make much of natural things, and connect what is spiritual with them, whereas the Lord is to be believed on. His disciples believed on Him. This gospel is intended to lead those already believers into more definite faith in Himself. As it says: “These are written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life in his name”, John 20: 31. The Lord acquires a place in the soul by the manifestation of His glory, whatever form that may take, to the end that we should be henceforth believers on Him.
PL And then can the natural relationships be recognised? It says, “He went down to Capernaum, he and his mother, his brethren, and his disciples; and they continued there not many days”.
JT Yes. Then in the case of the nobleman,
[p. 360] having come to the Lord, having reached Him through this second sign, he becomes a believer. It says, firstly, that he “believed the word that Jesus had spoken unto him”; but, finding that the Lord’s word really became effective, then “he believed, himself and his whole house”. As we are not told what he believed in the second instance it is clear that he became a characteristic believer. The spiritual dominated the natural now, for his whole house believed with him.
HG In the garden of Eden God made “to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food”: Genesis 2:9 rather suggestive of the social side of man, but the tree of life was “in the midst of the garden”. The prominent thought was not the social side, but the life.
JB Would this be a following up of the statement: “In him was life; and the life was the light of men?” John 1: 4.
JT That is the beginning of the gospel, and it is the point to be worked out.
RLC It speaks of those who followed the Lord just on account of the miracles. That is the course we would take naturally.
JT Yes. In this gospel persons are specially prominent, life being in view. The first of Genesis outlines life in its various developments, but the second confines it to persons, because persons are to have names; and in the word ‘persons’ I would include the lower creatures mentioned, because I think they are symbolical. It does not say that Adam was called upon to give names to the rivers, or mountains, or trees, but to living souls; Genesis 2:19. That is, the living soul is marked by some features in its movements; so God brought to Adam the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air (all classified as living souls), “to see”, it says, “what he would call them”.
[p. 361] The idea was that in the head there was to be intelligence sufficient to convey in a name what the creature expressed; Adam, in this, is typical of the Lord.. What God had before Him was a scene of life; that is, a scene filled with living persons, and each person in it has his own character; and that character is the expression of the form that life takes in him; the name he obtains expresses that. The name the believer obtains is in the book of life. The name in the, book indicates the kind of person referred to. It is not arbitrary; it is Christ, in perfect wisdom and knowledge, expressing what that person is.
HG So when Peter says to the Lord: “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God” Matthew 16:16 it indicates what he was himself, and the Lord at once names him. “Thou art Peter”. Is that the idea?
JT It is, and so in John the last Adam comes out, and instead of saying “Thou art” the Lord says, “Thou shalt be called”, because, as I understand, it is the last Adam that is brought before us. Hence, “Jesus looking at him said, Thou art Simon, the son of Jonas; but thou shalt be called Cephas (which interpreted is stone)”. “Thou art” is based on his confession, but “thou shalt be called” is based on what his countenance depicted. When He looked on Simon he said, “Thou shalt be called Cephas” and then John gives the meaning of the word.
PL You mean that Peter in relation to the work of God goes into the building as a stone. When you come to, “Thou shalt be called Cephas”, it is the person that is to stand out distinctively.
JT That is it. It is one amongst others.
EHT Would you say they are named according to their movements? The creatures spoken of in Genesis 2 had different movements, and Adam named them accordingly.
JT That is it: “to see what he would call them”, and God did not [p. 362] alter it.
EHT So I suppose when John saw the Lord walk, what gave him the impression of who the Lord was, was the movement.
JT Yes. First, “John seeth Jesus coming unto him”. That is, John was baptising and when he saw the Lord coming to him, he says, “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world”. That movement denoted the Lord’s death, and thus the designation John announced; but when he saw Jesus walking — not coming to him, but walking — that suggested a different thing, and so he says simply, “Behold the Lamb of God”. His walk is in view, not His death.
WB-s Nathanael comes in at the finish, “Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile”.
JT When Jesus saw him coming He gave him a name.
FL The end of chapter 20 says, “Many other signs therefore also Jesus did before his disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life in his name”. Is that the intent of what is before us? Life is in His name, so one might venture to say these meetings would fail if there does not come before us such a presentation of Christ in these signs that life shall be effectuated and developed in His name amongst us who are here. Attention is called to the glory of the Son of God.
JT So you get in the first chapter a great number of appellations of Christ. The thought is, in developing the glory of His Person, to bring out that life in all its features is exhibiting itself in that Man. Whatever form life takes was exhibited in Him.
JMcK Would you say that every one of us has a name indicative of what we are?
JT That is it. That is just what I believe, and in the world that God has before Him we shall [p. 363] appear in this way. John had persons before him, and every person in that realm is distinguishable by his name. If you see him walking you recognise him because that movement indicates what he is. That is the name. So you have, as I remarked, all these wonderful titles of the Lord in this chapter, and then others are brought in. The two disciples that heard John speak come in. One of them was Andrew, and he goes after Simon. The point is the movements of life. That is what the Holy Spirit would bring before us. It is to the end that we might say, Well, what marks me? That is the effect of the truth. My name is in the book of life, but that name was given to me by Christ (whether prophetically or otherwise) on account of what I had exhibited. In Peter’s case it was given prophetically, because as yet the truth it indicates had not developed, but the Lord saw the end and gave it to him prophetically, as I suppose He does to every one of us.
FL In the word to the overcomer at Pergamos, the Lord indicates that He will give him a new name on a stone, that in the world to come every one will receive a distinguishing name; secret as yet, but to be revealed then, which will be the Lord’s characterisation of what that man had been.
JT I suppose that is what is in the book of life. Otherwise the book of life would be but a list of names without any correspondence to the persons represented. You might get that in an ordinary directory of the city or church. The Lord says to the overcomer in Sardis, “I will not blot out his name out of the book of life”, Revelation 3:5. There were many names in those days that did not express anything, but the book of life must agree accurately with the persons named.
PL In other words, God vindicates His writing by the power of life in our souls.
JT I think the names are given prophetically, so [p. 364] what you say must be true. The Lord sees the end from the beginning.
AFM The name given suggests possibilities to be developed. These miracles brought before us will tend to develop life in us according to the names given.
FL I suppose the writing of Christ on the fleshy tables of the heart is really an effect of life produced, and that writing finds its answer in the name which He gives.
JT He brings me into correspondence with the name He gives me.
CAM Speaking of the different names of the Lord Jesus in the first chapter, you said that was indicative of all the characteristics of life? I thought that was helpful, because every one lives on account of Christ; bearing, I suppose, in that way some characteristic set forth there.
JT Yes. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things received being through him, and without him not one thing received being which has received being. In him was life, and the life was the light of men”, John 1:1 - 4. That shows that the Spirit of God, in bringing in the truth of the Lord’s Person, immediately introduces the thought of life; this indicates what is in view in this gospel.
FL And one sees how essentially true it must be that any work of life in a believer must be some reproduction of what is true in Christ. It could not be anything else.
GWH First the choice and then the formation: is it not all sovereign?
JT Yes, quite. I think the giving of a name must be prophetic; it must be the Lord announcing what that person is to be on account of the work of the Spirit in him.
JMcK To begin with, God puts a certain stamp [p. 365] upon us, as it were, and His dealings with us all along the way are to bring us up to that point.
JT That is what I understand, and however the flesh may work, He will see to it that discipline will bring us to His thought for us.
PL So they are walking in the beginning of John and running at the end. Is it Christ in that way as a life-giving Sun, giving impetus to God’s world in life?
JT That is it, I think. One has remarked that the first chapter is astronomical. The movement of Christ induces movements in others, and their movements are in relation to Him, and He names them accordingly. So you can see a believer is named according to Christ, every one taking character from Him, and He giving a name to each. It seems to me a very wonderful thing and most interesting, because it is a question now of what I am to be — if I apply it to myself. The Holy Spirit, therefore, enlarges on Him throughout the chapter.
GAT I do not see what your name has to do with what you are going to be here for Christ.
JT It has a great deal to do with it, because firstly it expresses the intelligence of the Lord. He made no mistake in giving you the name, and then, secondly, He will bring you to it. I mean in result my course exemplifies that name.
GAT You mean the name you are known by in business?
JT No, the name I am known by in your mind or in any one’s mind, is my character. You say, Well, that is so and so, it is just like him. What I have in my mind is his name. You think of the name James — that is arbitrary, it means nothing, but I mean something. You mean something, every one of us means something. I have an ideal in regard to every brother here that I know. He has made some impression on me. Well, that impression [p. 366] is his name in my mind. Hence, we say, “So-and-So has a good name”. His character is referred to.
EGMcA In regard to the natural, I am recognised by my name; spiritually, my name expresses my character.
JT You get a name which in itself is arbitrary; in time that name not only designates you, but also your character, and in this sense it is used. But then in spiritual things the Lord gives the name prophetically, because He knows what you are going to be.
EGMcA If sin had not come in every creature would have justified the name Adam gave it, and it will work out that way according to the names the Lord gives because there can be no failure in Him.
RSS Take any brother well known among us: his name is mentioned, and what is immediately before you in an instant is what he is, though he may be thousands of miles away.
JT His personality has put a fulness into the words of his name that would not exist at all if another man came before me called by those words; but the Lord has a name for every one. There are no duals in the book of life. There are in this world, for conditions in human affairs are incongruous. The Lord gives a name that expresses exactly what you are, or are to be, spiritually.
AFM But James and John had one name for two — Boanerges, sons of thunder. What would that suggest?
JT That was a “degree”, so to speak; it had reference to their ministry.
RSS It is a very exercising thing that the Lord has given us a name, and the ways of God with us here are in view of bringing about what His thought at the outset was for us. It is a new thought to me, and should be a very exercising one to us all.
JB I suppose the Lord being the source of life,
[p. 367] all that flows from Him must take character from Him, in various characteristics, and the name is given that sets forth, or is in keeping with those characteristics.
HG Take Paul’s name, I suppose, in a way it was divinely given. At any rate the Spirit of God takes it up. “Less than the least of all saints” Ephesians 3:8: he welcomed everything that worked on the line of reduction, and seemed to be ambitious to be true to it. The man had disappeared in his life of flesh and reappeared in the life of the Man that he appreciated. He was true to his name.
PL Not only is the constitution that is to be wrought there foretold in the giving of the name, but the movements are even indicated before they take place. It says of Mary, “It was the Mary who anointed the Lord with ointment”, John 11:2. It is said of her before she did it. That is in the eleventh chapter and she does not do it until the twelfth. It was in the mind of the Head that she should do it. What the Lord has named He can commit Himself to.
JT Yes; that is a good example of what we are speaking of. At the outset of this gospel it says, “He came to his own, and his own received him not; but as many as received him, to them gave he the right to be children of God, to those that believe on his name”. And then immediately after, “who have been born, not of blood nor of flesh’s will nor of man’s will, but of God”, John 1:11 - 13. That supported the position He gave them. Many years after the Lord ascended, John is looking back and calling attention to what those who received Christ came into. They received title to take the place of children of God. This designation was fully justified in them after they received the Holy Spirit.
EGMcA Would you say that Simon was indicative of the will of the flesh, but Peter of the will [p. 368] of God?
JT Yes.
PL You get this principle in the Old Testament: Abraham getting his name changed, and Sarah, and Jacob.
JT Yes; these and other instances throughout Genesis are on the same line. We can indeed trace back certain features of the truth in the names of these persons.
FL The Lord is very discriminating in the use of names. When He speaks to Peter with regard to temptation He does not say, Peter, “Satan hath desired to have thee”; it is “Simon”.
JT So Genesis 2, in a sense, takes priority over chapter 1, because it brings in intelligence in the head in giving names to the “living souls”; and then after that it says, that the deep sleep comes on Adam and God builds the woman out of the rib of the man, and He brings her to him, and Adam says, “This time it is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; this shall be called Woman, because this was taken out of a man”, Genesis 2:23. So the woman receives her name from Adam in a very peculiar way, distinct from the ordinary creature.
CAM The second of Genesis is greater inasmuch as it is more persons than things.
AFM Why the expression “living soul”?
JT It refers to the lower affections of the creature; a plant has life, but it has not a soul. Life of an inferior order operates there; a plant has no affections, whereas an animal has affections, and, therefore, if we make use of it as a type, it refers to the saints in their lower affections, in the way they work out in compassions and in care for one another.
WB-s It is striking that Adam called his wife Eve after the fall, which means “life”. After this scene in Cana we get death and resurrection. The Lord said, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up”, John 2:19. Life is in connection with resurrection.
JT Quite, which is on the third day. That is, you might say, the preface to the book ends on this day. “After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight”, Hosea 6: 2. God intended that the testimony as regards life should be in Jewish settings. It was a very great witness to His grace that He should bring in the testimony of life in this way. The third day is still a Jewish setting, but the Lord manifested forth His glory so that He should be personally believed on, and that, I think, makes room for the third and fourth chapters, which take us into the wide domain of the world.
AFM What is the peculiar instruction in His first sign in regard to life?
JT I think the point is in having to say to natural things we need purification, because all that attaches to nature is impure. At best it is impure, so the six water-pots of stone were there. It was not an accident that they were there. They were there because the Lord would emphasise the need of purification in regard to natural affections. We have to see that life is outside of all this, and we have to be purified before we can touch it, so the water of purification becomes the wine of joy. It is not the gift of the Spirit, but emphasises the need of purification.
JB What do the vessels represent?
JT It is a Jewish scene, but I take the waterpot to be myself. A human vessel.
HG They were filled “to the brim”. Is your thought that the measure in which we accept displacement of what is merely natural we will enjoy what is spiritual?
PL And the wine is for the brethren. “So that death works in us, but life in you”, 2 Corinthians 4: 12.
[p. 370] Death is rolled in upon the vessel, and it works out in life for all, and that is the only way by which we can be preserved together in relations of affection.
JT John will not admit of any half measures. The tendency is to have some of the natural and some of the spiritual, and mix them. I am sure that is the state of many Christians. That which is right and true naturally is mixed with what is spiritual, whereas John will not admit of that. He must have you wholly, so Jesus says to them, “Fill the water-vessels with water. And they filled them up to the brim”. There is to be nothing left of the natural at all if I am to touch life.
EGMcA And there is no room for anything else if filled to the brim.
JT If filled up to the brim with the water of purification I become full of wine. The Lord changes me. It is the Lord’s doing. That is the thing for me to get hold of in my soul, what the Lord can do for me, and there are to be no half measures.
WCR You mean you have to do violence to natural affections, to what is natural to you down here?
JT That is right. “Woman”, the Lord says, “what have I to do with thee?” Was that not violence to natural affections? One often speaks of that, how the Lord could have said it, but it is put down there for us. Can I be as violent as that in regard to natural things? If not, I am not filled up to the brim.
HG Moses says that Levi did not know his own children; Deuteronomy 33.
JT That is it.
HG Natural relationships, affections have a place. We cannot bring them into the spiritual sphere, but they have a place in the natural sphere.
JT Oh, surely; it was so in the nobleman’s house in chapter 4, and even in the Lord’s action [p. 371] here. He went down to Capernaum with His mother and brethren; but He went down with them after this manifestation of His glory.
PL So it is for “not many days”.
JT That is, with the Remnant, no doubt. He goes with His mother and brethren.
JB Was the Lord setting before them what was entirely spiritual?
JT This first sign is to teach us that we must cut a sharp line between the spiritual and natural. The natural ends and so you must not look for life there. It has its place, as the Lord shows, but the spiritual is the first and great thing. Then you can come into the natural according to God.
HG Moses and Zipporah had to learn that. The natural would have hindered Moses; Exodus 4: 24 - 26.
AFM You made a statement that the wine is not the Spirit. Would you mind saying a word about what the wine is?
JT I do not think the point in the second chapter is to emphasise the Spirit, but rather to emphasise that the water of purification has changed. No doubt the Spirit is necessary to that, but the Lord is impressing us with the necessity of purification. Natural things are impure in themselves. A nice wife, children, ancestry, and all that, do not aid me in regard to life. I must be filled to the brim with water of purification, and that shuts out all the other. As that is effectuated, in the drawing out of the wine, life is manifested.
HG Is there any way the natural might serve the spiritual, whilst distinguishing in your mind the two spheres? I mean in regard to your children. As parents we all have spiritual exercises in regard of our children. I have spiritual desires for my children, and yet I seek to reach it through the natural — I seek to hold them by natural [p. 372] affection.
JT That is right. In seeking to help souls you can use whatever link of sympathy that may exist. You have a link of sympathy with your children, as a father, and you take advantage of that. God sets authority and restraint where it is least irksome, that is, in parents.
PL The natural would in that sense be but protective. You must have the spiritual for what is formative, must you not?
JT Yes. I have to bring in the water of purification even in regard to that. My relationships with my wife and children in themselves are impure. It is a very solemn thing and comes very close to you, that in regard to God, and Christ, and life, you must be filled up to the brim with the water of purification.
EGMcA Would you say the courtier’s affections were purified when he received his son back in life? Was the water of purification there in figure?
JT Yes; he believed, you see.
JB “This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood”, 1 John 5:6. The three bear witness — the Spirit, the water and the blood. I was thinking how blessedly the Lord returns to the recognition of natural relationships even when on the cross. “Woman behold thy son”. “Behold thy mother”, John 19:26 - 27.
RSS Is not the water spoken of in John, as he uses it, the water that flowed from the Lord’s side?
JT I think so.
RSS That gives it a solemnity.
JT Water is mentioned first in the epistle, but second in the gospel. Compare John 19: 34, and 1 John 5: 6. The epistle is to bring us into life. “These things have I written to you that ye may know that ye have eternal life”, 1 John 5:13. The natural must be removed from my mind and heart. Purification means that I am free [p. 373] from it.
GAT Joseph and Mary did not find Him among their kinsfolk; Luke 2: 44, 45.
JT You do not find Him among your natural relatives as such.
FL At the end the Lord recognises the natural relation, but He takes care to put his mother under spiritual protection and influence, does He not? It is to John.
JT She was to be with John as a mother. “Woman, behold thy son”. “Behold thy mother”. He established a link of a new kind, so she should be quite at home in John’s house.
AFM So His mother and brethren are found in the upper room with the apostles and brethren in Acts 1.
PL It is a stone water-pot, suggesting it is to be retained. It is not an earthen vessel.
JP Permanency is suggested in the stone water-pot. I think the teaching of the third and fourth chapters hinges on these two signs. The necessity for new birth and the necessity for the lifting up of the Son of man, so that the love of God should flow out to the world; and then the Spirit in the believer as a spring, making him independent. I think spiritual independence involves a spring, creating a certain energy and freshness. The Father thus has worshippers.
WHF New birth is the sovereign work of God, but coming into life, as you were referring to it a while ago, is believing on Christ.
FL Another thought about the spring is that the energy and the continuity in the power are always from above in the spring.
JT Yes, quite. I was thinking of the position of the spring in the book of Joshua: if we have not got the spring we are sure to lapse back to the natural, although we may begin with the spiritual. So the idea of the spring is found in Joshua 15: 16 - 19,
[p. 374] which refers, I think, to the beginning. The spring was necessary, but the same thing is found in the book of Judges, chapter 1: 12 - 15; suggestive, I think, of the fact that the assembly responded. Certain ones saw the necessity for a spring if freshness and vigour are to continue. The desire for the springs in Judges, I think, is prophetic. It suggests that the time of decline would come and the only way to meet it was by the spring in the saints.
PL So life is touched on in 2 Timothy. Joshua, as you say, would suggest the immense blessing in the early days of the assembly, Judges being the suitable path in a broken day, would answer to 2 Timothy, just as Joshua would answer to Ephesians.
AFM What do you refer to in Joshua?
JT In Joshua 15 you have Achsah coming to Caleb and asking for springs of water, and then you have it again in the first of Judges. I think it is the assembly in both cases, only the latter would be prophetic. So the midnight cry went forth, “Behold the Bridegroom” Matthew 25:6; then the question of the oil comes up and they went forth. There was movement with the ten virgins, but only five had oil.
FL So Achsah in Judges 1 would correspond very much to Philadelphia; also with Revelation 22 the production of the Spirit in the affections of the assembly.
JT So the assembly has something. We do not end in an impoverished way. There is that which can be pointed to. “Whosoever will let him take the water of life”, Revelation 22:17. The thing is there.
PL Does not Deborah refer to it when she says the spoil is divided amongst those who have part in the conquest? Deborah gives a review of the conflict in a broken day and the fruit or spoil of it in a way that tests one in relation to it.