READINGS ON THE SPIRIT (4)
[p. 327] READINGS ON THE SPIRIT (4)
JT Pursuant to what we have been saying as regards the Spirit, we may look at this chapter as presenting Him superintending the incoming of the gentiles into the economy set up at Pentecost.
A distinguished personage is in this section, as in chapter 8, which we considered yesterday, but he is distinguished, not so much because he is a Roman officer, but because he is pious. There was piety among the gentiles. This would show, without naming it, that the Holy Spirit had had to do with him. According to John’s presentation of the truth, we have had nothing of new birth so far in this book, but we have to regard its presence here: “The wind blows where it will, and thou hearest its voice, but knowest not whence it comes and where it goes: thus is every one that is born of the Spirit” (John 3: 8). The result of the Spirit’s work is clear, here, as the chapter says, “But a certain man in Caesarea, — by name Cornelius, a centurion of the band called Italic, pious, and fearing God with all his house, both giving much alms to the people, and supplicating God continually” (Acts 10: 1, 2). So that the incoming of the gentiles is not presented as though they were raw material, but as material already affected by God. We could not otherwise possibly have such a man as this; no Roman culture, tuition, or influence could effect it, but indeed the contrary.
So that we might dwell a little on the sovereign action of the Spirit seen here, not in word, but in effect, to make way for His active service in verses 19, 20 where He spoke to Peter, and told him, “Behold, three men seek thee; but rise up, go down, and go with them, nothing doubting, because I have sent them”. The Spirit now is in charge of conditions with which He has already had to do, which indeed He had effected.
[p. 328] Nothing could be more interesting, for we, that is the gentiles, were, as represented in Cornelius and his company, admitted, not as crude raw material, but as persons described in this chapter, affected by the Spirit. On the other hand, viewed apart from any divine operation we were dark and without God. Indeed, Ephesians 2: 12 says, “ye were at that time without Christ, aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world”. But God is letting us know that He is the God of the gentiles, and that He has already been operating. Indeed as far back as the deluge, as far back as the distribution of the race in the sons of Noah, I believe God was operating in view of the western nations coming into the economy which is set up now in Christ by the Spirit. That is, Japheth denotes spreading in the political developments in the west, and God undoubtedly had to do with them providentially to make way for the gospel; not the everlasting gospel, but the gospel which had the assembly in mind, for that is the gospel today. Cornelius was a household man; you would hardly get such a man in the east.
ANW Had you any thought as to why the Ethiopian should have heard the gospel outside of his own country and received it in a foreign land? Is it related to the movement of the Spirit at that time?
JT Yes. Actually the Ethiopian and Cornelius received it in the same territory, only that the eunuch was said to be one “who had come to worship at Jerusalem”. I should think he was a proselyte, such as many who were at Jerusalem when the Spirit came; that is, he was in religious relation to the Jews. Cornelius is one who fears God; but he is not viewed just in this way, but also as a military man, “a centurion of the band called Italic”. I think he represents the Roman system.
VC Why does the Spirit take up a man who is a [p. 329] centurion, a man who carries the sword? How would it work out as to current world conditions?
JT Well, a man took up the sword earlier and was told to put it back into the scabbard; a man that was not a soldier took the sword and cut off the ear of the high priest’s servant. The Lord told him to put it back where it belonged. He did not tell him to destroy it or discard it, but to put it into its place, meaning that in our dispensation we are not to use it. It is held in abeyance. This man was already a soldier and we are not told he had to give up his sword. If a man is already a soldier we are to have consideration for him; but the man who has not been a soldier, that is, Peter, is told to put the sword into its sheath. I think that is our position, an extraordinary position. We have no status at all and men generally do not understand us, but it is very plain that we are to have a certain judgment about the sword. The Lord conveyed the idea when He said, “My kingdom is not of this world”. It does not belong to the world, or even to Israel; it is a heavenly thing. Therefore the Lord says, “if my kingdom were of this world, my servants had fought that I might not be delivered up to the Jews; but now my kingdom is not from hence” (John 18: 36). As those belonging to that kingdom, it is not the fighting time for us, except with the sword of the Spirit. I do not know of anything plainer than that in the Scriptures.
VC What about one who is a soldier before his conversion? How could he put up the sword into its place?
JT The Spirit of God does not pursue the subject as to what Cornelius did, but I think the military institution of the Roman Empire is recognised by Him. If a believer has part in it before he is converted, well, the matter is just left. Not only is this man mentioned as being a military officer, but one who was “constantly with him”, and whom he sends with others for Peter, is said to be “a pious soldier”. Such a scripture would apply as 1 Corinthians 7: 21: “but and if thou canst become free, use it rather”.
AEH If you were in a country where there was no allowance for conscience, would you still maintain a conscience in regard to the sword?
JT I do not like to answer the questions theoretically, because we are not in the place. We are thankful God has made it different for us. Our position in the British Empire and the United States is clear. The governmental dealings of God are allied with His direct action. It is clear God had acted directly with this man and He is acting directly with us throughout these countries. He is using the governmental side, He is opening up doors to us through governmental conditions. But when you are not in the territory to which these conditions apply, it is not easy to say much. God is very considerate, and if you were in the circumstances He would make things clear for you.
JD Do you think the character given this man in verse 1 was the sovereign action of the Spirit of God apart from his hearing the gospel, so that the blessing of Abraham might come to the gentiles?
JT I think so. I think God was making a way, softening the dividing line between Jew and gentile; weakening it. He went over the wall of partition, as it is said of Joseph, “his branches shoot over the wall” (Genesis 49: 22). It would allude to Christ’s present position among the gentiles, how the wall is broken down, but overcome by God. Ephesians 2 contemplates it completely done, and Jews and gentiles reconciled in one body to God by the cross.
JRH As to the previous history of this man, it would appear he knew something of the gospel according to verse 36, “The word which he sent to the sons of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ, (he is Lord of all things), ye know”.
JT He must have. The glad tidings had gone out. Indeed Psalm 19: 2 - 4 says that their line went out “through all the earth”. “Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech and there are no words, yet their voice is heard. Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their language to the extremity of the world. In them hath he set a tent for the sun”. That is an allusion to the gospel, that it could not be hid. Paul appeals to Agrippa on the same line.
But our subject is the Spirit as superintending this matter, so that it is not a mere general report, it is personal. That is, there is a man ready to represent the gentiles; God has been working with him so that he is not raw material. He is material which God has fitted for this matter; he is a soldier, and he has a pious soldier in his household. God would say to us, You must be careful about this military matter and follow what Scripture says. One of the greatest things in such a matter is to be of one mind about it. If we are of one mind God can act for us more easily.
TS You were saying he was a household man. Would that be prominent in him rather than the soldier character?
JT Quite so; he was, under God, anticipating what he was coming into; he was pious. Why cannot the gentiles be pious? Can we not detect that there have been pious persons throughout the ages before christianity? Even the Jewish economy provided for strangers, involving God’s sovereign work.
JRH Would you get remarkable examples of that in Melchisedec and Hiram, king of Tyre?
JT You would, and in the magi of the east. God is the God of the gentiles and has never ceased to be that.
WS The household setting is important at Philippi; you have the household of the jailor especially referred [p. 332] to, and the household of Lydia, and in connection with these households baptism is introduced.
JT Quite so. It is clear that the household was in God’s mind in relation to christianity, but it did not come into evidence so much until we come to Cornelius. I believe Paul’s ministry is in mind as developing the household, which should contribute to the assembly. This man is anticipating that. Our subject is the Spirit viewed objectively. We have to view Him objectively as operating in new birth, according to John’s way of presenting Him; and now He is clearly operating in view of Paul. The household has a great place under Paul.
AEH Is the word “pious” an allusion to the presence of the Spirit? Paul tells us there is a great mystery attached to piety, and being used in connection with these men I wondered if it was an allusion, although not named, to the presence of the Spirit there.
JT The word would allude to God being apprehended in some way, but it is greatly strengthened by the additional phrase, “fearing God”. In fact, piety involves the fear of God, it really means that you are letting God into your circumstances. The additional word, “fearing God with all his house”, is remarkable; the house is not moving without him. In John 4 we have a household brought in with a somewhat different wording; it is said that the nobleman believed, “himself and his whole house”, verse 53. That is, he himself believed first, which is the right order; and then the Spirit of God seems to stress the household by itself, as the wife and the children, and they believed also. It is not that the nobleman believed with his house, but “and his house”, which, I believe, conveys somewhat more than we have here. What is stressed here is the influence of the centurion over his house; it is put, “Cornelius, a centurion of the band called Italic, pious, and fearing God with all his house”. That is, it is his [p. 333] matter, but they are in it with him; they are not viewed as fearing God by themselves.
RWS Would the Spirit observe that he was not a careless man about early spiritual impressions received? It says, “... both giving much alms to the people, and supplicating God continually” (verse 2), as if he did what he could without having the Spirit of God in him.
JT What he needed therefore was the gospel. There was something there. God had come into his circumstances and I think the Spirit of God is putting before us this question of material already affected by God for this great matter.
JRH You said that God takes account of any good there is in a man, instancing Abimelech in his integrity of heart. Would that be in line with this?
JT Yes. Wherever you get persons favourable to God and His people, God takes account of it. The gentiles are not so inclined naturally. Romans 1 tells us what we are by nature; therefore if any different condition exists, it is the result of God operating. There are many instances throughout the Scriptures of persons who were affected by God. Take Oman, the Jebusite, and his attitude as to the site of the temple, something had been divinely effected in him; and there are many others like that, Rahab for instance. We must always take account of God’s universal activities. Abimelech should be noted. God acknowledged integrity in his heart; he had at least the idea of fearing God, (Genesis 20). God drew very near to him and spoke to him feelingly, saying He had withheld him from sinning against Him. He seized the opportunity of speaking to the king, telling him that He knew of the integrity of his heart as to Sarah. “And Abimelech took sheep and oxen, and bondmen and bondwomen, and gave them to Abraham, and restored him Sarah his wife” (Genesis 20: 14).
WMT What about Nebuchadnezzar’s testimony in [p. 334] Daniel 4?
JT That is a genuine case.
LK What would you say about Cornelius supplicating God continually and never having heard the gospel?
JT He was doing well, showing what the work of God may be without the gospel. But God says, This man must have the gospel; he must be delivered, he must be in the liberty of christianity. The case is remarkable, because it is while the assemblage was listening to Peter that the Holy Spirit fell upon them. How much the Holy Spirit must have liked that man and those gathered! He did not even wait for Peter to finish his word; He fell upon them while Peter was speaking.
JWD The Lord Jesus in His own work seems often to select persons like the woman in John 4, who was a noted sinner; but the Spirit in His sovereign, special work seems to operate in connection with material made suitable through formation having already taken place.
JT I should think that in the woman’’ case it is to bring out the matter of wholly unaffected raw material. Hers was a long-standing case, but it brings out what can be done, how difficulties can be surmounted. Hence the Lord takes great pains with her. She is the very opposite to Cornelius.
AEH I suppose in Nicodemus we find the Lord dealing with one similar to this man; new birth was evidently there.
JT I would say that, but not so active in its results as here. The centurion is ready; we do not get that in Nicodemus. It took a long time to get him out of what he was in; in John 7 he is still seen as a member of the council. He did not move quickly, but this man is ready.
JD Are you stressing the importance of the work of the Holy Spirit apart from all other things, operating sovereignly in the introduction of the [p. 335] gentiles.
JT That is right, not letting anyone else in. It is clear Cornelius was affected by God because he feared Him, and not only so but he gave much alms, not a mere pittance: “both giving much alms to the people, and supplicating God continually”. That is a remarkable evidence of the work of God.
RA Do you think his prayers would be on the line of the state of the people, and that God could take account of his prayers as one who had given much?
JT He is like God in giving. This is all-important; foundational in what we are dealing with, the incoming of the gentiles. The Spirit had thus created a condition in Caesarea to effect this great matter, that this remarkable incident might take place, and we should remember that. Philip too was moving in this direction; Scripture does not say he evangelised in Caesarea, but later he lived there.
AHP Would this not remain in Peter’s history? He would understand that he was not the initiator of the work, but God Himself.
JT Yes, but as to instrumentality, it is “first Peter;” Philip is subordinate. He was found at Azotus and worked along to Caesarea, but it does not say he worked in Caesarea. I suppose he linked on with Peter’s work.
WL Is this a general principle, that the incoming of the gentiles still necessitates the sovereign work of the Holy Spirit?
JT That is what Paul stresses in Romans, that wherever God is working, whether among the gentiles or among the Jews, He recognises His own work. It is said, “If therefore the uncircumcision keep the requirements of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be reckoned for circumcision, and uncircumcision by nature, fulfilling the law, judge thee, who, with letter and circumcision, art a law-transgressor? For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, neither that circumcision [p. 336] which is outward in flesh; but he is a Jew who is so inwardly; and circumcision, of the heart, in spirit, not in letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God” (Romans 2: 26 - 29). That is Cornelius and God is showing objectively that there is material coming into the assembly that is equal to what is among the Jews. It is a question of what is inward in a man, and what is inward in a man for God is effected by God.
JWD Would you say this was special? Would you conceive of such an advanced state in connection with new birth today without the Spirit?
JT I would; there are many corresponding results.
ANW Cornelius was not yet saved?
JT No, that is after you have believed the gospel of your salvation, “in whom ye also have trusted, having heard the word of the truth, the glad tidings of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, ye have been sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise” (Ephesians 1: 13). He had not believed the gospel of salvation, it had not been presented to him yet, but it is about to be presented through Peter. Clearly he and those gathered with him believed it, for, as the preaching went on, the Spirit fell upon them.
WL Would you say the work of the preacher links on with the work of the Holy Spirit?
JT Yes. The work of the Holy Spirit may take place in the gospel and persons be converted, as in Peter’s case at Caesarea, and clearly the Spirit operated in those three thousand at Jerusalem; otherwise they would not have believed as they did.
SMcC Do you view in new birth the action of the Spirit from the standpoint of His sovereignty as a divine Person, or as an instrumental power or agency, or both? I am thinking of the Lord Jesus in relation to creation. In Colossians He is alluded to in both ways, as acting in sovereignty in His power as a divine Person, and as the instrument, all things being created by Him.
[p. 337] JT I understand that the Spirit operates sovereignly in relation to the light. New birth is not presented as the effect of light, it is presented as the immediate work of the Spirit in a person. The Lord said to Nicodemus, “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except any one be born anew he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John 3: 3). The light stands in relation to the kingdom; new birth is an act by itself, so that without it “he cannot see the kingdom of God”. That means he has no light at all. Before new birth he had no power to see, but now he has and what he sees is what the light discloses. Light contemplates the objective side of the truth, and the gospel is the full thought of it. So what Cornelius needed here was the gospel; he already, clearly, was the subject of the Spirit’s work.
JRH Perhaps that helps as to the matter of directions. Cornelius gets his directions from the angel, but Peter from the Spirit.
JT Quite so; with Cornelius distance is still there. He could not say, “Abba, Father”, intelligently or feelingly, because he did not have deliverance. Light is necessary, too, but deliverance lies in the Spirit.
JD He was ready now, according to the quotation from Ephesians, for the word of the truth, the gospel of his salvation, through Peter.
ANW So would new birth be indicated in the first day of creation, and the presentation of the gospel as light on the fourth day?
JT I think that is a good way to put it. The word is, “Let there be light”, the light was caused to shine. I think the subjective work on the third day corresponds with that. We are not told what the light was on the first day. It is on the third day you have the subjective thought, that is, the earth brings forth of itself; the principle of bringing forth is there. Then on the fourth day there is the light from heaven, or in heavenly bodies regulating everything here below. I [p. 338] believe it is on the fourth day you have the gospel, that is, Christ above.
SMcC Do you view the source of new birth to be in God, as we know Him, as the power through which it is done, or do you look at the source of it as in the Spirit Himself?
JT The Spirit Himself, although it is God’s work. One of the features of the truth which is before us is that the Spirit is God. He is no less than God: “in whom ye also are built together for a habitation of God in the Spirit” (Ephesians 2: 22). It is God here in Spirit, so that what the Spirit does, God does. Therefore when Peter gives the account in Acts 11: 17 of what the Spirit had done, he says, “who indeed was I to be able to forbid God?” The Spirit had acted, Peter tells them that, which meant it was God that acted.
JD In our first reading you spoke of the indirect reference to the deity of the Spirit in chapter 5, which might be quoted here: “Thou has not lied to men, but to God”, verse 4. Verse 3 says it was to the Holy Spirit they had lied.
JT That is right; and thirdly in verse 9 it is “the Spirit of the Lord”, against whom they had sinned, so the three divine Persons are there.
ANW The sovereignty of the Spirit is seen in the part of the verse you quoted in John 3: 8, “The wind blows where it will”.
SMcC When the Lord says in John 6: 44, “No one can come to me except the Father who has sent me draw him”, does He have in mind new birth?
JT I think it is more, because it is the Lord personally set before the soul, which is by the gospel. So not only is there the work of the Comforter, but the drawing power of the Father to Christ; hence the three divine Persons are always operating in the salvation of one soul.
WL I was wondering how John 16: 13 would fit into this. It says, “But when he is come, the Spirit of truth, he shall guide you into all the truth: for he shall not speak from himself; but whatsoever he shall hear he shall speak”.
JT The Lord is there presenting the Spirit as subject, but He is God, let us never forget that! We cannot define the Trinity. It is the Persons in relation to each other, but God is worshipped. If God is operating we cannot say the Spirit is not operating; it is by the Spirit He is doing things.
JW What is the force of the scripture, “My Father worketh hitherto and I work” (John 5: 17)?
JT The Father is operating; I suppose that carries you back to Genesis. And now the Son having come He is working by Himself, as it were. We must always consider the context. We are reminded that divine Persons work severally, but when we have God we cannot say the Spirit is not there.
JW It does not mean the Father has ceased to work?
JT Not at all. “I work”, the Lord says, but there is no thought of the Father ceasing to work.
AAT In this chapter do we see the second key of the kingdom?
JT That is right; the first key is mentioned as used in chapter two. This is a very important transaction. There are primarily unspoken transactions evidenced in Cornelius’ state and in the state of his house. But now the Holy Spirit comes in as a superintending Person and says to Peter, “Behold, three men seek thee; but rise up, go down, and go with them, nothing doubting, because I have sent them”, verses 19, 20. The “I” is emphatic. We are in the presence of an operating Person, a superintending Person, but in conditions that He has already effected without announcing Himself.
HB Would you say how this direct speaking [p. 340] compares with the ecstasy and vision in the early part of the chapter?
JT What things were happening! One might have said, Surely God is not in this place. But if you look at this account of Cornelius you see that God is in this place. He is not showing Himself, but the effect of His presence is there. Who effected this ecstasy in Peter? It is all preparatory. We are in the presence of one of the greatest operations of God, the incoming of the gentiles. And see what material He had! He is operating there also. So the Spirit comes in at the proper time and commands and directs Peter, saying, “I have sent them”. Where did they come from? They came from Cornelius, but the Spirit says that He sent them.
JD Do you think it is possible to discern in our inward souls which divine Person is speaking and directing? Can you discern between the Lord’s voice and the Spirit’s voice and the Father’s voice?
JT Very little can be said. The Spirit is the great mediatorial Operator here below. We have to allow for other things, especially the mutually relative positions the Persons have taken in the economy. The Father and the Son come down in the Spirit. He is the great subjective Operator down here, but He is more than that: He is the superintending Operator representing God, and yet Himself God. There is, however, much said in Scripture to indicate that in divine speakings the Person who speaks is to be apprehended by the hearer or hearers.
FKC Is it not remarkable the amount of detail in connection with this matter? It is said in our chapter that Cornelius “saw plainly in a vision, about the ninth hour of the day”, verse 3. Then you get Peter lodging “with a certain Simon, a tanner, whose house is by the sea”, verse 6; and then you get him going to the roof top at the sixth hour of the day. Do you think the Spirit works in connection with such details?
JT Surely; the Spirit says, “I have sent them”. Externally Cornelius had sent them, showing the Spirit is working in an unseen way up to this point. Well, the thought for us is, are we cognisant of what we are connected with in the realm of the Spirit? He does not always show Himself but you feel His power. The whole scene here indicates it; He says, “I have sent them”. You would not have thought it from the facts related. What do we know of this power? What has happened today? Can I trace what part the Holy Spirit has had in my history today?
JWD Do you mean that you may be speaking to God or to Christ as to matters, but the outstanding way the Spirit has His place in the economy is before you?
JT Quite so. The Father and the Son are presented as the Persons to be addressed in the economy. At the same time the Spirit is here operating every day, and at night in the wakeful hours you can go back and weigh what has happened in your history. Our histories are recorded in heaven, and why not keep them ourselves? Why not keep our own histories? Paul says, “forgetting the things behind, and stretching out to the things before” (Philippians 3: 13), but he does not mean us to forget what the Holy Spirit has done in us. It is a question of going back with God and seeing what your history has been.
AEH This is a remarkable thing: a man is upstairs and he gets word that there are three men at the door. That is quite definite. Are you suggesting that if we are spiritually sensitive enough we shall be ready to be used in such a transaction, as is in mind here?
JT Yes. Peter is presented to us here as a man available in this great matter. He was already designated as to it. The Lord says, “I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of the heavens” (Matthew 16: 19); they are given to him dispensationally. He had said, “thou art Peter” (verse 18), meaning he could be regarded as a [p. 342] spiritual individual; the thought was that he should be that concretely. In Matthew the Lord says, “thou art Peter”, but in John 1: 42, He says, “thou shalt be called Cephas (which interpreted is stone)”. He would be called that when the characteristic showed itself, but in the Lord’s mind he was that from the outset. He is a great spiritual product, the leading man on earth at that time and capable of being used in this way. So we are on spiritual ground now and it relates to the spiritual forefathers of the gentiles. God is saying, I am having to do with the gentiles all the time — and here is the great product of His work. He is going to take up this man to show how the keys were used by Peter; therefore what is subsequent to this brings out what a great man Peter was. It is in his own account in chapter eleven that you see how thoroughly he had come to understand it. He did not baptise these brethren, “he commanded them to be baptised in the name of the Lord;” not to it, but in it, as if the Holy Spirit had come down. They are to be baptised in the name of the Lord, which involves the power of it.
JVan Do we not see obedience throughout this chapter? The Spirit is given to them that obey God.
JT It is an illustration of that. Peter himself had said, “and the Holy Spirit also, which God has given to those that obey Him” (Acts 5: 32). These did so in a remarkable way!
LK What would be the character of the Spirit’s special operations? It speaks of a “vision” with Cornelius, and of an “ecstasy” with Peter. What would the vision infer today?
JT Of course we cannot say very much as from experience, but it is clear that Cornelius was ready for the vision. He was not greatly perturbed, he did not fall down like Daniel. It says of him, “Cornelius ... saw plainly in a vision, about the ninth hour of the day, an angel of God coming unto him, and saying to him,
[p. 343] Cornelius. But he, having fixed his eyes upon him, and become full of fear, said, What is it, Lord? And he said to him, Thy prayers and thine alms have gone up for a memorial before God” (verses 1 - 4). So he is not rendered in any way helpless, he does what is just right. This is an arranged matter. When God prepared the heavens, it says wisdom was there, Proverbs 8: 27. God has His man, He knows His man and the vision does not overwhelm him. It is right he should fear, but he is in a suitable state to take the words in and to act on them. Then the next thing is that Peter went up on the house to pray and he was hungry; “But as they were making ready an ecstasy came upon him: and he beholds the heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending, as a great sheet, bound by the four corners and let down to the earth; in which were all the quadrupeds and creeping things of the earth, and the fowls of the heaven. And there was a voice to him, Rise, Peter, slay and eat” (verses 10 - 13). That is, as being shown everything he also is prepared. Cornelius had been called by name, but now it is Peter, so that all the persons are suitable for this great matter. Then this great sheet is seen coming down — what a wonderful thing! It happened three times. It is a determined matter in heaven and on earth, everything is in order so that this wonderful event should happen. The sheet comes down and goes up, comes down and goes up, comes down and goes up, and stays. Then this doubting of Peter’s — what does it mean? There was need that this vision should be pondered over. Then the Holy Spirit comes and says something to Peter.
JTJr These two men are going on the principle of what is individual. Each of them is alone in this exercise.
JT That is the way it stands. The two outstanding characters are Cornelius and Peter; both are being prepared for their part in this remarkable administrative [p. 344] transaction. Peter had a great place, his very name shows this — it is not Simon, but “Rise, Peter;” it is a spiritual name. So whatever agency and details there are, you can see it is all a divine matter; while the Holy Spirit comes in here openly, He has been in it all the time really. He is the great Operator here below, but now He is showing Himself.
SMcC In connection with the thought of not addressing the Holy Spirit objectively in prayer, do you think we can have communion with the Spirit secretly, individually?
JT I think so. I think that is implied in “the communion of the Holy Spirit” (2 Corinthians 13: 14). What is impressing me in all this is that, being in His realm professedly, we are in the realm of divine Persons; and it is stressed here what preparation there was for this great transaction. Well, now, to instance these meetings, what preparation has there been for them? God is operating in a wide field. Each of us, especially if we have to take part in them, can detect what has happened in his own soul in view of these meetings. Before such an occasion we are to be in relation to heaven day and night; not simply when we are here, but in view of being here.
AT Would the four days in verse 30 imply preparation? Cornelius says, “Four days ago I had been fasting”. Then at the end of the chapter is there the thought of the continuing activity of the Spirit when “they begged him to stay some days” (verse 48) — no definite period?
JT All that raises considerable questioning in your mind: what doubtfulness there was, and what of these agencies used, and how are days and hours taken account of? We are in time yet and God was the first to use time. He made it and He was the first to use it. We are reminded how we are to use time and what happens in time, what happens in each one in his own [p. 345] history. That is a most important matter, that you follow up your own history and go back to the beginning of it. Then I suppose the end of the chapter would mean that Peter had acquired a great place in the house of this man. In the previous chapter it is said, “And it came to pass that he remained many days in Joppa with a certain Simon, a tanner”, verse 43. Now he is begged to remain here. It would show the servant had acquired a great place, which was to be expected. If God is using a brother it is rare that those he serves do not beg him to stay.
JRH I would like help as to the way the Holy Spirit is often mentioned with the article left out. For instance in verse 38, “How God anointed him with [the] Holy Spirit and with power;” then in verse 44, “While Peter was yet speaking these words the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were hearing the word”. What distinction is there?
JT The article is much more used in the original than appears in the Authorised Version. Mr. Darby’s version usually indicates where it is left out. Its presence very often simply indicates a distinguished Person; but when it is left out before the title Lord or Spirit, this indicates what is characteristic rather than what is personal. (J.N.D., as to the Greek article, says, ‘whenever a word, or combination of words, presents the object about which the mind is occupied, as objectively present to it, the article is used; whenever a word is merely characteristic, it is not’, Collected Writings, Volume 13, page 46). So that here where it is left out it means that the anointing was the point. But in verse 44 the Holy Spirit as a divine Person is in mind; it is not God anointing them there, but the Spirit falling on them; the Spirit is stressed. “While Peter was yet speaking these words the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were hearing the word;” our minds are directed to the Person of the Spirit, it is His action. He has been [p. 346] watching the whole proceeding. The word anointing is not the point, it is that He “fell upon all those who were hearing the word”, as the father fell on the prodigal. It is an energetic action which indicates His interest in them.
RWS Chapter 2 speaks of Him as being poured out; in chapter 8 of His being received; but here He is falling. Is this the most emphatic way of the Spirit Himself coming?
JT I think it is. The Spirit is stressed here peculiarly; the chapter says, He “fell upon all those who were hearing the word”, showing their state is in mind. Then it is said, “And the faithful of the circumcision were astonished, as many as came with Peter, that upon the nations also the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out; for they heard them speaking with tongues and magnifying God”, verses 45, 46. That is to say, the result is much the same as at Pentecost; our position in the economy is on much the same level as that of the Jews; the work of God here is similar to when they were brought in.
JRH Chapter 11: 15 shows that the same expression is used, “And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them even as upon us also at the beginning”.
JT Quite so; it is God honouring this great position that we are in. We are not a subordinate element; the full idea is among the gentiles.
VC Was it the action of the Spirit in two cases, those of Cornelius and the eunuch, but the direct action of the Lord in another case, that of Saul of Tarsus?
JT It was the Lord; quite so. There is nothing said of the Spirit in Paul’s case until Ananias says to him, “And now why lingerest thou? Arise and get baptised, and have thy sins washed away, calling on his name” (Acts 22: 16). It is in Paul’s second account of his conversion. It was in that connection that he received [p. 347] the Spirit. The Lord would say, This is My man! not Peter, but Paul.
RA Thinking of Cornelius as an initial work of the Spirit and working around that, Ecclesiastes 1: 6 says: “The wind goeth towards the south, and turneth about towards the north: it turneth about continually, and the wind returneth again to its circuits”. Is that the way the Spirit works?
JT There is, no doubt, a link there with our chapter. This is one of the most important transactions in the Scriptures! Certainly the wind turned around here. Philip was in mind too, he came up in that direction; and a little while afterwards Paul was there for two years, a prisoner. It was a very important point.
V.de Z. You were speaking about the energetic action of the Spirit, as though the Spirit was waiting for Peter’s words in verse 43, “To him all the prophets bear witness that every one that believes on him will receive through his name remission of sins”. It was a right moment, was it not?
JT Yes, every one.
JH Does the state of the subject have to do with the approach of divine Persons toward him? I was thinking of Paul, his state required the assertion of authority, to bring about subjection; whereas the eunuch and Cornelius seem to have been subject and teachable persons.
JT Yes; and then Paul’s distinctive place: he was not first thought of just then, he was in the mind of God, separated from his birth for the service to which he was called. A light from heaven shone round about him! Did ever another man have such distinction in that sense, save the Lord Himself, who was addressed from the opened heaven at the Jordan?
JTJr When Paul went up to Jerusalem and spent fifteen days with Peter, they would, no doubt, discuss this great matter of the pouring out of the Spirit.
JT Fifteen days — two Lord’s days, I suppose. “I went up to Jerusalem to make acquaintance with Peter, and I remained with him fifteen days” (Galatians 1: 18).
AAT I notice Peter speaks of God definitely at the end, “who indeed was I to be able to forbid God?” verse 17. We were speaking of the Spirit having fallen upon them, but Peter brings God in.
JT It is God. The Holy Spirit is God down here. It is God’s own action, but it is presented as the Spirit’s action. It is a precious thought that we may be in touch with the Spirit in a personal way. “The Spirit itself bears witness with our spirit, that we are children of God” (Romans 8: 16). That is something we are to understand.
AEH Is there not something to be specially noted in what these people heard? Mr. Darby gives a note in regard to “word” and “words” in verse 44; they are different. Peter was speaking certain “words”, but they were hearing the “word”. Does it not refer to the inwards of God, of which you were speaking earlier.
JT Yes. The first one in verse 44 is rhema, which is also used in relation to the framing of the worlds: “By faith we apprehend that the worlds were framed by the word of God” (Hebrews 11: 3). The other is logos, which means not only what is said, but what is in the mind of the speaker as to the matter spoken of.
NB “But the Spirit speaks expressly, that in latter times some shall apostatise from the faith, giving their mind to deceiving spirits and teachings of demons speaking lies in hypocrisy” (1 Timothy 4: 1, 2). How would the Spirit speak thus?
JT There it would be a prophetic communication to Paul himself. We can hardly look for a word in such a definite prophetic sense now. It is similar to what is said in Revelation, chapters 2 and 3: “He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the assemblies”. But this is an express word.