FOOD (2)
FOOD (2)
EuR This chapter begins with a manifestation. Have you any thought in connection with that?
JT The main thought is that it is a manifestation. The unfolding of it brings out other things bearing on what we have had before us today, but the main idea is that of a manifestation. You will observe that the expression occurs in verse 1 and again in verse 14, that is, the Holy Spirit emphasises the idea of a manifestation. But what develops out of it is this question of food, and the service of feeding and caring for the lambs and sheep of Christ. But, as I said, the idea of a manifestation is the main thought in this chapter, showing how complete was the attention of the Lord to His disciples ere He ascended. It was the third time, a complete series of manifestations, having to do, I suppose, with the divisions of the dispensations the first bearing on the church, the second on the Jewish remnant, and the third — that is, this one — bearing on the in gathering of the gentiles. But what we are concerned about is what comes out of this third manifestation — the subject of food. It involves in a special way those who are ministering; here the leading one of them, the leading apostle is the one who moves off in this fishing expedition. It is very touching to see how the Lord turns such things into occasions of manifesting Himself to us. John makes use of this word ‘manifestations’, which is to be noted.
HFN Would you briefly gather up what we had this afternoon?
JT We read certain verses from chapters 4 and 6 which treat of the subject of food, the disciples being brought in in each instance. In chapter 4 and the [p. 156] beginning of chapter 6 they are brought in to their discredit. On the first occasion they were material in their thoughts; they had gone into the city to buy food, and on returning they find the Lord engaged talking with the woman, and they marvelled that He talked with her. So the Lord reminds them that He had meat. Then in the early part of chapter 6 He would feed the multitude, and He inquires of Philip, proving him as to how it could be done. They had been occupied in buying already, but how can they buy for this large number? Andrew says, “There is a little boy here”. John 6:9. Philip was on the commercial line. He calculated about how much would be needed that each one should get a little. Andrew speaks about a little boy. “There is a little boy here”, he said, “who has five barley loaves and two small fishes”. He was uneasy and had no idea how such a small amount could meet the need, so that the leading men in the service are here found to be wanting in regard of food. They were successful evangelists, for Andrew had brought in Simon, and Philip had brought in Nathanael, but they were defective on this line; but the Lord taking the matter up and giving thanks, could use what was there, and the administrative suggestion of the twelve hand-baskets follows. Out of a small beginning the thing is worked out naturally, without any effort. The quantity is there, and the baskets are there, but there is no reference to any persons who could take up the baskets. The Lord did not even use the disciples to hand the things to the multitude, although He allowed them to gather up the fragments. He certainly allowed them to become acquainted with the idea of [p. 157] the baskets, but how He disposes them is another matter.
Then, at the end of the chapter, the disciples are formally alluded to as “the twelve”. I think they had profited by the teaching of the food in the chapter. The chapter is so full of the subject of food. The Son of man is food, as come down out of heaven, and in all that follows as giving His flesh. His flesh is truly food, and His blood truly drink. Then the Lord says, “Will ye also go away?” speaking to the twelve and formally alluding to the administrative position. Peter says, “Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast words of life eternal; and we have believed and known that thou art the holy one of God”. Peter undoubtedly speaks for them all; he is qualified, I think, in that way, as having learned from the teaching as to food. That was what I think we had.
HFN How does that lead on to John 21?
JT Well, this chapter alludes to the departure, beginning with those in responsibility as servants. It shows how the Lord turns it into an occasion of manifestation, dealing particularly with Peter, and that He would focus our minds on the question of feeding: “Feed my lambs”, “Shepherd my sheep”, “Feed my sheep”. That is the heading under which all ministry should be carried on.
Ques Was the apostle Paul an instance of one who was sent? He was supplied with abundance of food, and finally he could say, “I have finished my course”. 2 Timothy 4:7.
JT Quite. As was remarked this afternoon, in writing to the Colossians Paul’s thought was to present every man perfect in Christ Jesus. That was the aim he had before him, and in Ephesians the gifts, whether himself or others, are to that end; they were given in perfect wisdom; first, apostles, then prophets, then evangelists, then pastors and teachers. “for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ”.
[p. 158] I think the Lord would help us in respect of ministry at the present time. There is a great deal of ability (and thank God for it), but perhaps we need more co-ordination.
MWB You have alluded to irregularity and incoordination. What have you in your mind?
JT I alluded to Solomon’s regime and how much is made of the food provision. The realm was divided up into twelve sections, each governed by a superintendent, and generally their names are hyphenated, implying sonship. That is to say, this relationship seems to mark the persons, “Ben-Hur, in mount Ephraim, Ben-Deker in Makaz”, 1 Kings 4:8,9 and so forth. That is, the idea of sonship is attached to each superintendent, and some of them were united in marriage to Solomon’s daughters; they were linked in that way with Solomon’s house, and there was to be no interference one with the other. The regulations seemed to be such that each superintendent looked after his own province, and all Israel dwelt safely, “eating and drinking and making merry”. 1 Kings 4:20. Then we are told what Solomon’s provision was for one day, a most sumptuous bill of fare — fine flour, meal and all kinds of animal food, including oxen and sheep, fallow-deer and fowl. It was certainly a very rich provision, and the setting of the scripture shows that it was due to those superintendents being over the realm, so that there was the greatest possible result. Irregularity in the thing would greatly minimise the product; I thought the Lord might help us on the line of co-ordination, that we might see that service involves maturity and known relationship with Christ, so that each knows what he has to do and does it.
JJ It is striking that under Solomon and David [p. 159] each man had his own work. One was not doing two works, but each man one kind of work.
JT That is what marked them. Order had entered into everything.
JJ Should that not be true now?
JT That is the thing, because irregularity leads to persons acting on their own initiative, doing their own wills. The leading man here says, “I go a-fishing”, and the others say, “We also go with thee”. That is always the danger unless we are under regulation, and each has his own province and knows what he has to do.
PL So in John service is enhanced in the sent One.
JT That is the great principle running through John. John the baptist might be taken as a sort of model; you get no failure mentioned of him in John’s gospel. We have him introduced almost immediately. “There was a man sent from God, his name John. He came for witness, that he might witness concerning the light, that all might believe through him. He was not the light, but that he might witness concerning the light”. John 1:6 - 8. The Spirit of God goes on as if delighted to delineate the character of John the baptist, and he disappears as rejoicing in the Bridegroom’s voice.
AHW Is there any significance in Peter and Thomas being the two leaders here?
JT I think so. If you go back in the history it would look as if there had been something left unregulated in each of their souls. Peter would represent them all in a way, and needed regulation after the manifestation. In all such movements there is someone who needs to be personally adjusted.
AHW So that saying “We also go with thee” is serious on the part of the others?
JT Yes. It shows what party spirit is. We are all exposed to it.
[p. 160] WCG Would you say why the fishing is unsuccessful?
JT That is what comes out. He speaks parentally to them. “Children”, he says. They were, as it were, of the household. “Children, have ye anything to eat?” That is the test. What have you got in this expedition? what have you to show? You belong to the family, but that is not everything. “Have ye anything to eat?” It does not say, as in Luke 24:41, “Have ye anything here to eat?” It is not a question here of locality, but of the persons. Have you anything of value to show from this expedition? Their salvation lay in the fact that they acknowledged they had not anything; they had toiled all the night and had taken nothing.
Ques Is there any thought that it was not the twelve?
JT I think they had lost all sense of administration; because the idea of the twelve is that you are administering in relation to the whole; it is complete. It represents the mind of God, that we are available for the service of God, and are not thinking of any party; and besides having lost all sense of administration, they have nothing to administer. Holding the idea of the twelve, we hold ourselves in relation to all the saints. There were seven of them here, but seven in a bad sense. Perfect so far as they went; no doubt enough to man a ship and cast out a net; perfect in that sense, but a bad sense. The more perfection on that line the worse for us. They had been fishermen, but the Lord called them, and they had left all and followed Him; now they returned to what they had left.
Rem It mentions two other disciples.
JT But they are not named. They are there to make up the seven; enough of them to make an expedition with a hope of some success.
[p. 161] Ques Is the contrast seen in Isaiah? “Here am I, send me”. Isaiah 6:8.
JT Yes. What we see here is the Lord’s grace in moral adjustment. As you see, they had neglected that side. Paul said, “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?” Acts 22:10 but here they had neglected that, and said, “I go a-fishing”. When things are unreal they are exposed. They have men enough from their own reckoning, but not enough from God’s reckoning. God’s number is twelve. They had men enough for their purpose, but they caught nothing. Now they are exposed, but the Lord says, “Children”. That is a very gracious touch. He would still hold them as belonging to the house, to the family. It is a parental word.
AHW Would that meet the party question?
JT I think so, because you would thus be reminded that you are of the family, and party spirit does violence to the family. They had toiled all the night and taken nothing. They say “No” in answer to the Lord’s question, and their salvation was in that, and then in accepting the Lord’s word. He said, “Cast the net at the right side of the ship and ye will find;” He did not say that to Peter earlier; what He said to him was, “Launch out into the deep, and let down your nets for a draught”, Luke 5:4. That is another thing, but here it is, “Cast the net at the right side of the ship and ye will find”.
MWB What do you see in the thought of the right side?
JT I think it is a suggestion of power, and the casting, too, would suggest it; not letting down simply, but casting it. What do you think yourself?
MWB What you say commends itself. It was at the Lord’s direction.
JT Everything now hinges on coming under the Lord’s direction. Unless we do that it [p. 162] is hopeless.
WCG Would you say the Lord’s direction is enough for the power of administration?
JT It is, assuming the power is still there. These were not apostate. They had gone off on this expedition, but they are not opposed exactly. They are children, and so belong to the house, and the Lord spoke to them with affection, but with authority at the same time. They do not hide the result. He says, “Children”, and He directs them. Everything now hinges on coming under His direction. “Cast the net at the right side of the ship”.
PL Is He directing His own life in them? Does the casting suggest the energy of life?
JT I think so; it is supposed that power is there. There is no power in apostasy. It is said, “I will kill her children with death”, Revelation 2:23 but it is not so here. Whilst there is power, there is hope of something for God.
EuR That was one of the lessons of chapter 6. “It is the Spirit which quickens, the flesh profits nothing”. John 6:63. They prove that here.
Ques Would you put this on the line of the grace that encourages?
JT Surely. You are impressed with it. It is a manifestation, not a question of exposing the brethren. The Lord makes use of an opportunity of this kind to manifest Himself. There is going to be some result out of this, but everything hinges now on coming under His direction. “Cast the net at the right side of the ship”. You have to discover what that means. Where have you been casting it? Not on the right side under His direction.
HFN Does that fit in with the co-ordination you have referred to?
JT Yes. They are all coming under His direction. So we read, “They cast therefore, and they could no longer draw it, from the multitude of fishes”.
MWB The question of direction is a very practical [p. 163] one. There was an instance in the Acts giving the impression Paul had when he saw the man of Macedonia: “concluding that the Lord had called us to announce to them the glad tidings”. Acts 16:10. In what way do we get direction today? Is it by impressions?
JT I think so. If we are near to the Lord we shall discover where the fish are. He knows. One has often wondered why the apostles did not go east. It was true they had to “go into all the world, and preach the glad tidings to all the creation”, Mark 16:15 but then that does not abrogate levitical law — the principles that govern the levites. You have to go where you are sent in fact, and so it is said, “The Spirit of Jesus did not allow them” Acts 16:7 to go to Bithynia, nor to speak the word in Asia. The Lord knew where the fish were, so the material for the assembly was to come from that direction. We have to be on the alert to discover what the line of service is. Here you notice there is a multitude, but they are all great ones, that is to say, it is the size of the fish as well as the number. That is in keeping with John; they are great ones. We are on the outlook not only for numbers but for greatness — spiritually great persons.
PL Is that in keeping with what one might call with reverence the Lord’s own fishing in John? the worshipper of the Father in chapter 4, the blind man in chapter 9, and here Peter.
JT Quite so. It is the greatness of each individual fish that is seen in John.
FW Simon Peter seems to be the one to finish the work here.
JT Yes; he drew the net to land.
FW Do you think he had learned his lessons?
JT I think he was coming to it. The Lord’s final challenge leads to the finishing touch.
FW I mean he realised what it was to be sent.
JT Just so; the Lord had directed them to bring the fish they had [p. 164] caught.
PL And then he casts himself into the sea. There is another feature of casting. Do you think he reaches the Lord through death in the energy of life, and so is qualified at once to serve in the completion of the work?
JT Yes. Then the Lord was on the shore and had prepared for them. John represents in this scene the discernment of affection. He says, “It is the Lord”; it is the discernment of affection.
WCG After all, dining is more important than fishing.
JT That is the next thing, the attitude of the Lord on the shore. He says, “Come and dine”. That is a dignified invitation; not come and eat, because John here shows He had in view the dignity of those He is dealing with.
JJ I suppose both are necessary. Fishing would connect with the gospel, and the feeding with the assembly.
JT Quite. What you get here is that the Lord had fish on the coals, but not the fish they had caught. That is another feature — He was carrying on without them.
Ques Was the thought of fishing in connection with the supply of food?
JT They were fishermen by profession, and so the expedition was to get fish, but the Lord carries on. That is the way John deals with it. The Lord carries on, hence He Himself had the fish and the coals and the bread. It is the grace of Christ in providing against such an emergency as this, so He not only has the bread and the fish, but He has the fire of coals on which these were laid; He has everything. He is taking account of our need. It is a dignified repast.
PW As to the number of the fish, I have heard it divided into twelve times twelve and three times [p. 165] three. If that is right it is very significant — administration, affection and divine power.
JT I think that is very suggestive. The number simply is divisible by three.
AHW Do you think we have profited in these last days by the Lord’s activity as you referred to it? Breakdown has come in, but it has not hindered the Lord’s personal activity.
JT He carries on; there is no cessation of the testimony. That comes out always. It implies that you can be done without. Even those great men, Peter and the sons of Zebedee, can be done without.
Ques Would the “fish laid on it” indicate sovereignty?
JT No doubt. The fire of coals and the fish on it and the bread point to the grace of the Lord, and how He still retains His servant character; I suppose John would teach us that we have to retain our servant character. One can never hope to get at souls who have turned aside except in servant character, not only that we are “servants of the Lord”, for that is usually a term of dignity with us, but servants of the saints. And that is what the Lord was here. It was the chief meal of the day, and He knew they must have been hungry. Nobody ever did go off on an expedition like this without becoming so, and in their telling the truth the Lord met their needs. It was the love that ever does its best for us, and so He has the things on the coals. Not only the fish was on the fire but the bread. It was a good bill of fare, like Solomon’s. If we give the Lord His place, we shall be short of nothing.
Ques Are you suggesting we only touch these things on the line of affection?
JT That comes in. The latent thing, the work of God, is there in Peter and John. They represent the work of God, and it will ever show itself. Peter appeals to the Lord’s own knowledge that it was in him.
PL Would you say Paul recovered the Corinthians in that servant spirit? “Ourselves your servants”. 2 Corinthians 4:5.
JT That is right; you retain your servant character.
FSM Is there a principle in the fact that they had to feed on His bounty before they were qualified to feed others? The Lord said, “Come and dine”, before He said, “Feed my sheep”.
JT It is on the same line as we had earlier. You learn from Him and see how bountifully He did it, and with what care and forethought. They got the best He could devise for them; that is what can be relied on. Then He says, “Bring of the fishes which ye have now taken”. He would bring them into it. What He has done is there, but “Bring of the fishes which ye have now taken”.
MWB It was a very sweet act of grace.
JT The Lord brings them into what He is doing.
FSM Would you suggest that it is not only what He did, but the way and the spirit in which He did it that would colour their movements afterwards?
JT You may be received into a house or a meeting by those responsible, but how do they treat you afterwards? What you get after you get in is the test. The Lord brought up that principle in speaking to Simon the Pharisee, and it is seen in regard of Martha; Luke 10. She received Him, but that was not everything. Receiving the Lord, or one whom He sends, is the same thing, for if you receive whom He sends you receive Him. But after the reception, what goes on? what do you get? With the Lord love will do its best for you after you are received. With Martha there was criticism, that was all. The word ‘dine’ here is fully borne out by the food and the cooking, the preparation of it, for after all you [p. 167] might have the best kind of food, but if it is not properly cooked it is not palatable. But the Lord did the cooking here to show how He maintained His servant character. It is the service of a love that does its best for its objects.
DLH We get in the case of the Lord’s dealings with Peter the thought of how He finished the work of God in his soul.
PL And in regard of dignity in connection with the servants, does that connect with the first-born, the levites?
JT Yes; you never lose that. Each levite is a first-born. In recovery we ought always to bear in mind the dignity from God those recovered may have had. Even in Satan it is recognised. Michael would not rebuke him; he recognised his dignity. We can never ignore what persons are, what God has made them.
HH Does it all depend on the work of God in Peter’s soul?
JT That, is right; the thing was there in a latent way. It was not destroyed. It was only a question of bringing him back to it.
HWS Was it not bringing him back to full communion with His mind?
JT Quite. He would probe him and clear away the rubbish. The Lord knew what was there; the work of God in a man is indestructible. It is only a question of clearing away the rubbish, and the Lord did that effectively. He perfected the work, and now He says, “Feed my sheep”. He entrusts him with the care of His sheep; that implies trustworthiness.
MWB The fact of the Lord manifesting Himself shows that a failure in service may serve to bring the Lord into evidence.
JT We have proved that. Whilst we have to own each has his part in it, yet the Lord graciously makes it an occasion of a manifestation, that is,
[p. 168] some feature of Him comes into prominence, and that becomes the property of the assembly.
They were all soon conscious it was He. They did not say a word to Him; they knew it: “knowing that it was the Lord”. That is a fine point to reach, and they all came to it. As soon as you discover it is the Lord, you will be perfectly restful. There is much to follow, because He deals with each of them individually. So the Spirit tells us it was a manifestation to the disciples, and after this, Peter comes under the Lord’s adjusting touch.
Ques Would there be a link of affection between him and the Lord in that the Lord said, “my lambs” and “my sheep”?
JT Yes; I think He reminds him of how precious they were, and how He would entrust them to Peter, John is earlier entrusted with the Lord’s mother, and here Peter is entrusted with the lambs and sheep, and the feeding of them; that is to say, he will have to determine what kind of food lambs need, the special food for the young, and what kind of care shepherding is. It is a remarkable thing the lambs are not said to need shepherding, but the sheep. It is the old ones.
MWB The lambs move more by instinct.
JT They follow the mother. There is not much trouble caused by young christians; it is the older ones. The principle of shepherding comes in there. I think, perhaps, that is where we have to own our weakness. We need moral power to do that.
PL Would the Lord’s tender dealings with him develop those tender sensibilities?
JT I think so; and knowing how to use the right word. The Lord began on the high note, but He came down to where Peter was in using the word ‘attached’.
ASL I suppose Peter had had a private interview with the Lord before this. “He was seen of Cephas”, 1 Corinthians 15:5 but here he is restored in such wise in the presence of his brethren that no one could point the finger at him any more. It is delightful to think of how the Lord carries on whatever breaks down. It is even better than the little boy with the five loaves and two small fishes. He was a little instrument used in the provision, but here there is no instrument.
JT Yes; the Lord Himself has the dinner ready. Peter says, “Thou knowest”. You are in the presence of One now who knows all things, and it is a comfort that He does. He knows whatever is down below, however misjudged one may be. It is not telling the brethren. The Lord knows my heart. Peter is not speaking to the brethren but to the Lord: “Thou knowest all things”.
PW It was after they had dined that He gave all these instructions.
JT That is very important, because if a meeting goes wrong, you always feel that a little ministry, a little food helps greatly; and so in the case of an individual, as we see here.
Ques Would dining bring about co-ordination in service?
JT I think the latter verses bring that out. The Lord’s word to Peter was, “Follow thou me”, and he looked round and saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following, and said, “What of this man?” That is where the difficulty lay, and that had to be settled. None of Solomon’s superintendents had to make any inquiry about another. Each one knew what he had to do.
Ques Would you say what is involved in following?
JT You see the line the Lord is taking. He says in chapter 8, “I am the light of the world; he that follows me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life”. John 8:12.
[p. 170] I think that applies to a time like this, that you look out for the light of life; you see where the life is, where the Spirit is. Wherever He is you will find life. It is not that you follow the life, but the Lord has a place there, and you may be sure that if there is the evidence of life, He has a place there.
HFN Would you say a word in regard of the ministry of these two servants, Peter and John? They are evidently seen together in the Acts. Has the divine end been reached there? You have remarked that John was the reserve man, the man the Lord held in reserve.
JT They are seen together in the Acts: “Look on us”. Acts 3:4. How thoroughly they were together. Co-ordination had taken effect: “They went up together into the temple”. “Look on us”, Peter says. There is something very beautiful in that. So that there they represent the administrative side that we have been speaking of, that is, Peter in the government of the house and John in the affections of the family — the two principles that are essential. But they are seen separately here. The Lord’s reference to John is a mystical allusion to his continuing to the end, and it is something that leads the brethren to be in doubt. They are saying the Lord said something that He did not say about this brother. He did not say that he should not die, but it does not say the Lord did not imply his ministry should not continue. It is an allusion to the ministry of John continuing, and he qualifies for the thing because he has such an apprehension of the greatness of Christ. “There are also many other things which Jesus did, the which if they were written one by one, I suppose that not even the world itself would contain the books written”. I have no doubt that since that day the Holy Spirit has been writing in an indelible way. Not one of the thing Jesus did is lost. “One by one” [p. 171] suggests they are all precious, and John had that conception of Christ.
HWS Is that why he brings out the heavenly city at the close?
JT I suppose the heavenly city includes all.