MY FATHER'S BUSINESS

Luke 2: 41-52; 4: 16-22; 23: 44 -49; 24: 50-53

E.M.W. I was thinking of the Lord Jesus as engaged in His Father's business, or with His Father's things, and that from a very early age. In the same way that the first few verses of the books of Scripture give us an indication of what is contained in the book, so I think that the Lord's first utterances in the gospels give us some impression of how the gospel will help us, what is in mind in it. Matthew, for example: "for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness" (chap 3: 15), and here: "did ye not know that I ought to be occupied in my Father's business?" The Lord of course is perfect, He is Himself unique, but at the same time He becomes a wonderful pattern for us which, as we dwell upon Him and His perfect committal and occupation with His Father's things, would encourage us to act in like manner. No doubt on that action and committal God's testimony will be carried through. In the second scripture the Lord is serving consciously with the Spirit upon Him, and no doubt we could regard it as a continuation of His engagement in His Father's business. Luke is very broad, as we know, so that mankind is in mind for blessing; the genealogy of the Lord is traced back to God: "of Adam, of God", chap 3: 38. No doubt mankind is in mind. So Jesus speaks of being anointed to preach glad tidings, and the several things He mentions are enclosed within two preachings - preaching glad tidings to the poor and preaching the acceptable year of the Lord. It is wonderful to think of the Lord's operations in the day of grace; they "wondered at the words of grace which were coming out of his mouth". The basis of it all of course, and the ground of blessing and the fulfilment of the Father's will, is His death. No doubt in Luke we could say it is the death of the Priest looked at generally with a view to securing the praise of God in the priesthood. I thought that might lead us to the Lord leading them out as in chapter 24 and blessing them. All this in which He is engaged has the Father's glory and pleasure in mind. He leads them out and blesses them, and they "were continually in the temple praising and blessing God". So that, as we have often been reminded, Luke speaks early on of a dumb priest and he finishes with a priestly company who are continually in the temple praising and blessing God. I wondered if that might be fruitful.

R.L. I am sure it would, as we are concerned to be wholly in those things now. The note links it with Paul's word to Timothy: "Occupy thyself with these things; be wholly in them", 1 Tim 4:15. Would that encourage us in our day to set ourselves that way?

E.M.W. I thought that. We can ponder His perfection, and in the light of that we may feel our limitations, but I think as pondering His perfection and His being fully occupied in His Father's things it would strengthen us to commit ourselves to His Father's things. I believe the object and motive before the Lord, in all His thoughts and impulses and actions, was His Father.

A.A.B. Is this what Mr Darby refers to when he says 'Sonship in conscious nature'?

E.M.W. Yes, I think that is implied in "my Father's business”. So that while the Lord Jesus was in the form of a bondman and served, He never acted beneath the dignity of sonship - not simply sonship as to relationship but in all the affections and feelings and responses proper to that relationship. Hence the expression 'Sonship in conscious nature, His words and ways declare'.

L.A.B. Does the beginning with the temple and the ending with the temple indicate that there is a sphere where these things are to be known?

E.M.W. We would not perhaps consider too much in this setting what the temple may have become but rather the thought that is contained in it. Luke looks at a good many things as normal, does he not? Jerusalem for example. So the temple, even in this position in Luke 2, is still recognised.

R.L. Would it be the same area as He speaks of as "my Father's house"?

E.M.W. Yes. That is another simple evidence of the Lord's occupation in His Father's business, the way in which He would protect His Father's interests, His Father's house.

J.C.E. Do you think there is something to learn from each of these four places that we have read of? I was thinking of Jerusalem as being the centre at this time of God's ways on the earth; I wondered if it would correspond somewhat to our interests having a wide out look. Then coming to the place where He was brought up might suggest that we should begin to show our committal in the place where we may be set. Then learning what the place of the skull meant and then Bethany - the Lord led them "out as far as Bethany".

E.M.W. That is helpful. As you say, Jerusalem is looked at as the centre in God's ways, the temple service was carried on there, and I suppose if we think of today we would think of the assembly. Outwardly ruined, the breakdown is very much pressed upon us, but at the same time God's primary thoughts should be maintained in our thoughts and affections. It gives us a broad outlook. Then the simplicity of a committal where we were brought up. We have often been reminded of Mr Taylor's committal in New York (not that he was brought up there) but in the place where he was. The lesson of the place of the skull is a very severe one but a necessary one, learning our lessons in the death of Jesus; the Christian's lesson book, it has been called. Then Bethany, such a home of. love, a circle here in which Jesus is cherished. It is a wonderful thing to be in that circle where the Lord Jesus is loved.

E.C.M. Does Nazariteship enter into it? think we have been taught that the Lord is the heavenly Nazarite in Luke.

E.M.W. Very much so. So that the committal really is total, wholly in the things of His Father. As we have just been reminded, Timothy was exhorted to be "wholly in them". So the reference to Nazariteship is appropriate. It is of little value to the testimony of God if I am half-hearted. Nazariteship involves a total committal. I may say 'I shall fail', and who does not? But that should not change my fundamental committal to the Lord Jesus in His handling of His Father's business which involves the testimony and the praise of God.

C.G.H. With reference to committal, the Lord when young was subject to His parents, indicating respect for certain relationships of life which we have down here. Now I take it, in relationships and in our connections that are of God, full committal may be none the less before us, because in the filling out of those relations God is glorified.

E.M.W. I had thought a little of that, that the Lord should say on the one hand "did ye not know that I ought to be occupied in my Father's business?" and yet He went down and was subject, showing in the simplicity of it that the filling out of these relationships in life, simple subjection to His parents, was all included in the way in which He glorified His Father in all that He did. So a young person of twelve is pleasing the Father and, I think, contributing to His business in being in simple subjection to his or her parents. It does not make us hyper-spiritual; that needs to be watched so that we are not artificial but simple. So the Lord at the age of twelve - this gospel alone drawing aside the curtain as we have often been reminded - shows us how a total committal to His Father's business in no way impairs the simple responsibilities and relationships of life.

D.J.H. It speaks of "favour with God and men". The exhortation to Timothy goes on: "that thy progress may be manifest to all". Are there the two sides, what is for God's glory and what is before men?

E.M.W. I had thought of that because the gospel itself has mankind in mind - wonderful breadth. I came to it recently that one has been rather narrow in outlook. You take such an expression as somone put to Mr Raven: All that Christ is giving is for all the saints; he said, All that Christ is giving is for all men. Primarily what is before Him is the assembly, but what He gives and what is brought in in the glad tidings and the ministry is for all men. How many will avail themselves of it is another matter. It gives us a broad outlook, very much like His Father's outlook, if we lay hold of that.

E.C.B. Do you therefore have to relate what you have in mind to what the Lord says in addressing the Father in John 17: "As thou hast sent me into the world, I also have sent them into the world" (v 18)?

E.M.W. That is helpful, but add a word please.

E.C.B. The Lord speaks in John's gospel, not about His Father's business but His Father's work, but I suppose it would be the same thing. He says "As thou hast sent me into the world" (that would be to be engaged in "the work which thou gavest me that I should do it") "I also have sent them", that is that they are to follow the same pattern. Then in resurrection He says, "as the Father sent me forth, I also send you", chap 20: 21.

E.M.W. Yes, that scripture, "the work which thou gavest me that I should do it", was in one's mind in connection with this. No doubt, as you say, it would be the same thing substantially if a little different in aspect. I had thought that as presented to us it is a pattern for us: "as thou hast sent me", and "as the Father sent me"; showing, I suppose, the level of the service that is to be rendered.

R.L. Would this add a dignity to the way we fill out the responsible side? I was thinking of paying to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.

E.M.W. I am sure it would. In His acting in the liberty and affections of sonship, not simply bondmanship but sonship, He was never less than Son, never acted in any way that was beneath the dignity of that relationship. In connection with John 17, "glorify thy Son, that thy Son may glorify thee" (v 1) , the Lord Jesus had not Himself before Him even in asking to be glorified, but in order that "thy Son may glorify thee". His whole life, impulses, thoughts, actions, had His Father before Him.

E.C.B. I wondered whether those verses did not also bear on what you were saying about the breadth of things. While in John 17 the Lord speaks of the world in different connections, He says "thou hast sent me into the world", that is, what was in Christ was for all men.

E.M.W. Exactly. Earlier some said that He is the Saviour of the world (see chap 4: 42) and John says in his epistle " that the Father has sent the Son as Saviour of the world" (1 John 4: 14): Saviour of the world.

V.E.W. For us does it not only involve knowing and understanding the business, but also the Person whose business it is?

E.M.W. Yes, I would think that. Here the Lord says, "my Father's business" or 'the things of my Father'. How well He knew the Father! As Mr Bellamy quoted, 'Sonship in conscious nature'. He was born Son of course, and I suppose that is why Mr Darby uses that expression. But the level for the saints is the same, it is not different. Hence you can understand Paul urging Timothy to be "wholly in these things". The reference to Nazariteship is very appropriate, I think.

L.A.B. The broadness of this is seen even in the way the Lord refers to the question of receiving the Spirit: "The Father who is of heaven give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him", Luke 11: 13. We need grace to have more power to reflect what heaven thinks and how heaven views things.

E.M.W. Yes, very much so. We are very much affected by the environment in which we live but we should be increasingly affected by heaven and what heaven thinks.

F.M.K. Are these two things, wisdom and stature, very necessary for us to be marked by?

E.M.W. Well, that would be so. Jesus "advanced in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and men". We always use great care when we speak of the Person of the Lord Jesus; nevertheless scripture says this about Him as man. I thought that all these simple touches, such as this section and His advancing and so on, show us that it comes within the scope of His occupation with His Father's things. You could not think of Him being insubject to His parents in order to fulfil His Father's will.

F.M.K. As contemplating that, as His mother did here, shall we gain very much by it?

E.M.W. Yes, as feeding upon it. We are apt to make our failures our food, and plead our weaknesses and so on; but to feed upon Himself as wholly in the things of His Father would stimulate us to be wholly in them too.

E.C.M. The Lord says in John 8, "I do always the things that are pleasing to him" (v 29). Do you think that His going back in subjection to His parents was pleasing to the Father?

E.M.W. Yes. Here He says "my Father", but a little later the Father says "Thou art my beloved Son, in thee I have found my delight", chap 3: 22. I do not doubt at all that He found His delight in One who was subject to His parents. Now is that not so with our younger people? To think that I am subject to my parents, perhaps at the age of twelve, is pleasing to the Father. We think perhaps too much of what others may think; we should get an impression and an appraisal of what heaven thinks, what the Father thinks.

R.L. Would this be the basis of what is said in the Psalms to the saints: "In them, is all my delight", Ps 68: 3? And would that encourage us on this line?

E.M.W. It would. That gives us an impression of the Lord's committal, simplicity, devotion, and piety as Man here.

D.J.H. Does the way He puts it, "did ye not know that I ought to be occupied in my Father's business?" - He does not say that 'I am occupied in it' but 'I ought to be' - imply a holy obligation? How would that extend to us?

E.M.W. It is a challenge to them. You wonder at the relation that had existed in the previous twelve years, and why the Lord puts it like this. No doubt He puts it as an obligation because He came for that purpose. It is interesting that the Lord should put it as a challenge: "did ye not know that I ought to be occupied in my Father's business?"

A.T. Therefore should they have known, being His parents? It says they did not understand. Before that, they were astonished at His understanding and answers in the temple, but here there is someone that has been with Him for twelve years, and had the visitation of the angel, and yet does not understand.

E.M.W. I think it would have raised an exercise with them step be step, especially with His mother, because she pondered it. I think the Lord raises such exercises with us. He more than once asks the question, after all His patient service, Do ye not yet understand? In grace He is continually stimulating the work of God and stimulating exercise and affection so that there should be this greater committal with those that are in His company.

C.B. Is it important then to know the Person? They did not know exactly who He was.

E.M.W. That is important, to know the Person, because we are under Him and with Him. What is brought out in the passage is the perfection of Jesus at this tender age, and yet a wonderful pattern for others at that tender age. It is remarkable that Luke should give it to us because, apart from this, the first thirty years of His life is unseen, there is no record of it.

D.E.B. The second chapter of 1 Corinthians refers to the things of God, and they are particularly connected there with the Spirit rather than the Lord. Would you say something as to the distinction.

E.M.W. In so far as we are concerned we can only know the things by the Spirit, and all that is made effective in us is made effective in His power. He has been given to us that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God; so in Him there is a wonderful resource for apprehension and realisation of the things that have been given to us.

D.J.H. Would you say also that, because of the indwelling of the Spirit as flowing out of what you have already referred to in John 20, this obligation here extends to us?

E.M.W. Yes, I think so. While we are not under law we must understand the moral obligation. Hence John in his epistle uses the word 'ought' several times, as the Lord does here - "I ought to be", and we ought to be. It is a challenge to us but we ought to be engaged in these things. Although we are not under law but under grace, there are moral obligations.

E.C.B. For that obligation to be apprehended by us, and especially perhaps by the younger brethren, would it be necessary to understand sonship?

E.M.W. I think so. When you say understand it, you perhaps do not mean understand the fulness of it. Would you say what you mean?

E.C.B. Well, there are probably few things spoken more about amongst us than our place in sonship, yet I wondered whether you would say something to help us all, and as I said perhaps the younger brethren, to understand how they are brought into that relationship, because unless there is a relationship there is no obligation. I wondered if it would be apposite to strengthen our understanding of what our entrance into sonship is.

E.M.W. I think it is right that we must enter into the consciousness of it as well as understand the relationship itself. Scripture says, "ye are all God's sons by faith in Christ Jesus", Gal 3: 26. That is just a simple fact; that is the light of the thing, and everyone should be established in that, that through faith in Christ Jesus we are all sons. The degree in which we have realised and appreciated it would be another matter, but we are all sons: "because ye are sons, God has sent out the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father", Gal 4: 6. I think as we make room for the Holy Spirit we are brought in our exercises into the realisation of what that relationship means. I have often noticed that the exercises in the first few chapters of Romans seem to be intended to lead to the consciousness of sonship: "ye have received a spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father", Rom 8: 15. Persons are normally brought into the realisation of it.

E.C.B. I was enquiring because, if we speak of being here and engaged in the things of our Father, then some apprehension of the relationship on the level of its privilege is needed in us. There is the aspect dwelt on in Matthew where the Father provides for us providentially, and that helps to build up our sense of relationship, but the reality of it, as you say, lies in the Spirit making it good in us.

E.M.W. Yes, hence the importance of developing and strengthening our links with the Holy Spirit.

E.C.B. It is interesting that, in chapter 11 to which Mr Barlow referred, the Lord says "When ye pray, say, Father" (v 2), but it is a continuous paragraph down to "the Father who is of heaven give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him". It is as if the relationship is entered into because the Father gives the Spirit.

E.M.W. I think that is helpful. I do not doubt that that passage, if we weighed it over and followed what the Lord says, would bring us into the consciousness of our relationship with the Father.

L.A.B. And is our realisation of it in the measure in which the Spirit enables us to apprehend it in the Person Himself?

E.M.W. That must be so, I think. That is why the Lord Jesus is presented to us in this way. It underlay my thought that occupation with what is presented in Him would strengthen our own exercises and affections.

L.A.B. This had an effect upon persons; they wondered, and the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed upon Him. The sense in our souls that He is different from every other man is the initial lever in our hearts to go after Him.

E.M.W. So there was a wonderment or, as it says in chapter 2, they "were astonished at his understanding and answers". Here it is "And all bore witness to him, and wondered at the words of grace which were coming out of his mouth". This is characteristic of Luke; as the Lord goes on in His service there is astonishment, there is wonder as glorifying God who has visited His people. He is presented, especially perhaps in this gospel, as food for our souls to build up in us this order of manhood.

F.G.M. I think you said earlier that the Lord was serving in the conscious power of the Spirit. In chapter 4 it refers to Jesus being full of the Spirit, being led by the Spirit, and returning in the power of the Spirit. Would you say a little more as to the consciousness of it?

E.M.W. In the passage read it says "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me". That is not an observation by somebody else but by the Person speaking. It was fulfilled that day, and Jesus was moving in the power and grace of the anointing, consciously so. So it is not someone else pointing out the fact that the Holy Spirit descends and abides upon Him, but He Himself says "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me", as though serving in the consciousness and grace of the anointing of the Holy Spirit, which involves of course the Father's pleasure - not only His committal in the first instance to His Father but His Father's unreserved committal to Him.

L.A.B. And in measure this should not be beyond the experience of any one of us, do you think?

E.M.W. Just so; that is a very challenging remark.

L.A.B. It is still the truth, is it not?

E.M.W. Yes, it remains the truth; we should lay hold of it in faith and seek to be serving in the consciousness of the anointing.

E.P. In the verse referred to in Romans it speaks about receiving the spirit of adoption (small 's'). Do you think that would be something on our side that is ready to answer to what the Spirit would do for us?

E.M.W. Yes, in that way it becomes the character of the believer.

E.P. The truth of the glad tidings is often presented but there are some that are not prepared to receive it.

E.M.W. Quite so. I think there is a distinction between the giving of the Spirit and the reception of the Spirit. Scripture seems to make that clear. So we have "received a spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father". Then there is also the side of the anointing. It would be an exercise to every person who serves as to whether the Father approves, as to whether His pleasure and committal rest upon the person serving.

D.J.H. The Spirit came upon One who had already said "I ought to be occupied in my Father's business" .

E.M.W. I thought of the two sides in that way; He says "my Father", the Father says "my...Son". There is a wonderful flow of reciprocal affections between the Father and the Son, and I think the Lord's service flowed from communion. It was not a forced thing, although of course He accepted the obligation for which He came.

D.J.H. He uses the word 'as' in John - as He hears and so on; it is not only 'what' but 'as'. Would that involve that communion?

E.M.W. Yes, and I suppose what is emphasised in this second passage we have read is the grace of the Spirit resting upon Him. I judge that, while He is in the consciousness of that, it has more in mind public service. Had you something in mind about that in raising the question?

D.E.B. I do not know that I can say much more about that but I was wondering as to these words, astonishment and so forth, that have been called attention to. While they are right, if we stop at that there is no active result in the Father's business. The wonder and astonishment should go on to stimulate enquiry and a constructive result in the power of the Spirit.

E.M.W. Very salutary, that! If you serve you ask yourself the question, What effect will the service have? What would I in faith expect to achieve in serving the saints? You do not just stop at astonishment in what is before you, but there should be exercise with each that as the truth is presented to us it should lay hold of us and be practically effective. As it is effective it brings us into correspondence with Him.

A.A.B. Would there be any link with what the Lord says to the Father in John 17, "for the words which thou hast given me I have given them, and they have received them" (v 8)? I am linking it with the words of grace that were coming out of His mouth and thinking of what you said a moment ago as to service flowing from communion; the Son and the Spirit do not speak from Themselves in the economy, do they?

E.M.W. No, just so. It is said both of the Lord and the Holy Spirit that He does not speak from Himself. I think what you refer to as to His words, that "they have received them", shows that there was effectiveness. The Lord says on the one hand, prophetically, I have laboured in vain, I have spent my strength for nought" (Isa. 49:4), but on the other He can say “the men whom thou gavest me out of the world". They received the words and they were effective.

J.C.E. Do you think the fact that the Lord sat down to teach here would induce, or should induce, the word going down deep into the soul? To what extent it did may be another matter, but He stood up and gave the word of God its dignity, especially in reading, Was there a patient and restful way in which the Lord taught in order that things should sink in?

E.M.W. It is deliberate and restful. A little later it says that Mary "sat down at the feet of Jesus" (chap 10: 39) - deliberate and restful. I think that is helpful in a day such as that in which we live when everyone is dashing around; a lot of it is just a frenzy in the mind, persons do not achieve anything more. In days in which there is tension and build-up this deliberateness of sitting down is important so that we can imbibe in quietness of mind and spirit what the Lord would bring before us in His words or communications. I say communications because they are distinct from the word. I think I am right in saying that as to John 17.

A.A.B. Yes, that is an important distinction. The side of grace is stressed here, it is the manner of His speech. It says at one point that Paul and his fellow servant so spake that many believed. It was not exactly the thought of the word but how they spoke. Is it the same as we have in this passage in Luke?

E.M.W. I think that would be the character of it. Again it says of one, that "they were not able to resist the wisdom and the Spirit with which he spoke", Acts 6: 10. I believe it is dependent (we need to be very careful in speaking of the Lord Jesus) but it is dependent upon the Father's pleasure in the anointing - "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me". Would you think that?

E.C.B. Yes. That they wondered at the words of grace that proceeded out of His mouth implies that the Father was active. Does not Mr Raven say something to the effect that if the Father is made known, then He is active in grace and things are no longer on the basis of works. So the scripture the Lord reads is of administration to people rather than requirement from them.

E.M.W. That is very helpful. In that sense it is the spirit of the new covenant. It is not demand but giving, not 'thou shalt' but 'I will'.

E.C.M. Do you think what Moses said in Deuteronomy 32 would fit in; "And hear, O earth, the words of my mouth! My doctrine shall drop as rain, My speech flow down as dew, As small rain upon the tender herb" (vv 1,2)? Is there something like that in the grace of the anointing?

E.M.W. I would think that. I like the expression 'the grace of the anointing', it is very wonderful. That it is by the 'Spirit all pervading' is the general thought, and I suppose largely future although it is known now in the assembly, but this seems to be specifically the anointing upon a person, pre-eminently Jesus; but then the anointing involves the Father's pleasure and the Father's committal to Him, and henceforth the Spirit, as the hymn writer puts it, was to be the power of His hand. Now that is so for every believer, especially those who serve.

F.M.K. Would wisdom be needed to discern the need as any service is carried on? These things here bring to light need: "preached to captives deliverance, and to the blind sight".

E.M.W. I suppose that would be right. It is a touching reference to the Father acting in grace for man's deliverance: "to preach glad tidings to the poor ... to preach to captives deliverance, and to blind sight, to send forth the crushed delivered, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord". It is an administration of blessing and that is what the glad tidings is.

C.G.H. Would the Spirit as the anointing be that which would be looked upon more as coming upon, whereas the Spirit indwelling would be more a question of what is life in us and what affects the mind and spirit?

E.M.W. I think generally that would be right. There is the reception and indwelling of the Spirit and I think that is distinct from the Spirit coming upon a person. No doubt there is a close link between them, but nevertheless the Spirit coming upon (what we speak of as the anointing) involves God's committal to and pleasure in the person or persons anointed; so the assembly is the anointed vessel.

W.E.E. Would you link it at all with the fine flour mingled with oil and the unleavened cakes anointed with oil in Leviticus?

E.M.W. That is a helpful allusion in the type.

W.E.E. The fine flour would be the evenness of the pathway of Jesus, and the mingling with oil that every step would be in relation to the Spirit; then the anointing, as we have been speaking, would be what would be seen outwardly.

E.M.W. Mingled with oil and anointed with oil - both references fit in with Luke's gospel. The anointing is upon that kind of man. As I see it the only Man that is anointed really is Christ, whether it be Christ personally or Christ in character.

A.A.B. When transmitting the responsibility for the care of the assembly to the elders in Acts 20 Paul makes reference to the words of the Lord Jesus, that were to be remembered. Would that involve, in seeking to care for the interest of Christ in our localities, that there would be a refinement and savour in the service rendered which would be relevant to those precious words? He Himself said "It is more blessed to give than to receive" (v 35) and it is in the context of labouring and coming in aid of the weak.

E.M.W. Although we cannot cover very much in an hour or so, I had thought that care for and protection of the Lord's interests (and surely His saints in their localities must be His chief interest) would be included in this, not only what we do but the way in which we do it. I think the anointing enters into that

A.A.B. David speaks of "his father's sheep" 1 Sam 17: 15. That would be a very prominent feature of the Father's things, would it not?

E.M.W. Very much so; the types help us in this.

J.C.E. In unrolling the book the Lord would have passed a chapter such as the 53rd which would remind us of the events of the place of the skull, the way and the basis on which these things could be so freely said.

E.M.W. That is interesting. Before we can really come into the gain of these things Jesus must have gone that way; is that what you mean?

J.C.E. Yes. You are pressing upon us rightly that we should give more pondering to these things. If we just think of the Lord unrolling the book chapter after chapter, He would have passed that passage in the 53rd of Isaiah, He would have known what it was.

E.M.W. Indeed, "He found the place where it was written". It was not an indiscriminate opening, it was an intelligent finding of that passage as appropriate to that particular moment. So He passed Isaiah 53: "he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities", and so on.

L.A.B. Does this show the way things work? We do have customs, but what we would look for is something fresh and living on each occasion?

E.M.W. I think that; so He "stood up to read". Our brother stood up, it is a right custom. What you are emphasising is that there is what is fresh and living, the words of grace which were coming out of His mouth.

L.A.B. There are things that we do customarily and it is good to have customs, it is good to be together, but it is not just that; it is a question of the way the Spirit of God may come in on any occasion, and that would always keep us in the element of expectancy.

E.M.W. So you do not set aside a custom just to be spectacular. It is a good custom to sing a hymn before we open our meetings, and speak to God. Many of these customs are good customs; but then if they are just customs, and the Holy Spirit is not free to bring in what is fresh, what do they become? Many have similar customs to us, and you might ask the question of them and of us, and of us underlined, what liberty and freshness is there in the Spirit in our occasions?

S.D.K.R. In Psalm 45 it says "grace is poured into thy lips" (v 2); here they say it is coming out. Would you say a word as to the distinction.

E.M.W. It might connect in some way with the Spirit typically, I do not know; but in both cases I notice it is grace. Here it is "the words of grace which were coming out of his mouth". I think that is well worth pondering, but I could not say that I could explain it.

C.B. Would you say that these operations of grace should have an effect and an end to them? This healing and giving sight were not just for the relief of man.

E.M.W. I had that in mind in the latter passages which the brethren can reflect upon, but the death of Jesus is the sacrificial basis on which all is brought to pass. I thought in a general way, without entering into detail, we get the death of the Priest. The whole order of man displeasing to God is set aside there, but think of the Lord Jesus going this way to give effect to His Father's will. He says in this passage, "Father into thy hands I commit my spirit". Then in resurrection He is active. I think He is still active in His Father's business in maintaining the testimony and the praise of God.

H.P.W. Would the appropriation of the sacrifice of Jesus in the way we are looking at it set the captives free and give the blind sight and be part of the acceptable year of the Lord?

E.M.W. We should dwell on it more. It has often been called the Christian's lesson book, and there are many lessons to be learned at the cross.

H.P.W. I was thinking of the many Christians that are in bondage although they may not think it. There is wonderful liberty to be known by pondering and appropriating the work of Christ, the sacrificial basis of what is for our benefit.

E.M.W. As we go over these things we would be helped; as you ponder you are giving scope to the Holy Spirit to help and form you. If you ignore them or forget them you are not giving Him room to form you according to them. Finally the Lord had in mind the praise of God: they were "continually in the temple praising and blessing God". So the Lord's service was effective. You might say outwardly it was a failure, but it was effective in that He secured the praise of God, if it was only in a handful of persons.

 

MAIDSTONE

22 November 1975

 

Key to initials

L.A.B. L.A.Barlow Bexley; C.B. C.Beale London; A.A.B. A.A.Bellamy Buckhurst Hill; D.E.B. D.E.Burr Redbridge; E.C.B. E.C.Burr London; W.E.E. W.E.Ellis London;
J.C.E. J.C.Evershed London; C.G.H. C.G.Hitchcock London; D.J.H. D.J.Hutson

London; F.M.K. F.M.Knappett Maidstone; R.L. R.Lawrence Maidstone;
F.G.M. F.G.May Maidstone ; E.C.M. E.C.Muggleton Croydon ; E.P. E.Palmer London; S.D.K.R. S.D.K.Roberts Croydon; A.T. A.Thomas Gillingham; E.M.W. E.M.Walkinshaw Gillingham; V.E.W. V.E.Wraighte Gillingham; H.P.W. H.P.Wright Gillingham.