THE WAY OF LIFE (4)
[p. 410] THE WAY OF LIFE (4)
John 11: 1 - 44; John 12: 1 - 3
JT What we come to here is, as will be observed, not only that the works of God should be manifest, but the glory of God and the glory of the Son of God. The ninth chapter ends with one who was the subject of the work of God brought into the light of the Son of God. The tenth hinges on that. That is, the Son recognised, must henceforth control and regulate the subjects of the work of God. The Son is the Shepherd. The truth of the Shepherd comes in. It is subservient to the great truth of the family. The Son necessarily brings in the idea of the family, only that the thought of the sheep precedes the family; just as in Luke 15, the son is the great end in view; the prodigal should be in the house as son. I think that in this chapter the glory of the Son has reference to the family.
RSS Would you say that up to the end of chapter 9 it is rather individual, and from chapter 10 on we get the collective thought?
JT Yes; and to the end, I understand, that the family should be brought into life. This chapter deals with the family.
AFM In the tenth chapter, I suppose, the great point is the “one flock and the one Shepherd”, but in chapter 11 it is the family and how it becomes graced by the Head.
JT That is it — the Son becomes Head.
HG The blind man in chapter 9 had become solitary, and so had been set in a family. The solitary are set in families; Psalm 68: 6.
FL Then I suppose chapter 11 comes in to suggest that everything must be on the ground of resurrection. There cannot be anything established on any other ground.
JT [p. 411] No; so that death is allowed deliberately. As blindness had been allowed, death was allowed, so that God’s works and glory might be manifested.
WCR Association is not on individual lines. Solitude is realised and then association.
JT The family relationships are appreciated by those who know solitariness, and this man in chapter 9 knew it. He was cast out. There is a peculiar feeling of loneliness in being cast out. But Jesus having heard that he was cast out, finds him, and hence the truth of chapter 10 follows. The “one flock”, is composed of such as he. The sheep are given eternal life and shall never perish; they have life “abundantly”. Chapter 11 introduces certain persons in family relationship. What comes out, as you will observe, is that there was a certain man sick, Lazarus of Bethany, of the village of Mary and Martha her sister. “It was the Mary who anointed the Lord with ointment and wiped his feet with her hair, whose brother Lazarus was sick. The sisters therefore sent to him, saying, Lord, behold, he whom thou lovest is sick”. That is the preface to the subject. That is, it is a family matter. The sisters, it says, sent to the Lord, saying, “He whom thou lovest is sick”. They address Him as in family relationship. The family was evidently without a head, for nothing is said of parents. The brother and sisters dwelt together in love, but death broke in on them. No doubt they represent the Jewish remnant, but we may also see in them the effect of the work of God where Christ is not yet known as the resurrection and the life. Resurrection places the family beyond the reach of Satan’s power.
PL The teaching here leads out of the limitations of the village into the largeness of the city. The Lord goes to dwell in a city near the desert, Ephraim, at the close of this chapter. A village is largely dependent on a larger centre.
JT Bethany’s distance from Jerusalem is mentioned. A village, in this respect, is like a local assembly as related to the whole assembly.
PL A city is self-supporting and wields an influence, has an order of administration. We are led on from village conditions, under the headship of Christ, into the full truth of the assembly.
JT I think a village conveys a spiritual idea in that way. It is like one of the “daughters of Jerusalem”; the measurement from Jerusalem is given, and what is so interesting is that it is in the village that the love of the family is manifested, and the family passes from a headless condition into a condition of headship. The beginning of chapter 12 shows the sequel to the scene that you have in the village in chapter 11. The house is mentioned, but it is not prominent. It is the village. You have in the village a mutual state of things in which Christ is supreme. The subject begins thus: “There was a certain man sick, Lazarus of Bethany, of the village of Mary and Martha her sister”. Then we are told who the Mary was and what she did; and then it says, “The sisters therefore sent to him, saying, Lord, behold, he whom thou lovest is sick”. As I understand the passage, it supports the epistle to the Corinthians. It is John’s way, I think, of supporting the local feature of the testimony. It is life manifested in a locality. The family was well known there. The idea is that in a locality the saints are known, and they were known in this instance as a family held together in love; and they were loved by Christ. That is the beginning of chapter 11. It does not say that they loved Christ in the eleventh, although doubtless they did, but it says that He loved them. In chapter 12 there is every evidence that they loved Him, because instead of Lazarus occupying their minds, they made Christ a supper. The point is that a mutual state of things had come about in which Christ was supreme.
PL [p. 413] Yes, it is not called their village in chapter 12. It is just Bethany. In it they have much as together that would help them into taking character from Christ.
JT Yes, He came to Bethany where Lazarus was in the twelfth chapter, but in the eleventh it is the town of the sisters, Mary and Martha. The scene in chapter 12: 1 - 3, supposes resurrection, hence Lazarus is said to be in Bethany, not of it. It is “Where was the dead man Lazarus, whom Jesus raised from among the dead?”
HG Does it suggest the thought of being quickened together with Christ?
JT I think it does. I think it is Colossians.
HG And the “together” is prominent there. It is not only that we are loved by Christ, but quickened together in His own blessed life.
JT “With” is a sort of key-word in Colossians.
GAT They were very conscious of His love or they would not have said, “He whom thou lovest”; and they were also very conscious of His power to recover him.
PL While the village order of things has a place in the testimony, it is to take character in what governs it from what is universally in recognition. Is that not your thought?
JT Yes.
EGMcA How do you connect “the glory of God” with this scene?
JT It is the glory of the Son of God more in chapter 12: 1 - 3. He attains a place in the affections of His saints. His glory shines in the family. He becomes Head to those who love Him. They accord Him that place in love.
EGMcA And the evidence of the affections flowing out toward Him is in the pouring out of the ointment.
JT That is the evidence of intelligent appreciation.
[p. 414] Mary represents the spiritual intelligence of the saints. Lazarus represents their dignity. He was “one of them that sat at the table with him”.
RSS What strikes you in the early part of the twelfth chapter is that everything is in order and Christ has His place.
WB-s The thought of life comes out very prominently in John 12, and the glory connected with this blessed Person being the resurrection and the life.
JT The opening verses of chapter 11 announce what is sought to be brought about. Hence you have it stated that “It was the Mary who anointed the Lord with ointment and wiped his feet with her hair”. That was the Mary. The result seen in her action was what the Spirit of God had in mind to bring about. It is like a psalm in that way.
RSS What is the object in view in recording what is said of Mary in the second verse?
JT The scene here sets forth the spiritual intelligence, and appreciation of Christ that accrued from these signs. They are cumulative. Here believers reach a point through this great sign of death and resurrection where we are in sympathy with the Lord. We are with Him. She has kept this, He says of Mary, for the day of My burial. She has kept it. It was a treasured, costly thing that she had kept for a purpose. She looked on to the end of the course His feet were on. What she kept was in view of that. Hers was a mature intelligence accruing, as it were, from the signs preceding.
PL And can we be with Christ in His movements of love as Head if we have not a reserve in love that will contribute to Him in those movements?
JT You begin to gather substance; as you are formed you fill your house with treasure. That is, one advancing spiritually is gathering treasure, but it must be in relation to Christ. I think Mary [p. 415] represents the full height of spiritual maturity and intelligence, growing out of acquaintance with the Lord according to the light in which He is presented.
AFM Do I understand that these three represent one of the spiritual families and they are pursuing the way of life which is above? So in Lazarus we have an illustration of the advance of soul in the understanding of resurrection, where the Son of God is known as “the resurrection and the life”, and in that way He is recognised in affection as Head.
JT Yes; this is the result, divinely presented, of the work of God so far. We must remember that these three people represent what preceded in the gospel. They love one another. So in Colossians the Holy Spirit is only mentioned once, because what is brought forward is His work — the effect produced. “Who has also manifested to us your love in the Spirit” (Colossians 1: 8), meaning that the Colossians were a people formed so that they were not carnal; they were not swayed by natural feelings. “Love in the Spirit” is pure love; love as it is in God, you might say, but in the Christian. You could not say this of these three yet as seen in the beginning of chapter 11. They had love but their love was largely centred in Lazarus. As yet Christ was not the supreme object of their love, although they loved Him. Now Colossians emphasises what the Holy Spirit has effected — the fruit of His work; hence the Spirit is in the background, because it is a question of putting forward what is effected. The point here, I think, is to bring out, in a collective way, what has been effected in the several individuals. The first three verses in John 12 present a collective scene. It is, “There therefore they made him a supper”; without saying who “they” were or in whose house it was made. It is a question of the mutual conditions that have arisen in Bethany, in which Christ was [p. 416] supreme.
FL We get help in seeing that we have a new starting point with the man in chapter 9, and that he is carried through; you find him in his collective position in the tenth, and morally he is Lazarus, and he is Martha, and he is Mary. In other words, as the thing is worked out and we are brought into the good of death and resurrection, these are the effects that are produced in us. He is the sample-man, and has to be carried in thought all the way through, even to the end of the twelfth chapter, where we get the “sons of light”; and, indeed, chapter 13, where we are in the upper chamber with the Lord. You know what I mean?
JT Yes, quite so. In chapter 10 you will notice that the point the Lord emphasises is the works He did in His Father’s name; therefore, chapter 11 must necessarily be based on that. Here we have: “This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God”. It is not a lame, or blind, or palsied man, but a dead man. The Lord says, “Lazarus, our friend, is fallen asleep”. The death is first announced by the Lord, because He has in mind that this death is to be for a peculiar end. It was “for the glory of God, that the Son of God may be glorified by it”.
HG The glory of God shines out peculiarly in Colossians.
JT Christ is Head in Colossians in virtue of who He is. He is given to be Head in Ephesians, but He is Head in Colossians in virtue of who He is. So He acquired headship in this family by virtue of who He was. “Marked out Son of God in power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by resurrection of the dead”, Romans 1:4.
HG He fills the family morally with Himself so as to set aside everything in the way of partiality.
PL And He preserves the family now, under His headship, free from all disease.
JT In Romans, I think, the Lord acquires [p. 417] headship on moral grounds. The epistle to the Romans shows how He supersedes every man that went before. As you might say, He becomes Head to us because He has befriended us. He has met our need; whereas in Colossians He acquires headship because of who He is. It is a very different matter. If I need to be relieved I am not so much concerned as to the person that relieves me; but after He relieves me He acquires a place with me. Using the illustration our brother used last night, the man loved the One that saved him. That is Romans. “I thank God through Jesus Christ, our Lord”, Romans 7:25. Deliverance endears the Lord to me, but then after I know Him as my Deliverer, I inquire, Who is He? The proposal in the ninth chapter is, “Dost thou believe on the Son of God?” “Who is he, Lord?” is the question, and the Lord says, “Thou hast both seen him”. That is Romans, as you might say, and, “It is he that talketh with thee” John 9:35 - 37, leads us on to Colossians. When Elijah crossed the Jordan in company with Elisha it says, “As they still went on and talked”, 2 Kings 2:11. It does not record what they said. The point is that there was holy converse on resurrection ground, so that Elisha, no doubt, got an apprehension of Elijah that he never had before. I think Elijah had acquired such a place in the heart of Elisha in the passing of the Jordan that he says, as it were, I want to be wholly like you; I want a double portion of your spirit. He got such an appreciation of Elijah, that he would have a double portion of his spirit. Elijah says, You have asked a hard question. The Lord loves these questions, and there are no questions He cannot answer and meet. He gives him credit for asking a hard question. “If thou see me when I am taken from thee it shall be so to thee”, 2 Kings 2:10. In John 9, in that way, I think, you have translation from Romans to Colossians.
WB-s The first of the Acts, between the Lord’s [p. 418] resurrection and the ascension, has often been said to be analogous to Colossians. He is seen conversing with His disciples.
JT During that time He would develop in them an appreciation of Himself as Head.
PL You were speaking of “with” in Colossians being a characteristic word. “Buried with him”, Colossians 2:12 “Quickened together with him”, Colossians 2:13 and “When the Christ is manifested who is our life, then shall ye also be manifested with him in glory”, Colossians 3:4.
JT Yes, “with” is a great word in Colossians.
HG In the end of the tenth chapter it says He went away beyond Jordan and many believed on Him there. You get the light of a new position there.
PL It is mentioned as the place where John was baptising at the first, as distinct from the second baptism, which does not seem to have had the same support from the Spirit of God. Compare John 3: 22 - 25. When he baptised first, you have the dove descending and the activity of divine affections. Is that what we are going to be brought into here?
JT Quite. That is, the baptism in the Jordan brings in the testimony to the glory of the Person of Christ. The significance here is clear. It says: “He abode there”. John’s testimony is then referred to, and afterwards we read, “Many believed on him there”, John 10: 40 - 42. The evangelist John records John the baptist’s words: “And I knew Him not; but he who sent me to baptise with water, he said to me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending and abiding on him, he it is who baptises with the Holy Spirit. And I have seen and borne witness that this is the Son of God”, John 1:33 - 34. So the truth of the Son of God comes to light at the place where John was baptising at the first. That is, at Jordan, and this scene being introduced at once, at Bethany, shows that the Lord would confirm it in “the household of faith”. The truth of the Son [p. 419] of God is now the heritage of the family of God. We have the knowledge of that. “We know that the Son of God has come”, 1 John 5: 20.
CAM That gives great emphasis to the thought of knowing the Son of God, not only because of what He has done, but because of what He is.
JT Quite.
PL Would you not say that the works of God secure a framework to which the glory of God provides the fulness?
JT I think the heavenly city represents God’s handiwork. That is the masterpiece of the work of God, and so it is the vessel of the glory. The city comes down from God out of heaven, “having the glory of God”, Revelation 21:11. Sonship marks the city in the knowledge of the Son of God. God is known there; the gospel had been effective in those who form the city.
FL The truth works on that line. In 2 Corinthians 4 you get the intent of the gospel: “Because it is the God who spoke that out of darkness light should shine who has shone in our hearts for the shining forth of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ”, 2 Corinthians 4:6.
JT That runs along with the idea of the city and involves liberty, the knowledge of God made known in Christ. “Perfect love casts out fear”, 1 John 4:18. There is the revelation of the Father, involving the family; and on the other hand the revelation of God. The two things go together. What I am within is the family; what I am without is the city. We must have the knowledge of God in the public thing. She has the glory of God.
WB-s Our brother was mentioning the end of chapter 10, the wilderness. The place where John at first baptised is still the wilderness; but it is “near to the wilderness” in the end of chapter 11. What is the significance of these two [p. 420] references?
JT In chapter 10 it says, He abode there, and many believed on Him there; this would point to His personal place as an object for faith. In chapter 11: 54, we read that He went to a city called Ephraim, and there He sojourned with the disciples. It may allude to the Lord continuing with the disciples in relation to the Jews, pending the full truth developing.
FL Do you not think chapter 12: 36, clearly indicates the present position? “While ye have the light, believe in the light, that ye may become sons of light. Jesus said these things, and going away hid himself from them”.
JT That lays the basis for what follows in chapter 13 and onward. You can see how the testimony that is seen in the Lord in this gospel gradually leads us outside. You are outside the world, you are hidden. Your life is hid with Christ in God.
GAT Would you say that the way these things are set in our souls is: in the fifth chapter the believer is delivered; in the ninth chapter he gets light; in the tenth he reaches the company; in the eleventh he touches the power of resurrection; and now in the twelfth he is exercised to be down here for the refreshment of the heart of the One who has done all this for him, like Rebekah would be to Isaac? She was a comfort to his heart.
JT Yes, quite.
AFM Would you mind going back in regard of your statement with reference to the city; the exterior having display and administration in view, and the interior being more what is within for the Father’s pleasure. Now that has reference in your mind to the kingdom side; what about the eternal state?
JT The interior is the family side, I think; and the family is a primary thought with God. It flows out of what He is. He predestined us, it says,
[p. 421] unto adoption through Jesus Christ to Himself. That was His primary thought in regard to us, and He does not deviate from that, only all the provisional things come in between. Not that we have to wait for the passing away of the provisional or administrative side for the family enjoyment; the family thing has already come in. There is an outlet for the Christian. According to Ephesians you get into eternity. I think eternity is reached in the Spirit. We have often spoken about it, but we cannot compass eternity, nor can we think in other terms, as far as I see, but if wholly in the Spirit we reach it. “The Spirit’s power has ope’d the heavenly door”. (74:5)
EHT Do you think we get the present enjoyment of everything that is going to be?
JT If we become “beside” ourselves (2 Corinthians 5: 13) in the power of the Spirit we touch that in which we are not governed by time or time limitations. It is eternity. The family relationship is that in which we are with God eternally.
FL Is it not interesting to see that in that which refers to eternity (of which we do not have much) the thoughts of Paul and of John merge? You have just been quoting from Ephesians. In Revelation 21, “The tabernacle of God is with men and he shall tabernacle with them”; and to the overcomer, “I will be to him God and he shall be to me son”. When it comes to the thought of eternity, what is developed through John or Paul merges in the family.
JT It is well to bear in mind that the city comes down from God out of heaven, showing that she has already been there. She is set in relation to God, and then she comes down from God out of heaven. What is peculiarly ours is perhaps least understood.
PL You mean that every family named of the Father is going to be for God, but when you come to the place of the primary family that is emphasised?
JT Yes, “Father, as to those whom thou hast given me, I desire that where I am they also may be with me”, John 17: 24.
RSS What do you mean by what is exclusively ours being least understood?
JT Just what we are saying, that the first of Ephesians is our light. “Arise, shine, for thy light is come”, Isaiah 60:1. That is what I am for God. He has predestinated us for adoption through Jesus Christ to Himself, and that is the greatest thing, I think, and perhaps the least understood. That must be outside of time, because it was designed outside of time. It comes into the provisional ways of God, but it is His primary thought, and so it continues.
AFM Every family is named of the Father: all stand in relation to the Father eternally, although amongst those families there is one, which we know is the assembly, which comes down and takes the character of a tabernacle in which God dwells with men.
PL Only one family will have the Spirit of God’s Son, although all the families will be brought into the light of sonship.
JT Clearly, all are in the light of sonship; God, I believe, would not have it otherwise.
HG The capacity to enter into the revelation differs.
JT Yes. As the Spirit dwells in the saints who form the assembly, they have the greatest capacity. The declaration of God is in John 1, but then the Lord says in chapter 17, “I have made known unto them thy name, and will make it known: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them”. There, I think, He has the saints forming the assembly in His mind. He says, “I have made known unto them”.
FL The first mention of sonship, in that sense, is in connection with Israel. “Israel is my son, my firstborn” Exodus 4:22; but that is in connection with the earth not exactly an eternal thought, but truly sonship.
HG It goes back in a certain sense to the angels — “The sons of God shouted for joy”, Job 38:7 as though God even in that past time was, you might say, speaking reverently, feeling after sons.
JT Yes, they were marked for sons in that way, but the idea of our predestination preceded that, did it not?
HG Quite.
FL It does cover every family in heaven and earth, whether originating eternally or in time.
JT It does, but when you come to the Spirit of sonship, you have what is very distinctive.
PL And the distinctiveness of the primary family is implied by the Lord in His prayer to the Father in their presence, John 17.
RSS Finally He says, “My brethren”.
FL Really sonship in the supreme light of the purpose of God.
JT I think the truth of the assembly necessarily hinges on the persons that form it. They are sons. Directly you have Christ in figure out of death in Genesis 22, you have the genealogy of Rebecca introduced; because the point is to show her dignity. Her suitability for Isaac is thus established.
CAM “Because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts” Galatians 4:6: that you would say is distinctive of this one family?
JT Yes.
RSS What is the difference between what you were speaking of a moment ago, the Spirit of sonship, and the light of sonship? You were saying that the primary family, the assembly, has the Spirit of sonship, but the other families would have the light of it?
JT The latter is the sense in which sonship will apply, the Spirit of God’s Son not being in them,
[p. 424] as He is in us. Indeed, God said to Israel through Moses: “Ye are the sons of Jehovah”, Deuteronomy 14:1. The remnant will have the knowledge of God as Father. The Lord taught the disciples, according to Matthew, that God was their Father, the relationship indicated, however, is not so intimate as that which we have. The Lord said, “I have made known unto them thy name, and will make it known”, John 17:26.
RSS “Come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty”, 2 Corinthians 6: 17, 18. That, no doubt, is similar to what the other families shall have.
HG In Jeremiah He says to Israel: “Wilt thou not from this time cry unto me, my Father, thou art the guide of my youth?” Jeremiah 3:4 So He encourages Israel to take up that language in regard to Himself.
JT As to the saints of the present time the word is, “Ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry Abba, Father”, Romans 8:15.
PL There must be a difference in “named of the Father”, as the fruit of revelation, and the relationship involving the Spirit of sonship. Do you not see that in the fact that there are “many abodes” in John 14? The Lord indicated a special one for those who form the assembly. He would come and receive them to Himself, and they would be with Him there.
JT They are marked off, like the Levites. The Levites were all numbered, the males from a month old and upward. The Spirit of God had in His mind the assembly. That is, we have come to “the assembly of the firstborn who are registered in heaven”, Hebrews 12:23. That is to say, it is an assembly which has the place of firstborn. That shows what we are: each one of us has that place, firstborn ones. Every [p. 425] Levite was, as it were, a firstborn, and that is what the assembly is — composed of such persons as that. We have the first fruits of the Spirit. We have the Spirit as dwelling in us, the Spirit of God’s Son, and no other family is composed of such distinguished ones as that. Every Israelite came into salvation and had his place in relation to the tabernacle, but the privileges of the firstborn belonged to Levi. The book of Joshua specially depicts these privileges.
Ques The place of the primary family is seen in John 17: 24, is it not? “With me”.
JT Yes, quite. “Father, I will that they also whom thou hast given me be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world”, John 17:24.
Rem You said just now we were slow in taking that in.
JT It may be through want of appreciation of what God is as Father. A family is so many persons; the assembly is an organism. As in the family, each is before God in personal dignity. We are as sons before Him.
HG The gospel and discipline, you would say, come in in the ways of God for the effectuation in us of purpose which is sonship?
JT Yes, and I think these bring about the manners suitable. The book of Deuteronomy is on this line. Moses brings forward all that had been said, and unfolds it, all to the end that they might go into the land suitably.
FL Do you not think John 13 and 14 answer to Deuteronomy in that respect?
JT That is it; chapters thirteen to nineteen, I think, are like Deuteronomy. They are instruction for the disciples, pending the great light that is coming in through Mary. That is, Mary’s message is like Joshua. Deuteronomy is the manners;
Joshua is the “man in Christ”, and that is John 20 really. That is, you bring forward the dignity of the persons. The great light as to who I am comes in when I am fit to take it in. It is incongruous that we should be so noble and yet be ill-mannered.
PL We should discredit the nobility if there were not the formation that could sustain it.
JT We are to be harmless and simple, irreproachable children of God; Philippians 2: 15. “Jesus therefore, six days before the passover, came to Bethany, where was the dead man Lazarus, whom Jesus raised from among the dead”. It seems to me, He came to bring out what was there, the beautiful result of what had preceded in the history of this family. Hence it says, “There therefore they made him a supper, and Martha served, but Lazarus was one of those at table with him. Mary therefore having taken a pound of ointment of pure nard of great price, anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair, and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment”. That is the result.
EHT I suppose the Lord picks out of the family the one supreme in intelligence, and that is brought out here in Mary?
JT He knew what was at Bethany before He came. He came in relation to what was there. That is, where the dead man Lazarus was, whom Jesus raised from among the dead. It is a Colossian scene.
JMcK There must have been a wonderful dignity about that company. The power of life was there, the power of love was there, and they took no notice of what comes out in the last verse of the previous chapter. It is very striking that, is it not?
JT “Now the chief priests and the Pharisees had given commandment, that if any one knew where he was, he should make it known, that they might take him”.
JMcK They sought His life, but this company took no notice of that commandment. There was power enough there in love to make Him a supper. That is the company the Lord can delight to be in the midst of. Their manners were all right.
JT He knew what was there.
GAT Now if such a condition exists, the next thing is the enemy attacks.
JT Yes, where there is a place for Christ you may look for opposition.
EGMcA This truth embraces what has gone before. That is important because Jesus came.
JT The truth seen here gathers up what precedes. Certain conditions exist; chapters 10 and 11 record certain movements of the Lord, as we noted; now He comes to Bethany. In the two instances mentioned He went, or departed, but here He came. The writer, we may say, placed himself in Bethany. John would cherish that spot. The dead man Lazarus would be Colossians. You are dead as far as this world is concerned; you have passed out of it. That is the first thing — the Lord came to where he was, to such an one as that. Then it immediately says, “whom Jesus raised from among the dead”. Not simply, who was raised, but whom He raised. It brings in the love of Christ. He raised us.
WB-s Is he in the place of privilege, being at the table? Is that suggestive?
JT I think he is mentioned as being representative of the company. He was not the only one, but “one of them”.
RSS Why is it that in John 12 there is nothing said about what Mary did being spoken of as a memorial of her? You get that in the other gospels, but not here.
JT What she did filled the house, and that is enough for John. It is really a family scene here. The owner of the house is not mentioned. What is [p. 428] presented is based on resurrection, and so no on has any natural advantage, such as a host. Christ is honoured and the company enriched by Mary’s act here and that is enough from John’s point of view. It is not the time for publicity. The loved ones at Bethany are not again referred to.
GWH Is there any difference in the three positions — Martha serving, Lazarus sitting and Mary anointing?
JT I think it is the activity of life, under the influence of Christ. First it is what they did — “they made him a supper”; then what Martha did, what Lazarus did, and what Mary did. What they did is mentioned; nothing is said of directions being given.
JMcK The movements of life.
JT That is it.
EHT Is it not brought about under the influence of the Head? You would say it is spontaneous, but under the influence of the Head?
JT Quite. He being there, “therefore” they did it.
Rem We need to connect John 20 with this to get the full thought of what we have on the Lord’s day morning. This is beautiful in its place, because it makes everything of Christ, He is supreme, but following that He would lead to the brethren.
JT Quite so. So far these scenes are in Jewish settings, which is an important point to notice. God graciously made all thus available to Israel. But chapter 20 is not a Jewish setting. The Jews are shut out there.