THE FATHER'S HOUSE
THE FATHER’S HOUSE
John 14:1-14; 1 Kings 6:5,6; 1 Kings 6:31-38; 1 Kings 7:1-8
JT I had in mind to suggest 1 Kings as foreshadowing the greatness and grandeur of the millennial state of things; but I felt that if we were occupied exclusively with that we should miss that which is more immediately connected with ourselves; that is to say, with the saints of the present moment; and therefore I felt it was but right that we should make the connection with the gospel of John. The way in which the Father’s house is spoken of there seems to connect it with the saints viewed in relation to God, either as sons or as children. The point in John is the family.
RSS The way the house is spoken of in the New Testament.
JT Yes; the Spirit of God speaks of the house in that connection. As God’s house it is a place of interest to His family. In chapter 8 we get the fact that the Son abides in the house for ever; and in chapter 14 the Father’s house is mentioned, and there is to be a place in it for the disciples. So that I think the house, as seen in the gospel of John, is the place for the saints viewed as the family of God, and as such it is foreshadowed in 1 Kings. Therefore you have the chambers, and the veil is not presented in the description of the house. The oracle is separated from the holy place by doors which can be thrown open — folding doors, indeed.
RSS What is indicated by the fact that they were folding?
JT I suppose the idea is that God can throw all into one, so that the whole scene can be in touch [p. 496] with God.
RSS Did these folding doors take the place of the veil?
JT There was a veil, according to the account given in Chronicles, but it is not spoken of in the description given here; and inasmuch as other houses are presented in 1 Kings, to show the greatness and grandeur of Solomon’s position, one would conclude that it is the heavenly system of things rather than the earthly that is in view; and then you have the whole scene — heavenly and earthly — thrown together, and God’s dwelling-place the centre of all. But then there are other houses, such as the house of the forest of Lebanon, Solomon’s house, and the house built for Pharaoh’s daughter, all of which would show the greatness of Christ and the different places of abode that He will have.
PRM Would you tell us what is, in your mind, the difference between Chronicles and Kings?
JT I think Chronicles deals with the house of David, and Christ reigning on David’s throne. The veil and the altar are more prominent there than in Kings; so that you would conclude it is more a question of approach where there is distance; whereas in Kings I think you have the sphere of the love of God and the peculiar places that the Lord Jesus will have personally, places that He reserves, as it were, for Himself, such as His own house. We do not get the interior of it, nor do we get the description of the interior of the house built for Pharaoh’s daughter, nor of the other houses; simply the fact that they existed as built by Solomon is stated.
RSS Would that indicate that they were more private in character?
JT Yes; and it would set forth the greatness of Christ that He has those houses. What is so precious to my mind is that the immediate abode of God, the inner shrine, could be immediately connected with the outer, so that all becomes pervaded by what God is.
[p. 497] Ques Do you understand that the holy place was divided from the most holy both with doors and with veil?
JT Evidently; but the Spirit has a different thought in Kings from what He has in Chronicles, as we have been saying. In Kings there is a more direct bearing upon ourselves, because it shows the house of God as having abiding places, whereas you do not get these in Chronicles; you get other thoughts in Chronicles. The chambers are doubtless what the Lord alludes to in John 14.
JP In regard to the expression “many abodes”, (John 14:2) I was thinking just now of the language of the apostle in Ephesians 3:15, “of whom every family in the heavens and the earth is named”.
Ques What would you say was the distinction between the Father’s house and the house of God?
JT The house of God is spoken of in Luke, and it is connected with the gospel. In the epistles it is brought in more largely in connection with divine order. In Luke the house is seen as a place of privilege; in chapter 14 God would have it filled, and in chapter 15 you get something of what goes on inside, but you do not get the family exactly. Whereas in the epistles the house is connected with divine order, that which is according to God. But in John it is the place for those who are in family relationship with God. In John 1:12 we get, “as many as received him, to them gave he the right to become children of God”. You feel that God’s house is the place for the children.
FL The Lord’s first words in resurrection were, “go to my brethren and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father and your Father” John 20:17.
JT It is a question of relationship. It is not a question in John of meeting man’s need, nor of man approaching God. It is a question more of man being in family relationship with God. Therefore it [p. 498] presents what is, in a sense, the greatest thing for us.
RSS Would you make clear to us what is in your mind in regard to the Father’s house? There are two thoughts in my mind in connection with the Father’s house; one is that it is a place of intimacy and retirement and nearness to God; the other is that it includes the whole universe and every family in heaven and earth.
JT Yes. No doubt the temple of Solomon taken in its largest aspect, including the court, gives us some idea of the scene that will be influenced by God and in which, in a sense, He dwells; but you cannot fail to see that the holy place and the holiest of all suggest greater nearness, and there only the chambers were: they were apparently connected with the holy place and the holiest of all.
RSS These chambers would correspond with the abodes; John 14:2.
JT And then all could be thrown together. The idea presented is, of God being in touch with the whole scene, all distance gone, rather than man approaching Him.
RSS Wherein do the tabernacle and the temple differ in regard to what you are speaking of now?
JT The tabernacle was connected with the wilderness only, and was moveable. It suggested also rather that God was hidden. What we see in the tabernacle is the way in which God would be approached, so that you get both the brazen altar and the golden altar and the mercy-seat. All these things have reference, on the one hand, to the means by which God puts Himself in relation to man and the whole universe in righteousness; and, on the other, to the mode of man’s approach to Him. But when you come to the temple you have a fixed abode, a settled dwelling-place for ever. The tabernacle did not suggest a place of affection: God, in the infinite majesty of His holy nature, was, in type, entering [p. 499] into relationship with a redeemed world. But the house, as seen in 1 Kings, was a settled dwelling-place, a place of affection.
WHF The temple is in the land.
HAS Could you say anything about the Father’s house in the present day?
JT I would not say that the Father’s house is a present thing exactly. In character it is; but I think that, in the light in which John 14 presents it, it is future.
PRM It is not yet brought into evidence, but I think we have had the enjoyment of it today. In the light of Ephesians it has reference to the great scheme of blessing which God will inaugurate in a future day.
JT If we are enabled to see the peculiar place which we shall have in that day as the family of God, we may perhaps review the outward surroundings of the abode of God. And these outward surroundings, I think, are all brought in in Kings to enhance our apprehension of the glory of Christ as in connection with the millennial order of things. He has an abode among the Gentiles. He has an abode of His own in Jerusalem, and then He has a special place for the assembly viewed as His bride. The house of the forest of Lebanon is the place that He will have among the Gentiles. I think it does us good to have a look into the future in that way.
HP What is the difference between this and what we get in the end of Ezekiel?
JT Ezekiel presents the house as a source of blessing: the river flows out from beneath the altar. The great point in Ezekiel is life. But Kings presents to us the grandeur of the coming age in its heavenly and earthly aspects; and we are entitled to introduce ourselves into it, inasmuch as the Father’s house is there; but then we have also an abode for the assembly viewed as the bride of Christ. But the [p. 500] Spirit of God brings before us the interior of the dwelling-place of the Father.
Ques Have you any thought with regard to the cherubim?
JT I think the idea is that they protect the ark. One is struck with the number of the cherubim; they not only appear inside as protecting the ark, but they are in the doors and they are all around the walls of the house.
RSS Do they set forth the government of God?
JT That is a great thing to learn in the house. Everywhere you look there is an indication of God’s governmental authority.
Ques Would you say that there is that thought connected with the Father’s house?
JT I think the idea of rule must ever be found where God dwells. I have no doubt that the cherubim ever refer to the rule of God.
Rem There should be the sense of sonship, but also that of rule.
JT Yes; as knowing God, we should never think of eliminating His rule from His dwelling-place. God’s will is supreme rule, though there are no opposing elements in the heavens. Everything is regulated by the will of God, and there is full response to it.
PRM There are the commandments “If ye love me, keep my commandments”. John 14:15.
Rem These who form the house of God are great gainers by knowing these things.
JT Everything, the palm trees, etc., has its own meaning. I suppose the palm means victory. The flowers are not fully in bloom, but they are there.
Ques Would you say that our capacity for present enjoyment depends on what you get in John 13?
JT I think that in order to enjoy the home you have to be formed after the parents.
PRM Certainly. Do you refer that to John [p. 501] 13?
JT Yes, because the saints were to be formed after what was set forth in Christ.
PRM I suppose one great thought connected with it is that there is intimacy there; the Lord Jesus bringing the saints into intimacy for the enjoyment of what is within; so that intimacy would be connected with what He brings them into.
JT I have no doubt that a child is properly formed by the love of its parents, and then it is set in relation to the other children of the house. And all that is good is formed by the parent. The house is thrown open to the children. John 14 is for the family. In Luke the house is connected with men; they are to be brought into the house, not simply as God’s sons, but as men.
RSS So that Luke presents one of the two aspects that I was speaking of a little while ago.
Ques Are all in the Father’s house in the good of sonship?
JT I think so; they are all sons; if not, they will not remain in it. Compare John 8:35.
CM I wonder how you connect sonship with the different families?
JT I believe that all in the future are set in relation to God in sonship — in principle, at least.
PRM All are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection, Luke 20:36.
JT I think that Ephesians speaks of sonship as having reference to the assembly; there you get the peculiar place and privilege of the assembly — of the saints that form it.
PRM “I go to prepare a place for you”. John 14:2. That is a distinct thought, is it not?
JT As those who share the rejection of Christ, we shall have a special place in the house.
Ques Is not the church His only interest on earth now?
JT Yes, at the present moment. He came [p. 502] to confirm the promises made to the fathers, Romans 15:8; but that is in abeyance for the moment. Some of us lately have been dwelling on Genesis 46. Jacob is there seen at Beersheba, going down to Joseph. God appeared to him as the God of his father; not as the God of Abraham, but as the God of his father Isaac. God assured him that, although the promises were to be in abeyance for the moment, they were all secured in Christ risen.
RSS So that Abraham is not in view. Only Isaac, who sets forth Christ in resurrection.
JT But when God speaks to Moses in the wilderness, He says, “I am the God of Abraham, of Isaac and of Jacob” Exodus 3:6; and then He says, “my name is Jehovah”; that was the sign that now He was undertaking to fulfil the promises; therefore He goes back to Abraham, and tells the new name which indicated His faithfulness. Christ came to effectuate all the promises made to the fathers, but on the ground of His rejection the promises are in abeyance; and the assembly is brought out.
CHB Would you expect to see the palm trees and the flowers now?
JT I think so. All these things are found here at the present time in the house. The cherubim certainly are found always where God dwells.
Ques What is the fatness of God’s house?
PRM It has to be tasted to be known.
JT In the Psalms we can see it was David who apprehended the blessedness of the house of God. He had a wonderful appreciation of it as a place of blessing.
You have to get the grouping of things in Kings. In order to see what the Spirit has in view, you have to see the whole range of things together, and I think that the future heavenly and earthly glories of Christ risen are foreshadowed in the description given in 1 Kings; that is, all these things will be seen together.
[p. 503] The effect upon ourselves of seeing them would be to divert us from the present course of things in this world.
FL I think that David personally helps us a little to understand how he felt in regard to the house of God. That is, in his day there was an intense appreciation of it, and there was the preparation of the material; and then, if we turn to the Psalms, we find that in heart and spirit he was in the full enjoyment of the house; he was in it, although the house itself was not actually built.
JT Yes, the Psalms help us greatly in the apprehension of the house, for they show that David had a great desire to have a house for the Lord, and then he had a great appreciation of it as a place for himself as well
Ques Does the house give you the idea of a dwelling?
JT The great central feature of the universe is God’s dwelling place. But then there are the surrounding houses; they are secondary, we may say, in a sense, but they enhance the house of God and they enhance the glory of Christ.
Ques When the eternal state is in view in the Revelation, how is it that it is the tabernacle that is spoken of?
JT I have thought that the tabernacle of God there refers to the fact that God shall have ultimately secured the thought He set forth in the wilderness, and it is now permanently with men. But I think that 1 Kings presents to us the importance of the Father’s house, and then the surrounding scenes of grandeur and glory that the Lord Jesus has in these other places; He will not be limited in that day. His place may be very limited among His people at the present time, but in that day things will not be limited.
FL [p. 504] I rather think that in the Revelation more is made of the glorious nature of the fact that the habitation with men is finally reached, than of the glory of the house. It would seem that the delight of God was with men before the earth was formed, and then, when the eternal state is brought into view, it is the greatness of the fact that He dwells with them.
JT The Word became flesh and tabernacled among us. That tabernacle has disappeared from view, but in future the tabernacle of God is with men.
HP The distinction between the houses remains in the eternal state.
JT I think not. I think they refer to the millennial state of things. They appear as enhancing the glory of Christ showing, in one respect, what He shall have as having been rejected here.
Rem In the eternal state there is nothing to interfere.
JT I think that what comes out in Kings is the vastness of the scheme. Solomon really sets forth Christ in resurrection, and what is evolved out of that is a scene of vastness and grandeur. Building was a great feature of Solomon’s reign. See 1 Kings 9:15 - 19. Divine building is on the ground of resurrection.
FL The opening flowers, etc., speak of resurrection. Compare Aaron’s rod that budded.
PRM The thought of the porch seems to be a place of judgment: Solomon’s throne of judgment was there. In John 10 the Lord walked in Solomon’s porch. The summer had not come with the opening of the flowers. He walked in Solomon’s porch as coming in judgment and discrimination. The opening flowers were not on the walls, nor the palm trees. It is remarkable that the house which Solomon built for his bride was after the pattern of the porch where the throne of judgment was. Does it not show [p. 505] that the public place the bride will have will be unchallengeable?
JT As answering to the place of judgment?
PRM Yes. Christ was made sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. I thought that the place of the bride will be unchallengeable, because it will be in accordance with the place of judgment.
JT Yes, I think that in another sense the saints are in accord with Christ. The throne was not in the house of the daughter of Pharaoh, but her house was in accord with the place where the throne was. Therefore you will expect that the saints will be in accord with the judgment rendered by the throne.
RSS Would it not also be connected with the thought that administration will be connected with the heavenly city?
PRM Yes, and that will be the bride.
JT Does it not say that the saints shall judge angels? Saints ought to be able to settle things amongst themselves. There is nothing indicates weakness among the saints more than the inability to adjust local differences. When you think of the place that we shall occupy in this scene of grandeur and glory as formed by the Spirit, you feel how immense the discrepancy is between this and a company of saints now who are unable to adjust local differences.
PRM All these little things are the education for them.
JT The very things that arise among us afford us an opportunity to judge according to God.
PRM Not according to business capacity.
JT To act for God according to God, and I have no doubt that the cherubim in the house speak of this. Saints should judge of things and adjust things in a divine way.
PRM I think it would be of great profit to us to [p. 506] see that the truth of the dwelling place of the bride was dependent upon the knowledge of the porch as the place of judgment. It is no good talking about the privileges of the bride if we have not learnt the practical side of administration; first in self-judgment, and then the ability to administrate divinely; laying aside mere human ability, and bringing in God.
JT In connection with what we have passed through lately, it would seem that a great many saints were unable to judge as to a simple matter in the house of God. If we were formed after Christ, we should have no difficulty in distinguishing between right and wrong.
JP That is Isaiah 7. The Child ate butter and honey, so that He might know how to refuse the evil and choose the good. And further down in the chapter, those left in the land lived on butter and honey; they are formed after Christ, and so they have ability to refuse the evil and choose the good.
HP How about the expression, “I go to prepare a place for you”? John 14:2.
PRM The preparation of that place is inaugurated by His returning to the Father as Man.
JT And it was to be “for you”; for those who had shared His afflictions here.
FL I suppose, looked at from a different standpoint, it is “whither the forerunner is for us entered”. Hebrews 6:20.
JT It is the same thing in principle, because if there is a Forerunner there are after-runners.
RSS Is there not then the other thought, in regard to our preparation for that place? Would you not think that chapter 13 suggested something as to that?
PRM Yes, that must precede it.
RSS It is very important and practical, that we should be prepared for the place.
JT He really left a family here of the kind [p. 507] that would be admitted there. He was forming the disciples after Himself, after the pattern of divine love.
RSS In connection with the new commandment?
JT Normally the children in a family are formed by the affections of the parents, and are set in relation to each other. I think the Lord may be taken as the One in whom the love is manifested in chapter 13, and the disciples were to be formed after that so as to be suitable to the abode of the Father.
FL Forming a new generation for the house.
JP But it all had its spring in the Father’s love; Christ had loved them as the Father had loved Him, and now they were to love each other as He had loved them.
FL I suppose the wood is significant here — the olive, fir tree, cedar, etc.
JT I should be glad if you would give us some light about it.
FL I thought that the cedar suggested glory, the olive suggests the Spirit, the fir tree suggests perpetuity.
RSS The Spirit pervades what was there. Would the beginning of John 13 suggest anything in connection with the Father’s house? “If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me”. John 13:8.
PRM It was the preparation for it by the removal of what was unsuitable, so that we might enter on that scene according to God.
RSS That is a practical thing now, is it not?
PRM To which we are all contributory.
RSS The Lord washed the disciples’ feet, and we ought to give the same service one to another. Christ does the feet washing, not immediately now, but mediately.
JT He does it as knowing that He was departing out of the world to [p. 508] the Father.
RSS I wish you would enlarge your thought of intimacy.
PRM The standard for many a Christian is that he has a good conscience — nothing between him and the Lord. But the standard of Christianity is not a clean book; you do not keep a debtor and creditor account; that is not Christianity, but Judaism. The thought of John 13 is that we might walk in intimacy with the Lord; intimacy in the midst of a scene of confusion.
Ques What was the end He had in view in introducing it here?
JT I suppose it would be to confirm and encourage the disciples in view of their place in connection with the testimony during His absence. I think in this part of the gospel of John He has the position before Him that they should have in connection with the testimony when He was absent.
RSS I suppose He had in view what we get in chapter 20 — association.
JT I think the Lord here is really preparing them for the place of witness during His absence; that their hearts should not be troubled, and then He goes on to speak of going to prepare a place for them, and would come again for them. All this would be a stay to their hearts, in the place of testimony, while He was away. I think every man standing for Christ should maintain in his soul the place that he has in Christ’s heart up there. He says, “Believe in me”, and then He goes on to say what He would do for them.
Rem So there is enough encouragement for us as long as we are here in this scene. All this, the Father’s house, etc., is future, yet, by the power of the Spirit, we touch it now.