DISTINCTIVENESS AND FINALITY IN PAUL'S MINISTRY (3)

DISTINCTIVENESS AND FINALITY IN PAUL’S MINISTRY (3)

1 Corinthians 12:4-14; 1 Corinthians 12:27-31; Ephesians 4:1-16

SMcC In considering further Paul and his ministry and the opening up of the heavenly line in it, and the reaching of what is distinctive and final in it, we come, in our consideration this morning, to the thought of the body as it is presented in these passages. The body is a marvellous conception of the divine mind, being part of the mystery. Never before, in the history of time, throughout all the ages or epochs, had there ever been anything like this. The Spirit of God was known as coming upon persons and affecting persons from the beginning, but never before had there ever been on this earth a vessel in which the Spirit of God took up residence, in the way in which He has taken up residence in the vessel that He has formed by His coming, the body of Christ. There is a distinct link with heaven in the thought of the body, because, as we see, specially in Ephesians and in Colossians too, the Head is in heaven. Of course, the Head was in heaven before the body was formed, but what is impressive in regard to these two sections of the word is the marvellous way that two divine Persons have taken up a station in relation to the great thought of the body. It is a wonderful thing that one divine Person, the Holy Spirit, has come from heaven and has formed a body as the vessel of His manifestations; and in that vessel there is witness to the divine presence. That is something that had never been before, in that way. We have of course the cloud in the wilderness, and the glory filling the tabernacle, and the glory in the temple; but we have never had before, in regard to men, the Holy Spirit taking up residence in a vessel and sphere such as He has formed in the body of Christ. It is very affecting to think of Him coming from heaven, indeed He has been sent, as it is said, from heaven, in view of this great result. Then also it is affecting to think that in the station that the Lord has taken in regard to the assembly in Ephesians, He has gone far above all heavens. It is very affecting to consider the remarkable place that the Lord has ascended into, where no creature ever can go, and from that station or place (as we would use the word, for we have to use words) the Lord is operating in all the invincible power that is linked with His ascension into that place, in relation to what is distinctive and final in connection with the assembly, that is the perfecting of the body, having in mind that we should all arrive at what is final, I mean final in the sense of what is perfected. Sometimes we are inclined to think of what is final in the sense that it is chronological, but one is thinking of what is final in regard to the circle of the truth, and Ephesians has that in mind. Another thing that one might mention is that in these meetings where we are together from the other parts of the world, especially our brethren who have language difficulties, it is a great matter that they with us should see the value of the body in this light, and the value and importance of the Spirit’s presence. While there has been a good deal of exercise as to uniformity in assembly customs, it is a great thing to see that the power and spring vitally for all must lie in the presence of the Spirit in this way, as having formed the body. So that uniformity really must spring from what is vital, and if room is made for the Spirit, despite language barriers and national differences, the body helps us to overcome all that. There is thus, as the Spirit is made room for everywhere, a sense of what is right, even if we do not have the intelligence of what is right, because it is the same Spirit. Whatever may have come in in the way of breakdown, in the dispensation, it is the same Spirit, and the body is there as the vessel of His manifestation. It might be said that in 1 Corinthians 12 the body is viewed in a provisional way; that is, it is not exactly its eternal relation, but it is viewed in a provisional way as a vessel to which God has committed Himself. It is the vessel that He has anointed and committed Himself to, in that way, for the representation of all His thoughts down here in this scene that we are in, and in the cities where we are. In Ephesians, while it is brought in in regard to what is provisional in the passages that we have read, the body stands in an eternal relation.

AJG Is the body in Corinthians connected with the local assembly, while the body in Ephesians is the full thought of what is universal?

SMcC Yes, it helps to see the different ways in which the body thus may be apprehended. In verse 13 of 1 Corinthians 12 it would also allude to what is universal, “For also in the power of one Spirit we have all been baptised into one body,” but then when it comes down to the verse that we have read, it says in verse 27, “Now ye are Christ’s body”; that is, the character of that body appears in Corinth or wherever we are set in our local positions.

AJG It was verse 27 that I had in mind in making the remark, but it is important as you say, to see that in verse 13 it is universal.

SMcC Therefore the importance of that verse as applying to where there may be difficulties, because if there is one thing we should beware of it is the development of national lines. That is inimical to the truth of the body, and I am sure we need the help of the Spirit as to it. We know the sorrow of the China matter, and the remarkable thing about that matter was the strong determination to develop a national assembly, and that is so even to this day. Whatever country we may be in, if the Spirit has operated, we must never nationalise it. We must learn to merge into the universal unity and oneness that is linked with the body, and the drinking of the one Spirit.

GRC So that although verse 13 is universal, it is still provisional. That is, it is the universal body on earth at any time.

SMcC Exactly, and I would say that although it is universal, yet verse 13 bears on what is local. Would you not think, in the backward or retroactive allusion to the Lord’s supper and to the cup, that locally we are affected by this great matter of all being given to drink of one Spirit every Lord’s day?

GRC And so also, “we, being many, are one loaf, one body”; that should affect us every Lord’s day.

SMcC Well, it should. It reminds us of how we are bound up with all the saints. We are not, as it were, a cluster of independent assemblies, using the expression in the light in which it is presented in the scriptures; we are greatly interdependent.

PHH Do you think the mention in verse 13 of “whether Jews or Greeks” would settle this matter of anything national in relation to the body? You could hardly have a people with national characteristics so different, and yet they are viewed here as finding their place in the body.

SMcC It is very striking. It shows how, through this great matter of the baptism of the Spirit which took place at Pentecost according to Acts 2, all are merged in this glorious entity, all nationality is gone in it. You take a gathering like this, with so many brethren; individually, as men and women, we have all got different spirits, for each of us has a spirit given by God, different from the other, but in the body there is only one Spirit. It is not a congregation of spirits, there is one Spirit pervading the body.

ABP Does the passage in Acts 15 bear strikingly on this? Peter says in regard to those in the house of Cornelius, “And the heart-knowing God bore them witness, giving them the Holy Spirit as to us also, and put no difference between us and them, having purified their hearts by faith,” verses 8, 9.

SMcC That is a beautiful word, “putting no difference.” What a touch on the part of God, especially where the prejudices were so great and the feelings ran so high, that God should personally come into the matter, putting no difference between them!

GRC If I might go back just for a moment to the matter of uniformity, you were referring yesterday to brethren in the same time zone breaking bread at the same time, but would you allow that in Moslem countries, where the Lord’s day is a working day, it may be necessary to break bread in the evening?

SMcC I would, but I would encourage the brethren to think of the principle, and to accept the principle; and if it were ever possible to work it out they would do so, but because of the unusual conditions in Moslem countries, I am sure the Lord would help them in working things out according to wisdom. If the brethren all have to work, as they have to in Moslem countries, and are not available, you cannot work out the Supper if you have not got the persons. You must have the persons to work out the Supper. Therefore there would be a measure of consideration for our brethren in the Moslem world in that sense, only you would encourage them to think of the principle, and see the value of the principle if it were at all possible. Would you agree with that?

GRC Yes. I think that is very good. It applies in Iran and also I think it will apply if there should be a reviving of the breaking of bread in Lahore.

AEM At the same time you would encourage the saints to pray, for by prayer we can alter customs and subdue nations! If the mind of God is known, we can pray that it may be possible to do what is necessary.

SMcC That is what one has in mind in stressing the importance of accepting the principle. If we accept the principle, God may bring conditions around to suit the saints. Where difficulties come in is where principles are not accepted, and brethren just settle down to accept the conditions without earnest prayer that matters may be changed.

CMM Could you spare us a word as to the worship of the Spirit, if I am not diverting you?

SMcC Perhaps you would make a little clearer what you are thinking about.

CMM I am also thinking of uniformity, that we might move together in that great matter. Sometimes I have noticed, in going about, that it has been lacking entirely at the Supper.

SMcC I have noticed from personal observation that when you have a distinctive response to the Spirit it colours the whole matter of the service of God. And I am sure that we need to see the importance of this blessed Person, who has come in as He has, being recognised. This very chapter establishes His deity, a Person that has the right to be worshipped and honoured.

JSE If we ‘drank’ more of one Spirit, would that not be more easy?

SMcC That is a good expression, ‘more easy.’ I think if there is anything we need to be helped in regard to, it is tension in the assembly. After all, we are in the presence of Persons who love us. Persons who love to be with us, and we are in the presence of one another, and we love one another. We are everything to one another, and where love is, tension should be lifted. Therefore we are searched as to whether we are on easy terms with one another and with divine Persons. What you refer to bears on it, “drinking of one Spirit.”

PHH Sometimes it has been found that the dear brethren do not quite realise what is in this matter of worshipping the Spirit. I suppose we should make a difference between having liberty to address the Spirit, in general, and having liberty to worship Him. Does worshipping Him bring in the acknowledgment of His Person, that He is God?

SMcC Yes. There should be with us the recognition of His deity, I mean as distinct and apart from the collective thought of God as in the latter part of the meeting. Sometimes brethren refer to the Spirit individually as God, in the latter part of assembly service, and it is not intelligent. It is not in keeping with what we have before us in that final part of the service. If we are going to refer to the Spirit individually, as God, we have to bear in mind His personal distinctive part as it comes before us in the early part of the meeting.

APCL Would the accustoming ourselves in the light of this chapter, to recognise that, help us in the service? I was thinking of the reference in verse 6, “the same God who operates all things in all,” and then the reference in verse 11, “these things operates the one and the same Spirit.”

SMcC It would. And it would help us, too, as to reverential ease. We use the word ‘ease’ in contradistinction to tension, not in any careless way, because we are always, as in the presence of divine Persons, reverential and in dignity. It is a great matter, however, that we should be relaxed, and what you refer to would help us in relation to that, because it says in verse 6, “there are distinctions of operations, but the same God who operates all things in all.” And then verse 11, “But all these things operates the one and the same Spirit.” Therefore we get the assertion of Deity in the Spirit in this passage.

LES Would not the distinctive way in which the great thought of oneness and sameness is brought into these passages have the effect of liberating us? Paul refers to the thought of sameness in the Philippian epistle, and then again in 2 Corinthians he refers to Titus having walked in the same steps, and having the same mind. Would not all this help us to understand the intimate link that we have in the realm of the Holy Spirit?

SMcC It would. And it is not a sameness just from mere actual literal words, it is a vital oneness and sameness flowing from the spring linked with the presence of a divine Person in the assembly.

JSE Does the first verse of the chapter shed any light on what you are saying? “But concerning spiritual.” Does that help us to see the force of the word ‘sameness’? It is a spiritual sameness.

SMcC Just so. These Gentile persons had been accustomed to another kind of manifestation; but now, as coming out of heathendom into Christianity, into the assembly, Paul seeks to enlighten them in regard to spiritual manifestations.

LES So that thinking the same thing, and having the same love is really what is inward, and involves an intimate understanding of our links with the Holy Spirit, and with one another.

SMcC It does, and the Lord has been helping us in recent years as to the same thinking, the same speaking and the same opinion. It is not just a matter of external uniformity, it is a uniformity that flows out from the presence of the one Spirit in the vessel of divine manifestation here in this world. And it is testimonial, in its bearing, as well as what it means to God.

JSE Is that why the word the “fellowship of the Spirit” precedes what has been referred to in Philippians?

SMcC Yes, that is interesting, bearing on what we are saying. I think it is remarkable that we should get this full chapter as to the Spirit following the Lord’s supper. There is no reference to Christ’s headship in this chapter, and we are to note that. We have not come to the period in the teaching, in Paul’s mind here, for Christ’s headship. It is of all moment to see that the truth of the body is brought forward in the foundational epistles, without any allusion to Christ’s headship in relation to it. Of course we have Christ’s headship in a federal way, in Romans 5 and in the opening of 1 Corinthians 11, that is His headship in a federal way. But we do not have His headship in regard to the body.

CRW Would you mind saying what a federal way means?

SMcC In relation to the whole universal race of man God has committed Himself to Christ as the new Head of the race; that is what I mean by the use of the word ‘federal.’ It is in contrast to the special and distinctive character of headship in relation to that glorious entity, His body, the assembly, which bears on what is organic.

PL Would it be right to say that the Spirit holds the place for Christ in Romans and Corinthians, until Christ takes it Himself supremely in Colossians and Ephesians?

SMcC That is the truth exactly. You take Romans 8, where the chapter is filled with references to the Spirit. The Spirit is life in the believer; not that He promotes life, but He is life. That is, He is everything to the believer until the believer reaches Colossians, where Christ is his life. The Spirit is everything until the position is reached where, as we shall see this afternoon, Christ is everything.

ABP So that there is no such thing as a headless body?

SMcC There is not. But the remarkable thing is that in the figure of speech employed in 1 Corinthians 12, the head is a member of the body.

PHH That is a most remarkable thing, is it not? Does that help us negatively to see that it is not Christ there, being spoken about, but a part of the body which Paul is using as an illustration?

SMcC I think it has in mind to throw into relief the Spirit, and what the body is as the vessel or the vehicle of the Spirit’s activities and manifestations at the present moment. It is thus a wonderful spiritual organism.

PHH Would you therefore think, as this language goes on, that every one of us should be more moved to include ourselves in this setting of the body?

SMcC I am sure we should, and I think it lies in acquaintance with the Spirit.

PHH I am thinking for instance of verse 21, “The eye cannot say to the hand, I have not need of thee; or again, the head to the feet, I have not need of you. But much rather, the members of the body which seem to be weaker are necessary.” I am thinking of these expressions, such as what we ‘cannot say,’ and what ‘are necessary.’ Do you think it would help us in our ponderings about the body, to include ourselves, and reckon on the Spirit?

SMcC I am sure it would. And it would greatly enhance the value of every one in our localities, in the sense that there is no one that we can discount. There is a great danger sometimes of thinking that everything hinges on the principal men in the lead. Well, influence is linked with that, and we are to have respect and honour for that, but we must see the value, in this vessel, of every part, every member.

PHH Do you think that certain persons may tend to exclude themselves, because it is the eye speaking for itself here?

SMcC I think there is need for that word, because the danger is with some of taking on congregational thoughts and ideas, and leaving things to others without seeing that they are all an integral and vital part of the body.

AHn You referred to the deity of the Spirit as being enlarged on in this chapter, would I be diverting to ask you to enlarge still more on that, for He operates, and He distributes, and He baptises.

SMcC Well, would it be quite right to say that He baptises?

AHn “For also in the power” (verse 13), how do you understand that word?

SMcC I see what you have in mind in regard to it, but I was thinking of a distinctive glory that attaches to Christ, namely that He baptises with the Spirit. That is signally marked out in regard to Him, and the baptism of the Spirit is done through the power of the Spirit. That is, the Lord administered the Spirit from on high. The Spirit was sent and, as the Spirit came, the body was formed, so that it was the baptism of the Spirit characteristically, but I think the act of Christ enters into it. But this matter that you refer to as to the deity of the Spirit is important, because who but One of the Deity could act as you point out in these different ways.

ABP Does the word in Acts 2: 33 help, “and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this which ye behold and hear”?

SMcC That is what I was thinking of in regard to it. What would you say, Mr. G.?

AJG Yes, there is very definite testimony of John the baptist in John 1, “Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending and abiding on him, he (emphatic) it is who baptises with the Holy Spirit. And I have seen and borne witness that this is the Son of God,” verses 33, 34.

AHn All I was thinking of was the securing in a living way of our place in the body through the operation of the Spirit.

SMcC Just so. So that we sometimes find divine Persons so closely linked together in a particular act or matter, that it is difficult to discern who is primarily acting. The body was formed by the Spirit when He came; the body did not exist in Acts 1, the assembly did not exist in the gospels. It existed in the divine mind, of course, but the assembly did not concretely exist in the gospels, nor in the first of the Acts. The assembly was formed by the coming of the Spirit, but Christ’s act, as indicated in John 1: 33, 34, enters into it.

RWS I would like to take you back to what you said earlier as to addressing the Spirit at the end of the meeting. I think you used that expression.

SMcC I was thinking of the tendency sometimes to address Him individually as God, using such an expression as “We worship thee as God,” when speaking to the Spirit at that point in the service, which I do not think is intelligent. I mean, if we worship God, in the collective sense, we worship Father, Son and Holy Spirit as God. We worship them collectively as God at that point, not severally as God. If we mention them severally, it is to bring in the glories that reflect on the Persons who are viewed together collectively as God.

GRD In connection with the deity of the Spirit, would the reference in verse 6 to “the same God” be limited to the operations of the Spirit, or would we be right to include, say, the Father’s operations, as well?

SMcC Oh, exactly. We want to see His deity, but that verse is not just a personal allusion to the Spirit. It says in verse 4, “But there are distinctions of gifts, but the same Spirit,” now that is the Spirit personally, but then it says, “there are distinctions of services, and the same Lord,” that is the Lord Jesus Christ; and then “there are distinctions of operations, but the same God,” that is the Father,

“who operates all things in all.” It would be Deity in the sense conveyed in 1 Corinthians 8: 6, “to us there is one God, the Father, of whom all things and we for him.” But then when we move down to chapter 12, verse 11, it is “But all these things operates the one and the same Spirit,” so that Deity is attached to the Spirit now, in the operation, showing the versatility in relation to divine names in the divine realm.

PHH I have not quite got your thought in regard to addressing the Spirit at the end of the meeting. Do I understand you to say that when we may speak to God in worship, as at the end of the morning meeting, we include the three Persons; I think we understand that, but what exactly have you in mind in worshipping the Spirit, and calling Him God? Is that not right?

SMcC No, I do not think it is right (if I might speak reverently, in the use of language that we have to employ), to isolate the Spirit personally, and speak to Him personally as God, in the latter part of the meeting. I do not understand that to be intelligent.

PHH Pardon me, I did not mean in the latter part of the meeting, I meant, for instance, soon after the Supper. If we worship the Spirit then, and mention the title “God,” is that not right?

SMcC Yes, that is what we are seeking to draw attention to. In the first part of the meeting, following the Supper, there is ample room to address the Spirit personally, in His deity, as God.

PHH Thank you, that is what I meant. That has made it clear.

Ques Does Hymn No. 8 lead up to the great thought of God, and is it hardly suitable when we have reached the final thought?

SMcC Hardly suitable! Why, that was one of the choice hymns in the Hymn Book when it was revised, that bore on the final phase of the service.

I understand Hymn No. 8 to be one of the choice hymns available when we refer to God - not as leading up to God, but as having reached God, in Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

JTS Would Hymn No. 337 (1951 Hymn Book) be suitable at the earlier part of the meeting, following the Supper? I am thinking of Mr. H.’s questions, I am not thinking of the end of the meeting now, but the place that we give to the Spirit as God earlier, and as we freely speak to Him.

SMcC Certainly, that is His personal greatness. That hymn was given out last Lord’s day in the early part of the service. In regard to our brother’s question, which we need to pay attention to, two years ago the question came up in Ireland with some, when I was there, as to reaching a point beyond the economy, where we worship God as God. Now that is outside the bounds of the truth in all that has been conveyed to us. I do not understand the idea of reaching a point beyond the economy. We are always in the economy, marked by creature capacity, and finite capacity, although the God who has come into the economy is infinite, and we are in the presence of Deity in infiniteness, even in the economy. So that we have to see the importance of the name “Father, Son and Holy Spirit “; that is, God as made known or declared, in this way.

CH Do you mean that whilst we cannot get beyond the economy, we are affected by what lies beyond it?

SMcC We are. That is what I mean when I say we are in the presence of infiniteness. We are in the presence of Deity which we can never compass; as alongside of Christ we are in the presence of infinite knowledge that we could never enter into in its fulness as He can, being who He is.

GRC Are you thinking of 1 Timothy 6: 15, 16 for instance, “the blessed and only Ruler ... dwelling in unapproachable light; whom no man has seen, nor is able to see”?

SMcC That is it.

GRC We know the God who dwells there, although we cannot approach there.

SMcC We cannot. And that is the God whom we worship as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It is nothing less - the same God. It is the God who has moved near in the opening out of His heart. His nature coming into expression, that we might be set at ease before Him in the presence of His majesty and might.

WRM How would you view a hymn like No. 297, where the Holy Spirit is worshipped as God, in verse 3? I understood that hymn to be suitable for the end of the meeting.

SMcC I think we want to be preserved from a reviewal of the Hymn Book, in this meeting, because we have to recognise the intelligence that there is in the assembly as to hymns. The brother who wrote that hymn recognises that if he had to write it again, he would write it somewhat differently. That is, for example, the reference to “Jesus, Lord, enthroned above,” which is not quite in keeping with the collective position of God, in the Persons, because it is a reference, in an isolated way, to the Lord in His uniqueness as made Lord.

ANW In that regard I would like to ask, following your remark regarding the other hymn, whether even in Hymn No. 8, ‘A Man in the heaven’ is wholly in tune.

SMcC Well, you have quite a difference there as I see it, because, while the Lord is Man, yet He is God. J.N.D. makes an astounding statement in one of his writings as to Deity united to humanity. We must make room for the fact that the only way that we know Deity is in a Man, we shall never know it in any other way. I see a difference between the reference to Him as Man, and the reference to Him crowned, or enthroned, as Lord.

ANW I had in mind rather “in the heaven.”

PL But the first thought bears on what He has been made, Lord and Christ officially; the second thought bears on what He is inherently.

SMcC That is it. We want to see that His humanity in no sense detracts from the Deity and the greatness of His personality.

GRC Does not Ephesians 4 establish that, the Man who has ascended above up all the heavens?

SMcC Exactly. That helps; and we had a helpful reference to that at Doncaster that it is as Man that He has gone above all heavens. That could not be said of a creature, that must involve His deity.

PL We had this question up in London some time ago, the thought that, at that time of the service, the Son could not be addressed worshipfully because He is unknowable in His Person according to Matthew 11. But that does not affect the thought that the revelation is in the three Persons, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and if we do not address the Son in the glory of His manhood, we do not know Him or have Him worshipfully at all.

SMcC We do not. Because we certainly do not know Him in abstract deity. We have the impression as to it.

AEM It may be of interest to the brethren to know that Mr. James Taylor himself altered that verse. Verse 2 of Hymn No. 8; it is put according to his views of it, especially ‘Blest Son.’ He said the title ‘Son’ was the highest title by which we know the Lord Jesus.

SMcC I think that is helpful, because you were present at the revision of the Hymn Book. One is a little bit afraid of remarks that one hears, here and there, which almost amount to the suggestion of the need of another revision of the Hymn Book. Whereas, what a wonderful collection we have! And whilst human error may enter into it, I think we should see the value of it, and one specially deprecates remarks that are being made, that if Hymn No. 8 is given out at the end of the meeting, we do not feel we have attained a very high elevation. I speak reverently in regard to these matters, because we are finite, and in the presence of Deity we have to recognise that we are finite. We are limited to the economy, although knowing the God who dwells in light unapproachable, and who has come into the economy in Father, Son and Holy Spirit. But we have digressed a little.

AEM And we always shall be limited to the economy.

SMcC Always, we shall never be outside of the economy throughout all eternity, and we shall never apprehend the Deity through all eternity apart from a Man, that Man.

GRC Is it not remarkable that through the economy we know God in His nature and character?

SMcC It is, I think that is the divine arrangement that that God, whom we could never have known, has designed the economy so that we should know Him in His nature and in His secret being insofar as we can know Him although, rightly speaking, in that sense, it is beyond creature capacity.

GRC You have spoken of human error coming into hymns, but you do not suggest we should not use Hymn No. 297, do you?

SMcC Certainly not, I do not suggest that we should disuse any of the hymns. Sometimes it used to be said that if a hymn was given out, for instance to the Lord Jesus, on the throne above, in a certain part of the meeting, it spoilt the whole meeting! But it is within the general framework of the truth, and a priest would recognise that, and be affected by what is within the general framework of the truth, although it may not be apropos to the particular moment. Now we should have a word as to Ephesians.

RH Before going on, there has been some question about the use of the title “in the name of the Lord Jesus,” when we are addressing God as the Trinity.

SMcC Some question about the use of it? Do you mean that we should not use it?

RH Yes. The question has been raised as to whether it was proper to revert to the thought of lordship at that phase.

SMcC Well, I hope we shall be saved from not using it! It would be extremely unintelligent not to use it, whoever may do it. A few years back, it was suggested, in another part of the world, that we reach a point in the assembly service where we are beyond what is mediatorial. That is entirely unscriptural. We never get beyond what is mediatorial in that sense. Therefore we are governed by the scripture in Colossians 3: 17, “And everything, whatever ye may do in word or in deed, do all things in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father by him.” Now that bears on the service of God.

GRC Did not J.T. say that even in giving thanks for the emblems at the Supper, where we are addressing the Lord, he would still add ‘in Thy name’?

SMcC He did. One was impressed with that recently, that even in speaking to the Lord Himself, you recognise the mediatorial system that we are in and the greatness of that name in that relation.

GRC Otherwise we are ignoring the deity of Christ, are we not? What I mean is that we could not even approach the Lord Jesus apart from His name, involving what He has done in manhood, and what He is in manhood.

SMcC It shows the importance of being governed by Scripture, and not by interpolating Scripture according to our own ideas. The scripture in Colossians is all inclusive, “whatever ye do,” we are to do it in the name of the Lord Jesus.

EAK Would it not involve the glory of redemption? What basis have we before divine Persons, apart from the glory of redemption? You recall what was said here by J.T. in regard to that as touching the service of God. I think it was in the readings on the mediatorial service of Christ and the Spirit.

SMcC Just so. That is, the value of that Person and the name come in in that connection.

EEP In the end of Revelation we have the expression “I Jesus.” I was struck with the fact that the mediatorial system is never to be given up.

SMcC The Lord would affect us in the last chapter in the Revelation by His own personal glory, “I Jesus”; it is the identification of the Person, in that way.

JOTD Is it important that the whole system of side-chambers in the temple was held to the house by beams of cedar?

SMcC I think there is something in what you say, but we would like to get a little more what is in your own mind.

JOTD I am referring to 1 Kings 6: 10, “And he built the floors against all the house, five cubits high; and they held to the house by the timbers of cedar.” The house would involve the great system of divine glory, and for us would connect with the knowledge of God as Father, Son and Holy Spirit, but the side-chambers would suggest how the saints are to live eternally in nearness to that. But the link between the two is in the beams of cedar which suggest the manhood of Jesus.

SMcC I think there is something important in what our brother says. In the study of the types,

which is very affecting in the passages that he alludes to, we have the way the saints are viewed as at home in relation to the divine dwelling, but never in a detached way. Similarly, we cannot view the absolute and the relative in too much of a detached way; that is, while we cannot compass or enter into what is absolute, it is not presented in a detached way, because the absolute enters into the relative. We have to see that, and we have a similar thought with the saints, that while we have to do with God, and worship Him in His majesty and supremacy, it is not in a detached way; it is as linked with Christ as the cedar suggests, by the dignity of humanity in sonship before God.

PL And divine love being the link.

SMcC It is the link between the absolute and the relative. It is not detached in that way.

AWR Whatever divine Person we address, and whenever, it is the Person that we are addressing.

SMcC In Deity, as Scripture sets out, there are three Persons, co-equal and co-eternal. We do not worship an office. It is God, the Supreme, the Being whom we worship, involving these holy Persons in co-equality in their collective relation, now known as revealed, in Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

HC Would you say a word in regard to the bearing of Colossians 3: 17, on some of the hymns addressed to God? That scripture shows that whatever we do is to be in the name of the Lord Jesus, but some of the hymns addressed to God do not make any reference to that.

SMcC I think all would be covered by the value of the name in a general sense. Hymns are not in the sense of a prayer, or a direct expression of need. In a hymn, the saints are collectively engaged in ascribing praise to God. So that in the doxologies of Paul we have no reference formally to the name of the Lord Jesus; Romans 11: 36; 1 Timothy 1: 17; 1 Timothy 6: 15, 16; Ephesians 3: 20, 21; the doxologies are like the poetical side in the hymns.

GWB Would you mind saying what you think of the remark which is often quoted that we cannot think of the Lord as God and as Man at the same time?

SMcC I think it involves the truth.

GWB I am asking because of what you said, a moment or two earlier, as to Deity and as to the abstract.

GRC Is that remark a misquotation? Did F.E.R. say that?

SMcC He did make some reference to it in the letter on the Person of Christ in referring to what cannot be grasped at one and the same time by the finite mind.

GRC I thought what was in his mind was that we cannot think at the same time of what Christ is as the expression of God to man, and what Christ is as the perfect Man before God, at the same time. But I would have thought that we always had in our minds His deity, however we are thinking of Him.

SMcC There is light in our minds as to His deity and His humanity all the time. What I thought our brother had in mind was as to whether, in a concrete way, we can hold the two thoughts in mind at the same time, which I do not think we can.

GRC But I wondered whether, for instance, when we enter the holiest, we can be engaged with Christ in His perfection as Man before God; but then we are privileged also, in the holiest, to contemplate Him as to what He is as from God to us, that in Him dwells all the fulness, and that He is the effulgence of God’s glory. I wondered whether it was those two sides that we can scarcely take in at one and the same time. But we are privileged, in the holiest, to think of both sides, and at other times, too.

SMcC Oh, certainly. What F.E.R. was seeking to guard against was that when, as in Hebrews 2, for instance, the Lord is before us as Man, in His relation to God as Man, we do not introduce the thought of what is proper to Deity in that relation. But in the same Person, we may see what God is toward us, what Deity is. That is not confusing the thoughts; he was seeking to maintain the distinctiveness of the two, that He may act as God, in the raising of His body for instance, but at times He is viewed as Man distinct and apart from what He is as God, in singing the praises of God.

GRC Yes, that is what I thought.

PL And if we confuse them, we may lose the distinctive glory of each thought?

SMcC Just so. Therefore the great need of holy regard in saying too much in regard to the Lord. Because the truth in the Scriptures is that He is a divine Person who has come into manhood. In His essence, He is unchanged; as to form, in relation to what has taken place before our eyes according to Philippians 2, there is some change, but as to essence and personality, He remains unchanged, and that is there all the time.

WSS I think on an earlier occasion, in Australia, when this similar question arose, you emphasised the point that we worship the Person.

SMcC Yes, and what was said at that time was that F.E.R. did not say that He was not God and Man at the same time. That is not the thought at all in F.E.R.’s mind in that remark. There is light in our minds, at the same time, as to the fact that He is God, and He is Man. But when we are engaged with Him as Man, and the features that are proper to manhood, we do not introduce into that the attributes and other things proper to Deity.

Ques Could we have a reference to Ephesians?

SMcC We have the reference to the supreme place of exaltation that the Lord has ascended to, and then how the gifts come in and how the body comes in. It shows what a great item in the divine system the body is, that such a place of exaltation seems to be required, and the irresistible and invincible power that flows from it, in view of our arriving at what is distinctive and final.

PHH I would like to ask why the thought of the assembly follows on in 1 Corinthians 12 and is brought in in Ephesians 2. In verse 27 of 1 Corinthians 12 it says, “Now ye are Christ’s body, and members in particular. And God has set certain in the assembly.” He does not say ‘in the body,’ but “in the assembly: first, apostles, ... “ Is there a close connection practically between the existence and working of the body, and this working of the assembly where the gifts are?

SMcC There is. I think it is like the distribution of what is heavenly and its influence in this environment. It is like the levitical side distributed through Israel in the types. It is striking how the gifts are linked with the assembly in both these chapters, as if God accentuates the side of heavenly influence to maintain this distinctiveness.

JSE Was it stated some time ago that the extended set of statements in 1 Corinthians 12 bore on the necessity for regulation amongst us in the wilderness, and the compressed set of statements in Ephesians 4 bore on persons who in themselves as written to were regulated, but it took them higher? Is that bearing on what you have in mind?

SMcC Just so. So that in Corinthians the body is presented as a figure, whereas, when we come to Ephesians, it is the great substantial side of the body, as Christ’s body, out of Christ. It is not so much now what it is as formed by the Spirit, the vessel of the Spirit’s manifestations, although that all underlies it, but what it is in its link with Christ.

PL Not animated by Christ testimonially so much, as deriving from Him in purpose.

SMcC Yes, and all the grace of the heavenly Man is expressed in that which is His body.

APB Could you help us as to the function of the body in its eternal setting? We have been more familiar with the working of the body in its provisional setting perhaps.

SMcC I think that Christ will be expressed eternally through His body, the assembly being His complement, the completeness of Him that fills all in all. The assembly is not only adequate for the testimonial sphere, and the day of display, but the assembly is adequate for the eternal scene, for the expression of the graces and the beauties of Him as Man.

ABP Does verse 16 suggest that a point may be reached where gift is no longer needed, but that the body works for itself?

SMcC It seems to be viewed in that way. The body is presented as a complete entity by itself in relation to Christ as Head, and functioning and operating for its own increase; it “works for itself the increase of the body to its self-building up in love.” What an entity this is, when you think of it, in God’s universe!

ABP Does that come close to what is in mind, “through all, and in us all”?

SMcC I think it does.

AJG When, in the eternal day, the holy city comes down out of the heaven from God, will not the influence that she exerts in eternity be the effect of the influence of Christ on His body?

SMcC It will. That is, the assembly gets His direct impulse. The universe does not get the direct impulses of Christ, but the assembly as His body does, and then we have the relay of the influence towards the universe. So it is a remarkable position in which we are set in that light.

JMcK It says, “we may grow up to him in all things, who is the head, the Christ.” Does the thought of growing up to Him convey the ideas of an abiding and final result in the assembly, so that the assembly should be fully complementary to Christ in His own position as Head?

SMcC Exactly. So that it involves the substantial side. It is not just an abstract view according to purpose, although purpose underlies all that we have in this letter, but the growing up, the agricultural thought in that, and the development in the body, is all to bring out the substantial side of this great entity.

WBH Does the conception of the body, which is distinctive to the assembly, underlie every other figure under which the assembly is alluded to, such as the city, the temple, and the house?

SMcC I think it does, because of the vital link of the body with Christ. The body is quickened in the life of the Head, and the direct impulses of the Head enter into it and affect every situation in which the assembly may appear.

PL Being who He is, does He not require a medium, through whom all that He is has to be known, and is to be diffused in life and love and glory? And does not the body furnish that?

SMcC It does.

ABP Is that what is meant by the fulness?

SMcC Exactly. It is a wonderful thought. God delights in fulness, and we know what the fulness of the earth is, and the fulness of other things; but think of the fulness of Christ, and the assembly’s part in that!