THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK
[p. 220] THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK
John 20: 1 - 19; Acts 20: 7 - 12
JT It may be observed that the synoptic gospels, according to the better translation, refer to the Sabbath in regard to the resurrection of the Lord; whereas John keeps to the first day of the week, and refers to it twice; having in view the spiritual or inward bearing of the resurrection; he is not occupied with outward form. The first day of the week may be connected with that side of the truth, leading in to God, and the counsels of God. The other writers have in view the ways of God — i.e., the continuance of the testimony carried over from the Old Testament — the assembly occupying the position for the moment.
The Lord’s supper stands in that relation, representing the public side, and the first day of the week the private side. It is the beginning of everything for us, and it does not refer to past testimony, for the assembly was not the conclusion of a previous testimony. The sabbath, according to the synoptic gospels, would indicate that it is linked on with what went before; but John had in view the inward bearing of things, consequently we have an outlet from time limitations and place, into what is wholly spiritual.
SJBC The first day of the week, then, would suggest the dawn of a new order of things in christianity?
JT I thought so; nothing precedes it. The third day, John 2, was the completion of the work of God, but the first day is a wholly new beginning morally, nothing precedes it. In John 20 “the doors were shut” — you will observe it is in the plural. John is not dealing with the public collective assembly, but with the state of our souls; so the doors were shut — [p. 221] there were many; and it is a matter to which each has to attend spiritually.
EM I do not quite apprehend your thought in connection with John’s reference to the Lord’s day.
JT Well, I think the Lord’s day fits in with public testimony. John refers to it in Revelation, where he is looking towards the resumption of God’s dealings with the earth. What one would like to get at is the spiritual progress of saints. Many have part in the public thing, and so far so good, but how many have access to God? How much do we know of the inward bearing of the first day of the week?
When the children of Israel came into the land they were to cut down a sheaf of the first fruits of their harvest, and offer it to Jehovah, and they were to begin to count from the morning after the sabbath, seven weeks or fifty days; Leviticus 23. There is a distinction, I think, between a public beginning — in a sense that is the passover — and the spiritual or inward beginning. The passover was to be the beginning of months to them. The people of God began the passover in Egypt; but when they came into the land the sheaf of first-fruits was cut down and offered to Jehovah, and then they began to count. Now it is in that counting, I think, that believers begin to make spiritual progress. What I am publicly in the passover is one thing, and what I am before God in the growth of my soul is quite another.
HH In John 3 it speaks of being born anew, has that anything to do with it?
JT That is where one’s spiritual history begins from the divine side; it is God’s sovereign work. The fifty days refer to the believer’s exercise and growth in relation to Christ risen. The passover is Christ subjected to the judgment of God publicly. That is where I begin; and that is public. John 6 is the Son of man coming down and giving His flesh for the life [p. 222] of the world.
SJBC I do not quite understand what you mean by “public”.
JT The blood was sprinkled on the door outside; the Israelites went out in the sight of all the Egyptians; it was a public matter; and a household matter too.
SJBC How would the passover work out with one’s public testimony?
JT Well, it is the believer’s appreciation of Christ as dying for sin: “our passover. Christ, has been sacrificed; so that let us celebrate the feast, not with old leaven, nor with leaven of malice and wickedness, but with unleavened bread of sincerity and truth”, 1 Corinthians 5. But then positive spiritual history is when we apprehend not only Christ as subject to the judgment of God, but risen from the dead.
Ques They had to count seven weeks or fifty days: what is the distinction?
JT Well, I think the days are individual spiritual history. In Revelation prophetic time is divided into years and weeks and days. If you measure your life in years you have the aggregate, but, if you take it in days you have detail; they are many, and mean much in the way of experience; for every day brought its own sorrow and its own joy or suffering. But then in those days the Holy Spirit operates, and that is when history is made; and that is what is more private. These fifty days come in between the resurrection and the ascension of Christ. “The world sees me no longer, but ye see me”, John 14. We are identified publicly with the Lord in His death. The world saw Him die, but did not see Him rise, or afterwards; “but ye see me; because I live ye also shall live”. Now it is in that way you make spiritual progress.
PSP What do the weeks signify?
JT I think they indicate collective or assembly history. We make collective progress. The week [p. 223] determines in aggregate what progress each has made for God; and the breaking of bread, being connected with the first day of the week, may be said to be the inwardness of it; it leads in to God.
JM So whilst the breaking of bread is in itself a material thing, yet by it we make definite progress in our affections.
JT Yes. Of course, as to terms, the Lord’s supper is the same thing; but it fits in, I think, with the public testimony. “As often as ye shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye announce the death of the Lord, until he come”, 1 Corinthians 11. A very solemn testimony to the world! It is the death of the Lord we are showing. The Lord’s supper is the public collective side.
JM The Corinthians had not been affected inwardly.
JT It is what is inward that gives tone and body to our testimony. There are many who have part in what is outward, and one would not make little of that, but what gives weight to our part publicly is the measure in which we know the breaking of bread in its inward bearing. In Acts 20, when they were assembled together to break bread on the first day of the week. Paul discoursed to them, about to depart on the morrow, and he prolonged the discourse until midnight; for on that occasion it was not a question of the assembly as at Corinth, as in Acts 18, but the assembly at Ephesus, as the repository of the whole counsel of God; there the door is opened up into eternity. As has frequently been remarked, the breaking of bread suggests the Lord being brought in. It is not the eating of it exactly; we come together to break bread, and that is what brings the Lord in. The breaking of bread is connected with the first day of the week. Primarily the breaking of the bread was the Lord’s act. He did it first, and it is in the breaking of it that you have [p. 224] the memorial; but the eating of the bread is our fellowship and is public testimony.
PSP You connect the eating with the Lord’s supper?
JT Yes; to be a supper it must be eaten. But the breaking of bread refers to what He did, and has the inward thing in view. The coming of the Lord is in view. We have an example in Acts 20 where they were assembled to break bread. There was a remarkable group of brothers present on that occasion, including Paul himself; he indeed it was who broke the bread, and doubtless he had a greater measure of the inwardness of it than anyone else in that company. It was there for them all, but the measure of each one determined how far he entered into it.
ENH By “inwardness” do you mean spirituality?
JT Well, yes; you see the bearing of the thing. Paul got up and then discoursed; now that discourse is intended to convey to us the counsel of God.
ENH Things “eye has not seen, and ear not heard, and which have not come into man’s heart, which God has prepared for them that love him, but God has revealed to us by his Spirit”, 1 Corinthians 2: 9, 10. God has wrought in our souls, and so we are enabled to enter into that which Paul opened out.
JT Paul’s discourse refers to what is disclosed of the things of God; the depths of God opened out, and thus what there is to be entered into.
JM It indicates how great was the measure in which the apostle himself entered into the meaning of the Lord’s words to His disciples when introducing the Lord’s supper.
JT The measure of my entering in is the measure of my stature; and there are many who do not enter. The entering in depends upon stature. “Through him we have both access by one Spirit to the Father”. Ephesians 2: 18. “Through him” — that is [p. 225] available to every Christian — but then he adds, “by one Spirit”. If I have not the Spirit I do not enter at all; it is simply a matter of light to me — precious light — but that is all.
JH So the entering in is connected with the first day?
JT Yes; the depths of God are disclosed to us, the things that God has prepared for them that love Him. It is by the Spirit of God we enter in.
EM You said if one had not the Spirit it is a matter of light?
JT Well, that is all it is.
EM I did not think you could have light apart from the Spirit.
JT Oh, yes, indeed it is to enlightened persons the Spirit is given.
Ques Is it your thought that we must have state for it?
JT We must have spiritual stature. This is a matter that ought to be looked into, because while many have part in the outward thing, it is by the Spirit we have access to the Father; through Christ we have access by one Spirit to the Father.
HH One sometimes thinks of Paul in this connection as having been in the third heaven.
JT You can understand if you sat down beside Paul you would be conscious that there was something in him beyond what you had attained to; no doubt his presence would help you; there was a man who himself had been in the third heaven. Now what would it be to him as the bread was broken! And others present on that occasion are mentioned — Timotheus, Aristarchus, Secundus and Gaius, Tychicus and Trophimus, etc., it was a remarkable gathering representing two continents. But what would doubtless be apparent would be the spiritual growth that was there.
SJBC It has been a difficulty to me, because [p. 226] it appears that they must have been together five or six hours before they actually partook of the supper; yet it was to break bread they came together.
JT But it was a special occasion; they came together to break bread, and we hear no more of that; but then Paul discoursed, and he prolonged the discourse till midnight. There is surely something very significant in that. Why should he be discoursing at the Lord’s supper? I think the spiritual meaning of it is that he is opening up to them the mind of God; he is presenting the inward side of the truth, the counsel of God. We are not told what he said, but we have to put things together. We see how Paul’s ministry is the light that governs us at the breaking of bread — heavenly light.
Rem In Acts 20: 27, he says, “I have not shrunk from announcing to you all the counsel of God”.
JT Yes; and as some of us were remarking elsewhere, the chapter begins with Paul embracing the Ephesian saints, and at the end of the chapter they embrace him; between these two embraces you have this account of what happened at Troas, indicating, I think, how things are to be in the assembly. Now when the Ephesian assembly (that is Paul’s assembly) is set up, it is set up in the light of the whole counsel of God, and the mutual embracing comes in in this connection. There was “first love” there, and evidently intelligence as to the counsels of God. So that the chapter presents the full height of christianity. And the first day of the week being introduced enables us to understand how matters now are: this is what we have. Paul discourses till midnight, then after the breaking of bread he talked to them a long while, even till break of day.
Ques Why should he discourse only till midnight, and not till the break of day?
JT I think the discourse is what continued on, to the revival of Eutychus, i.e. the revival of the [p. 227] assembly, after the decline; the scene has really a prophetic bearing. Paul’s discourse marked its earlier history, but as soon as the truth of the assembly was revived I think conversational ministry became very prominent. Paul conversed with them: this marks what we have now.
HD'AC It is more brotherly.
JT The conversational method would afford an opportunity for enquiries and mutual interchange of thought.
Ques In speaking of entering into the deep things of God in relation to the breaking of bread, is it possible for some to go over to that side of things and not others?
JT Going over is dependent on state, those who do not doubtless receive some benefit from those who do, because there is an influence which would lead to the desire to enter more fully into those things. The going over, however, is according to the measure in which we have grown spiritually.
SJBC It is good to remember that we can all start together. We commence as babes; the young men and fathers may get on further, and perhaps leave some behind, but all start together, so that the meeting can commence very simply.
JT Yes. The two disciples started together, but “the other disciple did outrun Peter”. John 20. The “other disciple” was the one whom Jesus loved.
Ques Would it be right to say that the remembrance does not take place until the bread is broken?
JT Well, that is the way Scripture indicates it. “This do in remembrance of me”. It gives the Lord His place. But then it is a question how far I go after that. He is available for everyone of us, but it is by the Spirit. “Through him we have both access by one Spirit to the Father”. Ephesians 2: 18.
PSP Should not each time we come together [p. 228] to break bread become an occasion for a fresh disclosure to our hearts?
JT Well, I think there is a manifestation; it is not only that He comes; there is some new feature.
FW I do not think you can take people by the hand and lead them into the land of Canaan. If you desire that they should not be left behind the thing is to enlighten them, and so promote exercise. It seems to me that the Lord is at the present time bringing about in the saints such affection for each other that we shall all want to go up together when the moment for the rapture arrives. The Ephesian truth is that God “has raised us up together, and has made us sit down together in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus”, chapter 2: 6.
JT That is an excellent thought; you desire that no one should be left behind. Perhaps there is very little of the familiarity that belongs to love among the people of God. To begin with, you can never love a person if you do not respect him. Some of us were speaking about the cup — all the company drink out of it. Mark 14: 23. Now it might be there are some with whom, under ordinary circumstances, we should not think of drinking out of the same vessel; but the Lord intended that the same vessel should be drunk into by all; they would respect one another so that there would be no sense of unfitness or inferiority. Drinking into the one vessel would suggest the familiarity of love, and I believe that Paul’s embrace is another feature of it. Acts 20 is a chapter of holy love, it is a chapter of embraces, of the familiarity and the expression of love. The cup in the Lord’s supper is intended to bring that about, and John had this in view. I believe John synchronizes with Acts 20. Having it in view he tells us that the Lord breathed into the disciples — that is familiarity — and He says, “Receive the Holy Spirit” and “as the Father sent me forth, I also send you”. Now, that is the condition we want brought about. The Lord is aiming to bring about the conditions of love. Canticles is a wonderful book as teaching us love in that way. As our brother was remarking, we do not want to leave anybody behind. If you are going in, you want all to go in. The embrace greatly helps, practically.
EM It would help to recognize that God has given us the same Spirit.
JT I have been noticing that in Acts 8, Acts 9 and Acts 10, where the three families of Noah are set together, the coloured man is converted first. That, I think, is very striking. God would show us that His thoughts are not our thoughts. He cuts across the thoughts of men in that scripture, in taking up the Ethiopian before the Jew or the Gentile.
Rem Paul connects the collection with the first day of the week.
JT That dignifies the collection. It is a good thing to mention, because one feels how very limited we are in our gifts. How small the collection is at times! I think the first day of the week involves spiritual sentiment, it involves the connections of that day, the memories that are aroused in the soul; what the Lord was; what came out then in the resurrection of Christ; what it disclosed on the part of God; what infinite wealth is brought out, and what love expressed!
SJBC The box is a practical evidence of how the love which is set forth in the Lord’s supper has really affected us.
JT Yes, I think that is right. So that the brothers who carry the bounty of the saints are messengers of the assembly; they were Christ’s glory, 2 Corinthians 8: 23. It is the shining out of love in giving: “it is more blessed to give than to receive”.
SJBC Yes, but the glory is Christ’s.
JT Well, the glory is the shining out of His nature: “Ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that for your sakes he, being rich, became poor, in order that ye by his poverty might be enriched”, 2 Corinthians 8: 9.
FI Does the sustainment of the first day of the week carry you in all your movements until next Lord’s day? Having tasted it I am affected for the whole week?
JT Yes. I am sure that is so.
HD'AC On the first day of the week you are moved to give to the Lord.
JT At Antioch we read that those who were “well off” gave.
SJBC At Corinth they made a distinction between the rich and the poor, and in doing so they were wrong.
JT The Holy Spirit indicates that those who are well off may do something by themselves.
Ques Is giving through the box a greater thing than giving individually?
JT I think it is. But certain ones at Antioch determined to give separately, and they did it; they sent it to the elders by the hand of Barnabas and Saul. Acts 11: 30. In 1 Corinthians 16 the apostle has the assembly in view, so that every one is brought into it. He says, “On the first of the week let each of you put by at home, laying up in whatever degree he may have prospered, that there be no collections when I come”, 1 Corinthians 16: 2. In fact I think the whole family is brought into it, because it is something that is done at home before wife and children.
SJBC It would not follow, of course, that everything laid by for the Lord at home would be put into the box.
JT It was for a special purpose.
Ques Did those who were well off at Antioch give as a company and send it up?
JT [p. 231] Yes, it was sent up in a collective way.
Rem It was sent from those who were well off, not put through the box so to speak. So that is an instance of a number of people giving directly, who were in a position to do so.
JT Yes. But then the letter to Corinthians is, I think, to bring about assembly giving, so that the messengers were messengers of the assemblies.
Ques What would the contributions that go into the box be used for?
JT Well, 1 Timothy 5 helps. An aged person is to be a charge on the assembly, for example. I think the poor come first; Paul was enjoined to remember the poor, so I think the first claim on us is actual need.
WM Perhaps you had something further to add to what you said about giving to the Lord?
HD'AC We call Him to mind, we have been thinking of Him and His love. He has given Himself; now what are we going to give? I think the Lord’s supper exercises us very much as to how we respond in regard to what we have in this world.