ASSEMBLY MATERIAL
ASSEMBLY MATERIAL
Matthew 16: 13 - 18; Ephesians 3: 20, 21
JT It seems right and needful that the brethren should have the assembly under consideration as a great feature on earth now, taking the place of Israel or Jerusalem, the centre of God’s operations of old; and also because of the imminence of the Lord’s coming and the great place it is to have in the future. Its present place and function command the first place next to the Person of our Lord Himself, so that it comes in in Matthew as the Person of our Lord is brought into evidence, as that which He has, which He calls His assembly. Ephesians gives us the greatest view of it, both in regard to its present place and function, and also its future place and function. 1 Corinthians gives us the assembly as God’s assembly here, especially locally, but the Lord speaks of it as His in Matthew, as His Person is confessed — for the place and service of the assembly can only be understood as the greatness of Christ is understood, whose it is.
WTE What is the idea in the word “assembly”?
JT It is persons “called out”; the word was well understood from the outset, even from Exodus. The Lord’s use of it in this passage involves a building: a thought which perhaps did not attach to it before. We read of “the assembly in the wilderness” and we read of “the whole assembly of Israel”, but the idea of building, and building by Him, gives the term a dignity that it did not have before.
WTE Does it mean an assembly of persons, whether assembled or not?
JT Well, there must be the concrete idea of it, and that is when the saints are assembled, but the building of it involves more than so many persons [p. 450] gathered under certain principles. The idea of building has to be understood.
HFN You have referred to the thought of the assembly as suggested in Exodus 12, and then the thought of the assembly in the wilderness, but how would you link this up typically in the Old Testament in connection with the thought of building? for the idea of building comes out very early.
JT Well, it does. I thought the idea of building attached to it here gives it a distinctiveness that perhaps we do not get earlier in the thought of the assembly. Of course there was building of old, the building of the temple, for instance, which would in some sense correspond; but the word assembly has more than the idea of temple in mind, it is something even more distinctive than the idea of house — it involves intelligence; as the Lord speaks of it here, it also has a military feature.
Ques Is it indicated in the expression about Eve, that He builded her?
JT He builded a woman — the idea of building is there, but it is a woman, whereas we have the word “assembly” here.
Ques Would you say it is all on the ground of resurrection, of what is spiritual?
JT Yes, the Lord had that in mind, but the word “assembly” has to be borne in mind too, something that He has, and the full instruction as to that is, I think, in Ephesians.
Ques Is that why the apostle prays in Ephesians that the eyes of their hearts might be enlightened that they might be intelligent as to it?
JT Quite so. First as to the hope of God’s calling and then “the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints”, and finally “the surpassing greatness of his power ... according to the working of the might of his strength, in which he wrought in the Christ in raising him from among the dead, and [p. 451] he set him down at his right hand in the heavenlies, above every principality, and authority ... and every name named ... and gave him to be head over all things to the assembly”. That shows us what a place it has — a marvellous place! In that passage there is the full thought of God’s power acting to set Christ in heaven as Head over all things to the assembly.
Ques Is it a primary thought, not contingent on the defection of Israel?
JT It is a primary thought. It shows how the counsel of God worked out in connection with the defection of Israel; that is, Rebekah comes into Sarah’s tent: there is no word of a wife for Isaac till Sarah dies.
Rem So the assembly takes the place of Israel?
JT It does, and to understand the type as in Rebekah, we have to see it in Ephesians. You get it in every chapter in Ephesians.
WTE Psalm 22 says, “In the midst of the congregation will I praise thee”, verse 22: but when that is quoted in Hebrews, it is “in the midst of the assembly”, chapter 2: 12. Why is the word changed?
JT Well, it is the Holy Spirit employing the Old Testament in relation to the present time: we have many such instances of the use of Old Testament scriptures in the New: “congregation” in Psalm 22 (Septuagint) is the same word as for “assembly” here.
WTE Does the word “assembly” mean more than a congregation?
JT It does. We have two words in Exodus 12: 6, the one is “assembly” which is ‘a moral whole’, even though every person regarded as of it, may not be present; whereas the idea of a congregation is every person in it, meaning that every one is responsible. The word “assembly” there, involves that you have a means of procedure although every [p. 452] person may not be there; there is responsibility attaching to it.
HFN We should be glad to get a little help in regard to what you were suggesting as to the peculiar setting of the assembly in Matthew.
JT One thought, I think, is, Who are we saying the Lord is? Because if we take up the idea of the assembly, it must be prefaced by what He says in verse 15, “Whom say ye that I am?” The assembly will not have its right place in our minds, unless we apprehend the Person who builds it; He is greater than the assembly. One great feature at the present moment is the greatness of the Person who builds. He is greater than what He builds, but then the assembly is great too. Much may be said or written about the assembly without understanding what prefaces it; the question is, what are we saying about the Person, who is He? It is not simply who I believe He is, but who am I saying that He is?
Ques Would it give a sense of dignity and character if we had that in our souls?
JT It would. The Lord has graciously brought the subject of His Person to our attention, and the brethren are saying some things, and I think He is pleased with what they are saying. We can see the effort of the enemy to rob us of what is being said; and to becloud the truth of the Lord’s Person in our souls.
WTE “The Son of the living God” — would that not suggest how the Lord has been revealed in relation to the thought of life, so that we apprehend Him thus also?
JT Yes. He speaks of Himself as the Living One, Revelation 1: 17. The bearing of such expressions generally is against Jewish feeling and influence which tend to deadness, to mere routine; the assembly is in a living setting — “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God”.
HFN How does this go with what John says, “(we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father), full of grace and truth”, John 1: 14. Would the two confessions give their stamp respectively to the gospel in which they appear?
JT John speaks of what the disciples “contemplated”, not exactly a revelation. I apprehend it was how they saw Him, as illustrated in the various occasions in which it is recorded that they saw Him with His Father; as for instance, in John 17, and Luke 11. The Lord would be with His Father alone, whether addressing Him in prayer or otherwise, and I think that is what John alludes to. Having the Holy Spirit they could look back to what they had seen, and speak of it in that way — “an only-begotten with a Father”. What reciprocal affections were there! Matthew 16 alludes to the Lord’s Person as He actually was then — “the Christ, the Son of the living God”. Operations are in view in this, as I understand it; “the Christ” is the One who does things for God; and “the Son of the living God” is His relation with Him, the dignity of it, involving a living state of things. Operations are in view, which we should expect in Matthew; but in John’s gospel, what they saw would be something; that will exist eternally — the relation of a Father to a Son; not so much what the Son will do, as what His relations are — what the reciprocal affections are between the Persons. Here it is operations, and the Lord immediately says, “I will build my assembly”: there was something in the revelation in Peter’s soul that would be stable, that, as apprehended in our souls, would support the great super-structure of God, that is the assembly.
Rem I got the impression from you that Christ built up on this confession in the soul.
JT [p. 454] That is the thought, it is not a mere theory, it is something in men’s souls.
Ques The expression, “This is my beloved Son”, had not been understood but is it now made known to Peter?
JT Yes, it was what the Lord was actually there, so that He is apprehended in this way as Man. It is not what He is in Deity viewed abstractly.
Rem Peter had never seen Him that way before, but now it is made known to him.
JT It is in his soul, it is not merely objective, the thing is there. There is that on which the Lord can build, which is not mere theory but something in men’s souls; it is not the Lord who reveals it to Peter, but the Father.
Ques Why does the Lord allude to Himself as Son of man?
JT That usually alludes to His breaking the covenant with Israel; He only employs the term in the gospels. It alludes to the abrogation of the relations with Israel, that He is on wider ground: He is at Caesarea Philippi, which is at the extreme north of the land bordering on the nations.
Ques Would that involve His rejection?
JT It does, that is implied in it, and that He is taking up wider ground which we see in Ephesians, the gentiles brought in.
HFN Is there no true material for the assembly apart from this? that until the Lord is confessed in this way we cannot be an intelligent part of it.
JT That is the point. You cannot be “Peter” without the confession. “Thou art Peter”. Therefore it is a question of what we are saying. If one were to investigate, he would find out what every one of us is saying about Jesus. If we are to be “Peters” there must be confession as to His Person.
Ques Are we to gather from the Lord’s added [p. 455] words as to the gates of hell not prevailing, that the assembly is the subject of attack?
JT It is, and it has been from the very outset; but the gates of hades do not prevail against it. It is not only Satan personally, but the whole satanic system — the gates. The features of testimony are seen in the assembly; it is the pillar and base of the truth. God works out all His thoughts in the assembly, as it says in Ephesians 3: 10 — the “all-various wisdom of God”. We can see how Satan would marshal all his forces against it.
Ques Would the expression “the assembly” here come in direct contrast with what we get in Psalm 22, “the assembly of the wicked?”
JT Yes. When Sennacherib came up against Israel the word is, “The virgin, the daughter of Zion ... hath shaken her head at thee”; she was unconquerable, that is the idea; the assembly cannot be overthrown — even in remnant times.
Ques Is there any relation between this and what the Lord says when He chooses the twelve — “First Peter?”
JT “First Peter” would mean that that was his place among the twelve; but this Peter is not presented as having precedence over other Peters or stones. He represents the material here. Every one who comes to make the confession he did is material for the assembly.
Ques Would there be an exercise of soul to reach this? I was thinking of Zacchaeus who got to the top of the tree to see Jesus who He was.
JT Yes. Zacchaeus is thus an example of what we are saying.
HFN I suppose if we miss this we miss what is distinctive at the present moment, and is not that a very serious matter?
JT It is indeed. The Lord, I believe, is bringing [p. 456] us to it — that we should say who He is, say it fearlessly and with intelligence. It is not merely what Scripture says, but the intelligence I have as to it. We are to arrive at the knowledge of the Son of God.
HFN The Lord would not have the very youngest go beyond their measure, but He would encourage us to confess the truth, and in doing so it would become clear to us.
JT As was remarked about Zacchaeus, he wanted to see Jesus who He was. He made a mistake in climbing up the tree, but he had the right thought, and the Lord honoured it, the Lord entered his house and dignified him by saying he was “a son of Abraham”.
HFN “Two of you”, chapter 18; would that revert to this? Would it suppose that even two of them were an intelligent and deliberative company?
JT Yes, the Lord would stress the value of those who are of the assembly.
HFN Have we not often taken up Matthew 18: 20, and tried to carry it out without this basis in our souls, that is, that the assembly underlies it?
JT I think we have. We must understand this. First, the Lord’s challenge as to who we are saying He is. If we are saying something as to Him, we ought to be concerned as to whether we are saying what is right: if we do say what is right, we show what we are, that we are of the assembly intelligently. It is of such material that it is made up, and what Ephesians sets out — and how great it is!
Rem We should see to it that we endeavour to be in accord locally with the truth of this, that there might be the state with us that prayers might ascend to God the Father.
JT Yes. In what I am saying of Christ, who He is, I qualify as material, and then there is the building — “On this rock I will build my assembly”. But He says, “Thou art Peter”: He gives you to understand that you are material, and He is building what is invulnerable; that gives great stamina to us.
Ques As to the knowledge of who He is, it says, “Flesh and blood has not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in the heavens”. Does that imply a knowledge of His Person?
JT The Person as He then was. The assembly is properly outside the range of flesh and blood, it is built as the fruit of the resurrection of Christ, the Person known by the Father’s revelation of Him.
Rem It depends on the work of God in the soul.
JT It does, but the thought is what we are saying.
Ques Is the saying essential? Why is emphasis laid on it?
JT Because it expresses your apprehension of the Person, and it commits you. A creed is not a saying; the creeds were written hundreds of years ago, they are formal confessions of faith written down, but the Lord is not alluding to such a thing at all. He is alluding to what each says now because of one’s knowledge of Christ. The Holy Spirit gives us increased light about the Lord and we ought to be saying what we understand.
Ques Would that confession give character to us in our ways?
JT Yes, and it commits us. If you keep your mouth closed, no one knows what you hold.
HFN Men are saying certain things in regard of the Lord, and it is a serious thing for us, if we have not sufficient affection to wholly commit ourselves to Him by what we say of Him.
JT The disciples here were evidently conversant with what men were saying. One said this and another said that. The “systems” have different [p. 458] views about Jesus; some are orthodox; some are infidel as to His Deity, some are doubtful but respectful. At the time of the Lord’s question here anyone who would say He was “John the baptist”, had a certain amount of respect for the Lord, for they did not have the Scriptures then as we have. Others said, “Elias” — well, he was a very distinguished man too. Others said “Jeremias” — “Or one of the prophets” — those who spoke thus were indefinite, not very interested one way or the other.
Rem It is the Lord Himself, having reached a certain point, who asked the question, “Who do men say that I the Son of man am?”
JT Yes. He constantly raises this question. He does it through one or another by the Spirit, but He is doing it. People are saying various things about Christ, but they do not agree. These alluded to here did not mean to be anything but respectful, nevertheless they were wrong.
HFN It was all on the line of speculation. Would that raise an exercise with us as to what we read? Ministry outside the truth is largely in the realm of speculation, and will give us defective thoughts in regard to Christ.
JT I think that is an important warning, for there is much ministry abroad in current Christendom about Christ that does not give the true thought. It is not always against Him, but it is largely speculative, it does not help you: we cannot get any help apart from the Spirit. The Scriptures, of course, convey right thoughts, but I can only receive what they convey rightly by the Spirit.
Ques Is that the idea in John — “He shall guide you into all the truth?” John 16: 13.
JT Yes. We are not asking, “What is truth?” like Pilate; the idea is knowing the truth, and especially as to Christ’s Person. We should know it. “Ye have not need”, says John, “that any one should [p. 459] teach you; but ... the same unction teaches you as to all things, and is true”, 1 John 2: 27. Today there is much objective testimony as to Him, but little subjective testimony. That is the point here; it is what you have in your soul, and that is by revelation — which now is through the Spirit. As soon as it is disclosed that the Father has revealed the truth, the Lord proceeds to say He will build.
HFN I suppose the great feature of Matthew as the first evangelist is the objective side of things, and here he comes to what is subjective and what we are prepared to confess.
JT Yes, it is something I have in my soul, and all the power of hades cannot take it away from me; in this sense that alone can be depended on.
Ques So does this revelation, referred to as a rock, become something impregnable in our souls?
JT That is the point exactly, who Christ is, known in us in this way — rejected by the Jews. The time had come for the subjective. Israel affords no solid basis for operations. Now the Lord is looking for something in men’s souls that can be relied on, and that is the result of the Father’s operations.
Ques It does not necessarily follow that all who have the Spirit have this revelation?
JT No, although they are potential material. But the stone character is in movement — “To whom coming, as unto a living stone ... ye also, as lively stones”, 1 Peter 2: 4, 5. Now the whole ground is changed: it says, “He enjoined on his disciples that they should say to no man that he was the Christ”, and Peter has the keys of the kingdom of heaven.
W.T.E. Why was that?
JT That others should be let in, that the field should be widened, but on the principle of the kingdom of authority. It is seen in Acts 2 and [p. 460] Acts 10.
Ques Why were they to say it to no man?
JT Because the world was turning away from Him. It says in the beginning of the chapter, verse 4, that “he left them and went away”; there is definite leaving. Now that which he leaves, is left judicially; He is not going to have it whitewashed with things about Him — but that is what has happened in Christendom.
HFN Having this light in regard to the Lord’s Person and this confession, would the kingdom in the light of the assembly throw its light on, and enlarge, everything in our souls? From this point in Matthew, would the kingdom become greater with the light of the assembly shed on it?
JT It would. You can see how it would greatly enlarge Peter’s function in the use of the keys, that he had this light in his soul. His own office would be just a subservient thought, and that is how he regarded it, that he is just used to let in the gentiles so that the assembly should be built. He would see that everything subserves the assembly.
Ques Is that why it is brought in that “whatsoever thou mayest bind upon the earth shall be bound in the heavens; and whatsoever thou mayest loose on the earth shall be loosed in the heavens”?
JT Yes, to give him full power. We see in Acts 10 how he used it.
Ques Would like power be extended to the assembly?
JT Yes, in chapter 18 the “ye” is the assembly.
Rem So that today this company which confesses that He is the Christ, has the power to bind and to loose?
JT That is the power that belongs to the assembly, but Peter’s power was, of course, peculiar to himself. In regard to Ephesians, we see what the assembly is, the vessel of God’s praise throughout [p. 461] all the generations of the age of ages. It is not here called “Christ’s assembly”, but “the assembly in Christ Jesus”: it is the assembly as I may say Godward; not as a vessel in Christ’s hands — “My assembly” — here, but what it is Godward, “in Christ Jesus”.
Ques Would this be the fullest thought of the assembly, so that we would touch eternal life here?
JT I think so. But here we get beyond eternal life. If I want to get light as to eternal life in the Scripture, I turn to Romans: Colossians and Ephesians include it, but they go beyond it. This is the position and function of the assembly eternally, in Christ Jesus, and there ought to be some correspondence with that now. It is not the formal doctrinal setting out of things, but rather a worshipful statement as to it, the heart full of the thought, which gives us the greatest conception of it. “To him that is able to do far exceedingly above all which we ask or think, according to the power which works in us, to him be glory in the assembly in Christ Jesus unto all generations of the age of ages”: I suppose you could not get any greater thought than that as to it, it is a heart full of the great thoughts of God.
Rem It sets forth one who is able to delight in all that has accrued to God by the working out of His purposes in Christ Jesus.
HFN Do you link it up with the assembly as the vessel of praise in eternity?
JT Yes, I think that is the view of it here, and that ought to have some place as we are together in assembly.
Ques Would you connect it with the beginning of Luke, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good pleasure in men”? chapter 2: 14.
JT It is the same idea, the heavenly hosts are full of the thought of the gospel. Here it is the [p. 462] apostle Paul who really is greater than an angel; I do not think an angel is equal to a member of the assembly in his worship. Certainly when you get a man like Paul in a worshipful spirit, you get something beyond anything an angel could say; the angels are learning in the assembly the all-various wisdom of God, it says. Paul speaks of, “my knowledge in the mystery”, the knowledge he had of it, and what the assembly was to be for God eternally; that was what was in his heart, not now so much what it was in the heart of Christ, but “the assembly in Christ Jesus”, the position and status of it: that goes beyond millennial thoughts, I think — it is what it is Godward.
HFN The place that the assembly will occupy in eternity must ever be greater than any position she has in God’s ways.
JMcG Were the sensibilities of Moses right when he wanted to see God’s glory and was put in the cleft of a rock? As these desires increase with us, it is vouchsafed to us to get a fuller understanding of the glory of God.
JT I think it becomes intelligible to us as we have a vessel great enough to be the residence of divine thoughts. The divine glory finds its residence in the assembly, as we see in Revelation. Here it is ‘glory to God’: in Revelation 21 it is “the glory of God”; she has the glory of God, that is for its outshining here, there is glory out of it, showing how great a thing it is! But glory to God in the assembly in Christ Jesus: there is something going out of it Godward. The thing comes within our range as individuals, as we see the divine thoughts set up in a vessel which, although finite, is great enough for them. Although you do get great thoughts in the Old Testament, Israel or Jerusalem could never be what the assembly is; and the material is [p. 463] indicated here in the confession, in what had been said as to who the Lord Jesus is.
Rem In Ephesians you have the fully-formed vessel.
JT Yes. The full thought of the assembly is in Ephesians; it is in every chapter, as we said.