FOOD (1)
[p. 137] FOOD (1)
John 4:31 - 34; John 6:1-14; John 6:60-71
JT These scriptures introduce the subject of food as John presents it, and I thought they would furnish substance for this reading, and perhaps we might look at chapter 21 this evening. I am thinking of it particularly as it bears on those who are ministering, and it works out in this section in the Lord formally recognising “the twelve”. This evangelist does not make much of the official side in the disciples, but the twelve are formally recognised at the end of chapter 6. I think they were making progress, the designation “the twelve” having allusion to their responsibility and administration, which largely involve feeding the saints. Thus the Lord in John would instruct us how food is to be administered in our times; it is to be on the principle of twelve.
This may be linked instructively with Solomon’s regime, in regard of which we are told that there were twelve superintendents over the realm in order to provide food for the people. There was no lack. Much depends therefore now on the distribution of the servants, each having his own province or section. There must be food for the people of God. We have given to us Solomon’s provision for one day, which was very liberal, all flowing from this wise distribution of the “superintendents”. 1 Kings 4:7.
In this gospel the references to the disciples do not generally show them to be spiritual; for in chapter 4 they went away to buy bread, leaving the Lord alone. All did not need to go. They are occupied with food from a material point of view, and being thus occupied, when they returned and found the Lord talking with the woman they marvelled at it. So the Lord brings in the spiritual side as to food — what [p. 138] His food was, which was very different from their conception of it. Many subjects are interwoven in these chapters, but food has a very important place in them. We have to learn from the Lord as to this, what His food was, for to have an apprehension of the subject we must understand what His food was. The manna was said to be “angels’ food”, but His is of a higher order.
WCG Is He introducing them into the grace and fulness of His ministry?
JT Exactly. All things were delivered into His hands, it was said earlier, but this was His food. The subject must necessarily work out from what His food was.
WW You said that His food was of a higher order. What is the significance of that?
JT “My food is that I should do the will of him that has sent me, and that I should finish his work”. That is greater than the manna. He was the bread of God Himself, but we have to see that in its setting, that is in chapter 6; but His food was to do the will of God and to finish His work, and that is what is suggested in chapter 4; the Lord is occupied, not with our food, but with His. They said, “Rabbi, eat”, and that brings out the truth of what His meat was.
SJBC “I have food to eat which ye do not know”. Would that imply a lack of sympathy in them?
JT There is reproof in it. They did not know what He was going on with; they did not know even what His food was.
PW Is it what we have in Psalm 40? “Lo, I come ... I delight to do thy will, O my God”. Psalm 40:7.
JT That is involved in what He regards as His food here.
Ques Are you linking His food with the finishing of [p. 139] the work?
JT That is what He says: “That I should do the will of him that has sent me, and that I should finish his work”. The will of God may not always imply being sent. It is imperative on everyone to do the will of God, but here it is the will of Him that sent Him.
MWB Is that why you link it with service?
JT Yes. Doing the will of God is imperative on everyone, but it is a question here of your service as being sent, and what the food is of those who are sent.
DLH Would you take the finishing the work to be in keeping with what the apostle Paul said when he wrote to the Colossians, that he would present every man perfect in Christ?
JT He would present the complete product, present every man perfect in Christ.
DLH I recollect J.B.S. used to say he thought the finishing the work primarily referred to the woman, the completing of the work of God in her soul.
JT No doubt. I think the work was finished so far as it was intended at the moment. She left her waterpot, and that comes in just as they returned with their loaves or whatever they had brought. She left her waterpot, that is to say, the work is complete so far. She discerned that the Lord was moving on spiritual lines, that her body was what He had in view. She was to be a vessel, and so she left her waterpot, signifying that she saw the Lord was not on the lines of the material thing, but that she was to be the vessel spiritually. So she went away to the city and said to the men, “Come, see a man”. John 4:29. She was the vessel herself, and the result was that the men came to Him.
WW Does the food in chapter 4 raise the question of responsibility in regard of service?
JT I think it does. What is the food by which we are to be sustained? The disciples are quickly [p. 140] turned away by the Lord from what is material to what is spiritual. He mentions also what was intended to humble, that they were not the inaugurators of anything, they just entered on other men’s labours.
Ques Is joy (verse 36) intimately connected with the thought here? Was His joy the food to which He referred?
JT I am sure it was very real joy to Him to find such an one as the woman. No doubt He alluded immediately to what had passed in His interview with her, of which they were utterly ignorant.
Ques So His joy is completing that for which He was sent. Is that what you had in mind?
JT The Lord says His meat was to do the will of Him that had sent Him and to finish His work. You may be doing something that seems profitable, but what about the finish? The point is the finish, the completion of the thing.
HWS Do you think it means that the whole scope of the will of God must be in view for service?
JT That is the only way we can serve effectively; you see what God is doing. As working with Him we have the completion of the work ever in view.
Ques Would it answer to Ephesians 4:13, “till we all come in the unity of faith”?
JT It would; that is what ministry is for. “Until we all arrive at the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, at the full-grown man, at the measure of the stature of the fulness of the Christ”. Ephesians 4:13. That is the thing. Your soul is sustained as thus engaged; there is positive pleasure and sustenance on those lines. The apostles were brought on to those lines in due course, and I think that is the reason why in the end of chapter 6 they are alluded to as “the twelve”. As compared with chapter 4 it is a dignified reference. Peter’s remark in answer to the Lord shows they were coming into the thing: “To whom shall we go? thou hast words of life eternal”.
[p. 141] They are now owned by the Lord as taken up for service.
Ques Is completion seen here in John 4 in the Father having worshippers?
JT That was in the Lord’s mind. He unfolds that to the woman as the Father’s thought. Ministry must have that in view. Chapter 9 shows how “the works of God” John 9:3 lead up to the worship of the Son of God.
HH It is important for us all to be entirely taken up with the will of God. The Lord Jesus was entirely absorbed with God’s will.
JT Yes; but that is a more general thought; we all are to “prove what is the ... will of God”, Romans 12:2. But here it is the idea of being sent — to “do the will of him that sent me”. I think it would help us greatly in service to see there is a finish to the work, and that God has not left us in the dark as to what that is, so that we can work up to it; we can have that in our minds and there is positive pleasure and sustenance in moving on those lines. There is sustaining joy in the sense that it is God’s will and the finish of His work.
PL You see this with Moses. When he set up the tabernacle, it says, “And so Moses finished the work”. Exodus 40:33.
JT That confirms fully what we have said.
Rem And also with Solomon: “And all the work was finished”. 2 Kings 7:51, 2 Chronicles 5:1.
JT In every instance you find God indicates fully what He requires. No one really could tell what was needed save Moses, because to him alone the pattern was shown. He saw the thing, and he had to receive and pass on every part of the tabernacle. It was all brought to him, one part after another, and he approved and placed it. The specifications in themselves could not convey fully what God required, hence the pattern of the tabernacle was [p. 142] shown to Moses, and all had to be according to it.
HH All our service is more or less deficient. I suppose what you have before you is the thought of the divine end producing results from the service that would be for God’s pleasure.
JT Exactly; and now you see in the beginning of chapter 6 the Lord is setting out the way of feeding, in connection with which you have the twelve hand-baskets, meaning that the thought of administration is developed in it. The disciples are not yet alluded to as the twelve, but there are twelve hand-baskets, that is, portable baskets, signifying, I suppose, that each of them would understand that there is a basket for him. The indication is not that any one of them would take two or more baskets, but there is something for each one to carry about. It is portable; so such work can be conveniently done.
HH One can work in relation to others, and yet be doing what has been given him to do.
FW Is it the same as in chapter 13 with the washhand basin?
JT I think the idea there is that it was portable; it could be carried around. You do not ask the saints to come to you where the basin is, but you carry it around.
FW In chapter 6 it seems to be indicated that the apostles needed to be educated, because they do not seem to be available at the beginning of the chapter. The Lord does the distributing.
JT They were disqualified in their representatives, that is, in Andrew and Philip. I think these passages bring out the Lord’s patience in dealing with us as in His service, for there is a great deal of irregularity and lack of co-ordination in the service of the Lord.
The idea of “twelve” is that we are an under the Lord’s control and we are coordinated; we are moving under Him. I think the designation, “the twelve”,
[p. 143] at the end of this chapter is an allusion to that. It is a dignified reference, meaning that they were learning. Peter’s answer to the Lord’s question shows that definite progress had been made, especially in the knowledge of Himself.
MWB Why does He refer to one of them being a devil?
JT So that he might not pass; the others apparently had not discerned Judas, but the Lord would not include him when referring to them as progressing in the knowledge of Himself. He speaks of Judas after Peter’s statement.
MWB You do not think it has any implied thought minimising the whole idea of what was official?
JT There is an allusion to the breakdown. He says, “Have not I chosen you the twelve? and of you one is a devil”; but then earlier it says, “Jesus therefore said to the twelve”. You have got to take that by itself, that is, there is a formal recognition of their administrative position. His saying He had chosen them is to throw into greater evidence the wickedness of Judas.
Rem The twelve were still here when the Lord appeared in resurrection as in 1 Corinthians 15.
JT The number was made up. You have a double reference there, first to the twelve, and then “to all the apostles”. “The twelve” is an administrative allusion; “all the apostles” refers to authority and representation.
MWB Would you take Peter’s remark as indicating the state of the twelve?
JT That is what I thought, showing they were getting on.
WCG Is there a suggestion that ability to administer food is bound up with the enjoyment of food oneself?
JT You have to begin with the thing you are [p. 144] going to administer. You have to arrive at what it is. Its most spiritual form is in chapter 4.
SJBC “As the living Father has sent me and I live on account of the Father, he also who eats me shall live also on account of me”.
JT It is important to notice that food for a sent one is the line involved in this passage, and the administration of food must be on that basis.
WW Is your thought in directing attention to being sent connected with our being in nearness to God?
JT Yes; “There was a man sent from God” John 1:6 — he had been with Him. The principle of ministry is first the idea of being sent, and then the representation of the One who has sent you. The Lord said, “He who receives whomsoever I shall send receives me; and he that receives me receives him who has sent me:” John 13:20.
SJBC My thought in quoting that passage was that we must be in the enjoyment ourselves of that which we give out. It has a wonderful effect upon those you are ministering to if they feel you are enjoying what you are saying.
JJ What was your thought in saying they were disqualified in their representatives?
JT The Lord challenges Philip as to how the thing is to be done. He says to Philip, “Whence shall we buy loaves that these may eat?” He puts it upon Philip to answer, and he replies, “Loaves for two hundred denarii are not sufficient for them, that each may have some little portion”. Then it goes on, “One of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, says to him, There is a little boy here who has five barley loaves and two small fishes; but this, what is it for so many?” We can see that they were not equal to the exigency.
DLH Have you any thought why Philip is singled out by the Lord for testing in this [p. 145] way?
JT We have remarked before that he and Andrew are associated in this gospel, beginning very well in chapter 1, but they miss it here; that is, on this line John would remind us that even with a good beginning in those who minister, there is the danger of break-down and failure. Philip, as we know, found Nathanael and spoke well to him, so that he secured him for Christ. Andrew found his brother Simon Peter, and secured him for Christ. That is one thing; it is one thing to get souls to Christ, but it is another thing to feed them, and that I think is the point here, whether you can minister food, for in order to do that you have to come into chapter 4, to understand what the food of a sent one is. One’s food is not in the number of souls he gets or in large meetings, or even in the support he gets in the meetings, but in the will of Him that sent him being done — something done in the light of the mind of God.
HWS Material for the harvest, do you mean?
JT The heavenly side is presented to us as the end to be reached. If I have not accomplished something on that line I have not done much.
MWB What is completing the work? As to the detail none of us can say the work is completed as the Lord did; He finished. In what way do we come in as completing the service?
JT The Lord says to His Father, “I have completed the work which thou gavest me that I should do it”, John 17:4 but then, that was so far. As here in the flesh and leading up to His death, He finished the work. It was supposing something additional, that is, He was to be glorified that He might glorify the Father in bringing the thing into form as it is now. It is after He had gone into heaven and the Holy Spirit had come down that the thing is worked out to completion, so that it was so far, “I have completed the work which thou gavest me that I should do it” As to ourselves the important thing is to be doing something [p. 146] that fits in with the general work of God. Each has his own part, but he is working in relation to the whole with a view to completion.
MWB Moving in the direction of completion which will be seen when the city comes in?
JT That is right. God furnishes us with the end before Him, and if I have not secured something for that, I have not really done anything.
HFN Do each of these individuals represent some distinctive feature of the Lord finishing the work? For instance, you have referred to the woman in chapter 4. Would Peter here represent another feature of the work being finished, and would it be seen in its entirety when they are all together in chapter 20?
JT I thought so. One has often referred to the verse, “While ye have the light, believe in the light, that ye may become sons of light”. John 12:36. Each of those cases furnished a son of the light, so far. I think the woman, for instance, was a son of the light; she moved intelligently in it; and so, too, the nobleman at the end of the chapter, and right through. Peter particularly is a son of the light, and what he says is a mature statement. “We have believed and known”. It was experience, and so in each case you see the idea of completion. More may be added, but it is complete in the connection presented.
HFN That is one’s exercise, and one is thankful for the way the Lord is helping us. If it is not going aside from the question, I would like to ask how you view the thought of food in John in relation to the sent One and in regard to Mark. Mark’s gospel we have looked upon as the great levitical gospel. How would you suggest the thought of food in the two connections?
JT What I see in John is that it is intended for our own times, as is obvious. We really lose nothing of first principles, only that we are made to feel in John’s ministry that things are broken and there is failure. That, I think, is why so much reflection is cast on the disciples, that they were not up to the mark at all, but they are brought to it; they are brought in the end to a higher plane than in any other of the evangelists. It is very encouraging for the last times that God is working up to the very highest plane, so to speak, that is, to the brethren of Christ and the ascension. Then the Lord breathes into them His own Spirit, sending them out as He had been sent out. Hence we lose nothing at the end; all the principles are carried through in the most spiritual, elevated way.
JJ What you say makes John entirely different from the other evangelists.
JT It does. In John’s gospel the Lord does not wait for John the baptist to be cast into prison to begin His service, whereas He does in the other gospels. The levitical rules are for the moment not in prominence; things refer to the Lord’s Person; He is not presented in this gospel in relation to what existed previously. There is, however, allusion to a levitical principle in the disciples being called “the twelve” in chapter 6. They were equal to it, as we have said.
RB Is being brought up to it the outcome of discovering what the food is and feeding on it?
JT That is really the great question in our consideration now, that is to say, the food of John 6. It is a wonderful chapter, and I think its results are seen in Peter as representing the twelve. The principle of the chapter is coming down — coming down from heaven, but coming down. We have to feed much on the principle of coming down if we are to be effective in service. It is manifested right through the chapter. The Lord’s challenge is, “Will ye also go away?” He knew well that Peter was taking in what He was saying. The words He had spoken were spirit and life, and He knew Peter was taking that in,
[p. 148] and hence He draws it out. Peter said, “Thou hast words”. The chapter is very long, full of words, and pregnant with precious meaning. It is what the Father was doing. The Father gives the true bread. It is a question of Christ; it was Christ provided for man here in the most positive way and at the greatest sacrifice.
EuR What feature does the little boy suggest?
JT It lays the basis for what we are saying. The little boy is of no reputation, but he has something. That is the way the thing works out. It is a question of what you have. If you have got something, the Lord will make room for you. So you come in in that way. The little boy develops into administration. What he had is made to feed all, with twelve baskets full remaining. It is the administrative idea that is worked out in the most simple way. There were the twelve baskets there, as it were, for anybody to take up. The administrative idea is present, not yet the persons who are to be used in it. These, as we said, come in at the end of the chapter.
HH Would you say a word as to what the five barley loaves and two small fishes convey?
JT I suppose the barley would refer to the first-fruits, alluding to what was here in Christ and what might be seen there. I apprehend it would be to Andrew’s credit that he knew this little boy. He did not say anything to enhance his own position and importance by it. If you have a spiritual brother in the meeting, you may seek to clothe yourself with his importance, but that is not what Andrew has in his mind. He says, “There is a little boy here”, not we have a little boy; he knew him. It was no credit to him that the little boy was there, but it was a credit to him that he knew he was there, and that he spoke of him in that way.
RB You were speaking about coming down in [p. 149] chapter 6, and if I understand rightly you were not speaking of it in connection with the manna.
JT The manna was angels’ food. I was referring to chapter 4, where the Lord says His food was to do the will of Him that had sent Him and to finish His work. That is not the manna. Manna is sustenance for us in the wilderness; it carries us through; but it is not the idea of food for persons specially sent. There are other kinds of food, priests’ food, for instance, but the Lord in chapter 4 is alluding to food for those sent.
JJ Do you think the little boy would suggest what was to come in later? The Lord always had Paul in His mind.
JT Well, he answers to the thought conveyed. It is what you are or have, not that you are put into any position. To put a man into a position will not do. There is nothing of that kind in John; it is what you are. “There is a little boy here”, and he has something. Where did he get it? They were barley loaves. Spiritually, I understand, they allude to Christ as He was here, and the fishes allude to some apprehension of the sovereignty of God. I think the two go together — what has come in in Christ, and an apprehension of God’s sovereignty.
SJBC I suppose in all that great crowd the little boy was the most unlikely person to be able to supply the need. He was little in his own eyes and in the eyes of others.
JT He was little in the eyes of Andrew.
AHW Would you say the two things represented in the barley loaves and the fishes must always be found in service, that is, what is put together in a way through exercise and the sovereignty of God?
JT I think so. I think the barley loaves allude to what was here in Christ as the first-fruits of what God was bringing in. Of course, the Spirit of Christ [p. 150] was in the Old Testament in the men of faith, and in that sense it would be the same thing, but Christ here personally must be distinct from anything. I think the barley loaves would allude to the apprehension of Christ in that way, and the sovereignty of God is suggested in the fishes.
JJ Would it not be “he that overcometh the world”, 1 John 5:5 as in John’s epistle? I was thinking of Gideon and the barley loaf there.
JT Just so. In Gideon’s case it was an irregular thing, and it is irregular here. It was irregular for a cake of barley to “tumble” in, Judges 7:13 but it did the work. It represented Gideon, and therefore, in due course, he had a place of reputation according to God.
JS The opening part of the chapter introduces the subject of food, but it does not only say, “come from heaven”, but “come down from heaven”. John 6:37.
JT You have the thing set out in the first part of the chapter in the sign. Then the Lord says, “Work not for the food which perishes, but for the food which abides unto life eternal, which the Son of man shall give to you; for him has the Father sealed, even God”. John 6:27. The Father has committed Himself to Him; and Christ will give food that abides to eternal life. Then we have, “What should we do that we may work the works of God? Jesus answered and said to them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he has sent”. John 6:28,29. You must get an apprehension of what is in the mind of God, of what He is doing. It is the Father and He sent this One, He sealed Him. Then they bring up the question of the manna, and the Lord says, “It is not Moses that has given you the bread out of heaven; but my Father gives you the true bread out of heaven”. John 6:32. The true bread is that which My Father gives; the true bread is He that comes down from heaven. We are to be prepared for that. The whole chapter is built up on the sign and culminates in Peter’s [p. 151] confession, who began to see that the Lord’s words were life eternal.
JS The shewbread was God’s thought.
JT It was “the bread of the presence”; the priests had part in it. It only emphasises what I was saying that administration is largely a question of food; it is what there is for the saints. These baskets represent this; at the end of the chapter there are twelve who can take them up. That is the way the thing is set, and before you are recognised as qualified you have all this wonderful instruction about what the Father is doing. What a cost in giving His Son that He should come down out of heaven and give His life! All that enters into you and forms you so that you become spiritual, and spiritual enough to come in under the heading of “the twelve”. He “said to the twelve, Will ye also go away?” and in Peter’s reply they come out as representing the work of God, “We have believed and known that thou art the holy one of God”, meaning that the experience had developed and culminated in this.
EuR I think there has been a tendency with us to connect the thought of ministry and those who minister in that way, with light rather than food.
JT The food is the thing that tests, whether one is able to minister it. In the next reading we may see that to minister food is the commission given to Peter.
EuR “Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season?”
JT Quite.
HWS Do you think Peter illustrates one who is appropriating the living bread?
JT I think so. It is the words of life eternal. He was taking them in in detail; they were being [p. 152] built into his soul. Then he recognised where they were — that the Lord had them.
MWB If we knew something of the first food you referred to, we should be more capable in the second connection of administration.
JT I have no doubt that is right. The Lord said what His food was, and we want to be like the Lord as workmen, understanding His food as sent and living on it.
EuR The little boy would suggest one in the gain of the chapter. He has a supply.
FW Would you say a few words about eating the flesh of the Son of man and drinking His blood? Would those be part of “the words”?
JT It is a very great challenge as to our spirituality, whether we are spiritual enough to take in the words. These hearers did not take them in. First the Jews murmur, and then His disciples, and then some went away from Him because they were unable to take in spiritual thoughts. I know no chapter that challenges our spirituality more than this one; whether we can take in the idea of eating the flesh of the Son of man and drinking His blood. Notice it is not His body here, as in the Lord’s supper. It is the condition He took up — the Word become flesh — and He has died, that is to say, the real condition that the Lord took up comes to light in His death. Eating His flesh and drinking His blood is our appropriation — eating is a figure of this — of His death as ending judicially the sinful condition in which we were. This could be food and drink only to those who as judging this condition wish to be clear of it and to live in the new condition in Christ.
DLH Is there a suggestion of weakness in the five barley loaves, which is carried on in the way the Lord speaks about His flesh and blood, apparently so weak in themselves, and yet so full of blessing for those who eat and drink [p. 153] them?
JT That is very suggestive. Perhaps you have more to say on it?
DLH It occurred to me there is a suggestion of weakness in the number five. It is well known and acknowledged that five is the number which constantly suggests weakness. David asked for five loaves of the shewbread out of the twelve; he did not ask for any more. I suppose there was the suggestion of extreme weakness at the moment, but that would do for food to set him up and those with him effectually.
JT Quite. What you do is with simplicity. The apostle urges on the Corinthians that they should not be corrupted as to the simplicity of the Christ. (2 Corinthians 11:3). The extreme simplicity of David in asking what the priest had under his hand suggests that you accept whatever is in your meeting or locality, and make the most of it; that is the principle here. David says, “What is under thy hand? give me five loaves in my hand, or what may be found”. 1 Samuel 21:3. Whatever the priest had would do. And then, what sword have you by you? The sword was there, but it was wrapped up behind the ephod. There was not much in it being wrapped up, but it was there; that is, you will get things if you are simple enough. David says, “There is none like that”, 2 Samuel 21:9 and he takes it. So here, the Lord simply accepts what the boy had. You accept what there is, which is a great principle in service, that is not mourning over the past, but accepting whatever there is. So here the Lord accepted what there was and made much of it, and it developed into an administrative thought. If you get the thing, then the principles work out, and appear. The idea of “twelve” comes in and at the end of the chapter you have persons known as “the twelve”.
Ques What would you say as to Peter’s confession of Christ as the “holy one of God”?
JT It is a question of their service, and bearing [p. 154] in mind that they are alluded to as “the twelve”. Holiness marked Him, and Peter apprehended that and says, “We have believed and known that thou art the holy one of God”. He spoke for the others. He was “the holy one of God”, and so we are reminded of the need of holiness in our service. The One who was anointed was the “holy one of God”.
EuR You have been speaking of it in connection with coming down, What is the importance of the verse? “If then ye see the son of man ascending up where he was before?”
JT It was to bring out who He was. In John He is the One who ascends; it is His Person, for in this gospel He says, “Before Abraham was, I am”, and He ascends up where He was before. His person is unchanged and unchangeable.