PAUL'S MINISTRY AND THE SERVICE OF GOD (5)

PAUL’S MINISTRY AND THE SERVICE OF GOD (5)

Ephesians 4:1 - 16; 1 Corinthians 11:17 - 26; Hebrews 2:10 - 12; Hebrews 8:7 - 13

JT We have read a part of Ephesians 4 which relates to gift, and from 1 Corinthians 11 as regards the order of God’s service, the public order of it, and the passages in Hebrews as regards certain elements of the truth, not co-ordinated in the sense of order, but nevertheless of first-rate importance in regard of the service. The first point of prime importance is the order of the divine service, in so far as it is given to us in any regular order. We have, as enlightened believers, no thought of creed or ritual, indeed the New Testament forbids any such thing. The platform of the service of God is that of “the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free”; Galatians 5:1; that is, in sonship; sonship working out in a practical sense as dealing with divine things, and therefore we are not spoken to as children in these matters, but as full grown. We are regarded as capable of understanding and knowing where any given truth may be found and where it is to be placed if necessary in any part of the service. The word in 1 Corinthians 10 helps in that respect, “I speak as to intelligent persons: do ye judge what I say”, 1 Corinthians 10:15, and then there is the word as to blessing, the blessing of the cup. It refers to communion, to fellowship, not to the order of the divine service. The order is in chapter 11, and in so far as it may be called ritual, it is what is to govern the Lord’s supper. The part of the chapter read alludes to the great irregularities at Corinth, but they were not irreparable, but could be rectified, and the apostle goes to great pains in order to show that the circumstances in which the Lord’s supper is celebrated are ^[p. 335] not the circumstances of our ordinary affairs; not our houses. The reference to the upper room in the beginning of the Acts, would indicate that the idea was carried through from the time of the institution of the Supper by the Lord Himself; it can only be touched on in that sense, because there are other elements that would modify it now, only it is clear that intelligence carries things through. In 1 Corinthians 11:17, the word is, “in prescribing to you on this which I now enter on, I do not praise, namely, that ye come together, not for the better, but for the worse”. This passage clearly indicates that the Lord’s supper is the leading or initial idea in the service of God, and that the service of God follows upon it. Other sections, including the second epistle, would show that the truth also is to be worked out in relation to the Lord’s supper, but the order of God’s service is clearly indicated in these epistles written to Corinth, to “the assembly of God which is in Corinth”. 1 Corinthians 1:2, 2 Corinthians 1:1. The assembly there was the vessel in which things would be carried out in regard of divine service, and reference is made to this in chapter 12; “so also is the Christ”, 1 Corinthians 12:12, meaning the vessel in which service is to be carried through, even ministry. I refer to that because of the importance of these two epistles, in regard to the matter in hand. As to Hebrews, it is well known that the epistle goes beyond christianity, for certain references in it show that the millennial state of things is in mind also, and especially the reference to the new covenant in chapter 8; it is clear that the setting of that is the millennium. That should help us as to the use made of the new covenant in the first and second epistles to the Corinthians, but especially the first; it serves conveniently to help in the spirit of it; that is, the character of the ritual, as we were saying, what comes nearest to Judaism in that sense, and yet is not Judaism, because the Lord’s supper is carefully separated from the temple in Acts 1.

AJG In saying that the Lord’s supper was carefully separated from the temple in Acts 1, do you refer to the fact that they gathered in the upper room?

JT Yes, and then there was breaking of bread in the house after the Spirit came in the second chapter. The teaching and fellowship of the apostles, and the breaking of bread are all brought into it.

JTS Have you anything in your mind as to the difference in the words in Luke 22 regarding the Supper, and those in 1 Corinthians?

JT Well, Paul’s message from the Lord to the Corinthians, as regards the Lord’s supper, is His message to the gentiles, and indeed to the whole assembly, and inasmuch as it is clearly the final word, it should be taken to govern us authoritatively. As already remarked, the Jewish system is in mind in the synoptic gospels, and they go beyond christianity. So that the final word on the Lord’s supper is through Paul, and given formally to the Corinthians, even the wording of it.

AHG Do you regard chapter 11:17 as a distinct break in the epistle? Prior to that Paul is instructing us regarding the matter of the fellowship, but then introducing the Lord’s supper in view of the service of God? We have rather carried over the thought of the cup of blessing in chapter 10 into chapter 11. I take it you have a different thought as to the setting of the cup in that chapter?

JT Yes. The cup is set in its order in the service of God in chapter 11, whereas in chapter 10 it stands related to the fellowship. The word fellowship is used in chapter 10 because it is a question of our public bond, and all that enters into our relations together.

Ques I think what you said as to the epistle to the Hebrews leading into the world to come is very helpful. Would you say the new covenant is that aspect of ^[p. 337] redemption which Israel will know as its proper and own place in the world to come?

JT That is clearly what is meant in the formal allusion to it in Hebrews 8. The actual terms of the new covenant are formally stated there, and that the old covenant had become old, and was about to be set aside, and that is really what is in mind in the epistle.

Ques In the wording employed, in regard of the Lord’s supper the covenant itself is not to be remembered, but the Lord personally, “this do, as often as ye shall drink it, in remembrance of me”. 1 Corinthians 11:25. Does that fix the matter in our hearts?

JT I think so. The Spirit of God makes clear that the real thought is the memorial of Christ not the new covenant; the calling to mind of Christ in the cup also as in the bread.

PHH The reference to the new covenant in 2 Corinthians 3, would make the Lord more and more glorious to us. Is that the thought? He goes on towards the end of that chapter, speaking not of the letter but of the spirit, and says, “now the Lord is the Spirit”. 2 Corinthians 3:17.

JT Well, just so.

Ques In that connection is it important that we are said to have come to “Jesus, mediator of a new covenant”, Hebrews 12:24, not to the covenant, but the Person?

JT And it is in Jewish language, the grace of God entering into the apostle’s feeling in writing. He is dealing tenderly with the Jewish people, although time had gone on and things had become worse amongst them, the opposition had increased, culminating in Stephen’s martyrdom, so that what the Spirit of God says in Hebrews 8 as to the old disappearing was imminent. Therefore, what we may have to say as to Jewish terms ought to be looked at in this connection, and we should not regard them as essentially of the christian vocabulary. We must remember that they belong to the types. There is such a thing as the christian ^[p. 338] vocabulary, and when Paul deals with the higher levels of the truth you get that vocabulary from him. Whereas on the lower level, so to speak, that is the Corinthian level and Hebrews, we get Jewish expressions, Jewish thoughts; God mercifully, and Paul too, tenderly dealing with them. Paul had already said that he had wished himself accursed for Israel, not that he then wished it, but that he had at one time wished to be accursed from Christ, for his brethren’s sake, showing his feelings, how deep they were.

EuR Does “the new covenant in my blood” 1 Corinthians 11:25, include the thought of the disposition of God shining out in the death of His Son?

JT The term thus can be used conveniently, the Lord Himself uses it. But we must bear in mind, that the epistle to the Hebrews shows how imminent the renunciation of the whole system was. Chapter 13 says, that we are to go forth without the camp bearing His reproach, and that we have an altar, of which they who serve the tabernacle have no right to eat. We have to understand what that altar means, it is the christian altar.

AJG Does the fact that the Lord says “in my blood”, 1 Corinthians 11:25, imply that He is impressing us with His own personal love which is the distinctive portion of the assembly?

JT Quite so, and no doubt carrying with it what we have already remarked as to the tender divine feelings towards the Jews, the ancient people; because they are not really abandoned, they are to be saved, and all those terms, in their full import, are to be saved with them.

Ques Referring to Hebrews 2, do not the Psalms and the prophetic scriptures indicate that the things referred to in verses 10 - 13, will be part of the inheritance of the Jew in the world to come, but are all taken up in the assembly provisionally now? “Behold, I and the children which God has given me”. Hebrews 2:13. Is that not what will ^[p. 339] be seen in Christ identifying Himself with the remnant for instance, in the day of His manifestation?

JT Well, they are most precious thoughts, because they refer to the Lord Jesus. The Psalm from which verse 12 is quoted relates to the Lord on the cross. It is what He says as He is heard from the horns of the unicorns. The heading of that Psalm is “upon Aijeleth-Shahar”; that is, the hind of the morning; the feminine thought is that, and therefore we may understand how affected the Lord would have been in speaking to His Father thus, and saying, “I will declare thy name to my brethren”. Hebrews 2:12.

Rem I thought that John 20 for instance would show that the Lord very definitely did that in resurrection.

JT Yes, but He does it here in Hebrews 2 in a Jewish setting really. The Psalms enter into Hebrews peculiarly, for the sayings of the brethren in the Old Testament are quoted so largely in the first chapter and throughout the book. So here, “he that sanctifies and those sanctified are all of one; for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren; saying, I will declare thy name to my brethren; in the midst of the assembly will I sing thy praises”. Hebrews 2:11,12. Now all these terms are in a Jewish setting, for even the word assembly is taken from the Psalms, only in such a setting that we can well employ it in the christian service, in the service of God in the assembly. It is from a most touching setting, but still, the Lord is there seen in Jewish circumstances.

SMcC You have referred to the thought of the sons and to the thought of the brethren, and to the thought of the assembly; what would be the bearing of “the children which God has given me”, Hebrews 2:13, in relation to us in this section?

JT It is an isolated statement as the others are, but they are set together in a spiritual way as indited by the Spirit, as also “again, I will trust in him”. Hebrews 2:13. These ^[p. 340] isolated statements are introduced by the Spirit of God as comments on the reality of the Lord’s humanity, that He truly came into flesh and blood.

Ques Whilst the Supper forms part, as you said, of the public service of God which takes place in the assembly of God in a place, yet privately, does it not lead to the saints affording Christ personally a specific portion which is exclusive to Himself during the time of His absence? Is there not a difference then between the public setting of it, as forming part of the service of God, and the private side which the remembrance involves, which has in view something for the Lord’s own heart?

JT Quite so, it is a memorial of Himself, He attaches value to that in this time of His rejection; His place in our hearts involving our loyalty to Him.

Ques Would you say that in John 20, the way that the Lord Jesus takes things up with Mary Magdalene seems to establish all this ground before giving her the great message, “I ascend to my Father and your Father”, John 20:17, as though the ground is fully cleared for Him to open up the Ephesian position?

JT You mean that the Lord had the Ephesian position in mind in all that He said to Mary; that is to say, all that the Spirit of God records of the matter. One thing perhaps, that has been overlooked somewhat by some of us is that the matter does not terminate with the side of rejoicing through the disciples having seen the Lord, but the Lord goes on and speaks of a commission that He puts upon the disciples. He is sending them forth and therefore it is not simply the service of God in the assembly, but the service of God in the testimony of God here. They are to go on with this testimony, and if there be the need of remission of sins, they are to attend to that; they are fitted for it by what happens in the upper room; in view of the public service, they are to enter into the meaning of this ^[p. 341] commission. So that it is not only a question of the public service Godward, but also the public service manward.

SMcC You have referred to priesthood in relation to Christ as well as to God in Revelation 20. Does that have a bearing on the service as you are now referring to it?

JT Very much. I am thankful you bring that up, because although it is a prophetic matter in a sense, yet it is there said that we are to be priests unto Christ. This would help in regard to the Lord’s supper, being exclusively the Lord’s supper, not the Father’s supper, nor the Spirit’s. The Spirit helps us in it, but it is the Lord’s supper.

EuR Would they who are sanctified involve the priestly thought?

JT Well, the word sanctified would, but the main thought there is, of course, that they “are all of one”. Hebrews 2:11.

Ques Would you say something about the character of thanksgiving for the cup?

JT I suppose it is “thanksgiving” as in 1 Corinthians 11 where it is said of the bread “having given thanks” and then “in like manner also the cup”. 1 Corinthians 11:24,25. We are speaking well of it, but we are speaking to the Lord about it, and the import of the whole matter is, “this do in remembrance of me”. 1 Corinthians 11:24. The cup, like the bread, is for the calling of Christ to mind.

Ques Is it suggestive that the adjective “new” in the expression new covenant in Hebrews 12:24 is not the word usually employed, but denotes freshness or youthfulness, and thus would suggest the importance of that element in the service of God? Might it also be connected with the passage in Exodus which speaks of the youths?

JT Quite so, it has a Jewish bearing, as we have already said. It is one of the things to which it is said christians have come, that is Jewish christians. The point ^[p. 342] was what they had come to as compared with what their fathers came to at mount Sinai, and there can be no doubt that the change in the word new is to give the thing a present bearing, so that they would understand that they were really in this thing, that they had part in what was new and fresh, and why should they go back to the old? I think that one important matter is to see the bearing of the rejection of the Jewish system, and how the Spirit of God, or Paul, for he was doubtless the writer, is leading up to the rejection of the Jewish system entirely. He was ready to abandon it, but he would, as it were, salvage all possible, and in doing so, not to offend his Jewish brethren. Some of them were in danger of turning away altogether, and so he says, “if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him”; Hebrews 10:38; my soul he says, showing the feelings that entered into the apostle’s own heart as to his Jewish brethren. I believe we ought to keep that in mind.

HFN Is not the real secret of our deliverance from it, the entrance into what is our own proper and distinctive portion in christianity? Is not that the real power of liberation for the saints?

JT Just so, only it is good for us to see how the divine sympathies still lingered. They were very powerful at the beginning of Acts, and they still lingered in the writer of the Hebrew epistle, and I think we ought to be as tender as Paul in that sense, and as tender as the blessed God Himself; how patient He was! It will work out in our own case, for the nations also are about to be rejected as the apostle shows in Romans 11. For ourselves, of course, we will be translated, but the gentiles as such are on the eve of rejection, and we ought to learn to be sympathetic with our brethren round about us; some mere professors and not real, but some are real, and we ought to be patient with them. The patience of God is a great feature of the truth.

EAK Would the feelings of Paul, when he spoke of ^[p. 343] having wished that he had been accursed from Christ be pleasurable to heaven, even as the spirit of Moses when asking to be blotted out for the sake of the people?

JT I think so. I think Jehovah would keenly appreciate the sympathies of Moses with Him in what was then transpiring. Three thousand Levites rallied to Moses when he said “He that is for Jehovah, let him come to me”? Exodus 32:26, and that is our present position. Hebrews 13 is our present position; “we have an altar”; Hebrews 13:10; that is christians. We are using the word altar, though it is a Jewish word; it is a pagan word, too, but we are using it in a christian sense; “we have an altar of which they have no right to eat who serve the tabernacle”. Hebrews 13:10 Those who are in the Jewish system, and serving it, have no right to christianity at all. But at the same time we are not without sympathy with God and His feelings about His ancient people, because they are presently going to be reinstated, and we know that. It is an early matter with God, and why should we not be sympathetic with Him? In using Hebrew terms, if they convey the sense, let us remember that we are dealing with christianity. As the Spirit of God says, “the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch”, Acts 11:26, and that stands.

LPM Have you in mind that 1 Corinthians 11 discloses a certain order that is to characterise the saints now, and that order is to emerge in the service of God?

JT Well, that is the understanding I have. We begin with what is public; “as often as ye shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye announce the death of the Lord”. 1 Corinthians 11:26. That is a public matter; but that is not all, for there is a secret side to it, and a sacred side too, peculiarly so. The Lord’s own feelings are in it, and so it is great enough to be the basis for the whole service of God, and there is no other service. I believe it has come to us from the very beginning, for in Acts 2:42, we learn that the converts “^[p. 344] persevered in the teaching and fellowship of the apostles, in breaking of bread and prayers”. Acts 2:42. The apostles have gone, but the teaching has not gone, the fellowship has not gone, the breaking of bread has not gone, prayers have not gone, and we are to go on with these.

WC Do I understand you rightly, that in referring to these sympathies, you have in mind that we may employ certain terms, but it would be in view of some who might be feeling their way out?

JT Quite so. For instance, our brethren in the Anglican Church, for one would have more respect for it than any others, because of its continuance from the time of the Reformation, and because of the loyalty of the martyrs. You cannot forget these things; heaven does not forget them, and so we ought to be very tender. We may all fail in this, but still, we are now dealing with facts and with principles, and we ought to be very tender as to matters, as to terms that we use, so that we might by all means gain some.

PL So that in the salvaging process to which you refer, would you say that the new covenant is made to serve in the spirit of it, in view of the formation, and securing of vessels for the sanctuary?

JT Yes. You might say it has its place in the things new and old. A householder is pictured by the Lord as like a scribe who brings out of his treasures things new and old. Let us take the new covenant and the blood of it; it is a matter that can be treated, to use a simple term, as an antique, a most valuable thing in view of its place in the Old Testament. The brethren will understand that I am not speaking disrespectfully of it, but an antique is valuable, because of its age, and so you might rightly bring in that as a thought into the highest level of Paul’s letters, because it is so precious and so old, so well worn in age, hence its value. I just use that as an illustration of how old things can be brought out and regarded as precious along with new ^[p. 345] things.

PL In the service of God in connection with the hymn on Olivet, as they went up, was there the in-gathering of the old combined with the introduction of the new?

JT Yes. We do not know what the hymn was; it was probably a psalm, but it is called a hymn. The verb is hymn in Hebrews 2; the Father is hymned to, showing how precious it is, as in that setting, but it is Old Testament; it is from Psalm 22 and it only illustrates what we are saying, that if a thing can be shown to be scriptural, well, then we are on safe ground in what we are saying.

Ques Would not the wording that you have referred to in 1 Corinthians show that before there is a hymn to God, as is suggested in the hymn on the way to Olivet, the Lord’s own portion is to be provided?

JT Just so, and the Lord joins in that in a collective sense, which is a very beautiful thought. They sang a hymn, not that He led in it; and the Lord, I am sure, enjoyed it more than any; He was there, and unquestionably He would sing it.

FW Is this matter of the vocabulary involved in Hebrews 6:1, “leaving the word of the beginning of the Christ”, having in view the bringing in of christianity and its vocabulary?

JT Very good. He is eliminating certain things, washings, and baptisms and urging them to go on to what belongs to full growth, and that is what we are going on to, I hope.

FW Yes, he had spoken to them of the oracles of God, and of those that were unskilled in the word of righteousness, and he wanted them to go on.

JT Full growth would mean that we are Bereans, and are worthy of being in Paul’s company. A Berean would be accurate and look into the thing verbally, and see that what is said is so. If something is quoted from another, well, is it properly quoted, and does it ^[p. 346] really mean what is intimated? Accuracy will enter into every matter.

FW The statement that the Sanctifier and the sanctified are all of one, would be understood from the type to mean Aaron the Sanctifier and his Sons the sanctified, and that is brought in in a spiritual way into christianity proper.

JT Well; Hebrews 2:11,12 is taken directly from Psalm 22, and it conveys the Lord’s own words to His Father. Aaron and his sons hardly typify it.

WC Would the happenings in Numbers 31 in regard of Phinehas, and the movement against the Midianites and the spoil taken and passed through the fire and the water, illustrate what you have been saying, that the Berean would be sure of having everything accurate, salvaging things, but having them accurate?

JT I think that is very good. The whole section of Numbers, beginning with chapter 16, the rebellion of Korah, brings out that principle. It is shown in the broad plates made to cover the altar, for they were made of the brass censors used by Korah’s company. The thing is salvaged, and turned into something for the service of God, and so too the utensils of Egypt are used; by the commandment of God the people were to ask for them, and so the metal in Jericho was to be used. All these things are important in what we are saying as to what can be employed in a right way in the service of God, even words.

PL Does that fit well with persons who have been salvaged themselves, the sons of Korah?

JT Very good. The third book of Psalms is adorned by these very persons; it is a question of the service of God in that book, and some of the most precious references to Christ are in it.

WC The Lord’s proposal to Laodicea would suggest His service to the salvaged persons, would it not? “Behold, I stand at the door, and am knocking”. Revelation 3:20. Would ^[p. 347] that be to deliver and extricate persons that are of value, those that He loves, from the Laodicean state?

JT Quite so; they are tested as to whether they will open. “If anyone”, “open the door, I will come in unto him and sup with him”. Revelation 3:20. The Lord would go that far, using the word sup which ought to be familiar to us in regard to the Lord’s supper.

JHT Is David salvaging in collecting the dedicated things of Saul the son of Kish, and Abner the son of Ner, and Joab the son of Zeruiah? All that was dedicated, even by these men, was used, according to 1 Chronicles 26:28.

JT That is good. The things are all dedicated, and it ought to help us as to our brethren that are not walking with us in the truth, if they do in any way show interest to be tender with them.

PHH Would you say a word as to these Jewish terms in relation to the “minister of the holy places”. Hebrews 8:2. Are we to carry over what that means into christianity?

JT Well, I think that is good; we have done it. In earlier days it was more used than we use it. It is a most beautiful phrase. First of all, what is said begins by pointing to the deity of Christ, for He “has sat down on the right hand of the throne of the greatness in the heavens”. Hebrews 8:1. It is brought in in the summary of what preceded in the epistle to the Hebrews. The writer says, “We have such a one high priest”, “minister of the holy places, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord has pitched, and not man”. Hebrews 8:1,2. These are allusions to wilderness matters, but it is the Lord that does it, and therefore it enters into the Lord’s supper. The service of God enters into it, and we have now come to the true idea of the service of God in our present considerations, and the Lord is minister of it Himself. He is viewed as actually carrying on the service of God.

SMcC You were referring to the position that we take up in the light of John 20, as His brethren. Would the “minister of the holy places” Hebrews 8:2, be a position that the Lord takes up in relation to the service of God following that?

JT Well, we might bring in those Jewish terms there, as we often do; knowing that the Lord has come in amongst us, we are glad to see Him, and He says, “Peace be to you”. John 20:19.

Reverting to the public side of the testimony of God manward in John 20:19, as referred to already, it is to be noted that this follows the service Godward. Having said “Peace be to you” John 20:19, a second time He commissions them and He descends to the idea of remitting sins, and retaining sins. So in the remarkable passage in Hebrews 12, already alluded to, the Spirit of God begins on the highest level, “mount Zion, and to the city of the living God, heavenly Jerusalem; and”, “to the assembly of the firstborn who are registered in heaven”, and it runs down to “God, judge of all”, “and to the blood of sprinkling”. Hebrews 12:22 - 24. We have to understand the order of service thus also; there are eight items, coming down from the highest level to the lowest even as the Lord does in John 20. He begins at the highest level, we might say, with the Father, but then He comes down to the forgiveness of sins. This, of course, relates to the service manward, but flowing from the high level of the service Godward.

LPM So that in relation to Paul’s expression “prescribing to you on this which I now enter on” 1 Corinthians 11:17, he has in mind a certain order in the service of God in the assembly. We do not begin at the top there and come down, but start at the appropriate place and proceed up.

JT Yes, that is exactly right. It is what we should start with. At Corinth things were not right, but the Lord’s supper in itself was right, only the Corinthians were misbehaving as celebrating it. They had come together for the breaking of bread, but they were doing other things, but that did not abrogate the divine thought,

^[p. 349] that the service of God should begin there; although their conduct was not right, the thing was there; what they were professedly doing was right. It was the beginning of the service of God. “But in prescribing to you on this which I now enter on, I do not praise, namely, that ye come together, not for the better, but for the worse. For first, when ye come together in assembly, I hear there exist divisions among you, and I partly give credit to it. For there must also be sects among you, that the approved may become manifest among you. When ye come therefore together into one place, it is not to eat the Lord’s supper”. 1 Corinthians 11:17 - 20. Notice this last statement. “When ye come therefore together into one place”, 1 Corinthians 11:20, that is a right thing to do, but he says as to them, “it is not to eat the Lord’s supper”. 1 Corinthians 11:20. They were not doing the thing rightly; they did right to come together, but for each one in eating to take his own supper before others, so that one is hungry and another drinks to excess was not right. He goes on to condemn all that, but the position was clear, that they had come together “in assembly”, and in truth they were pretending to partake of the Lord’s supper which was right, but they were desecrating it. So it is that we have to do with such circumstances, and yet the abstract idea remains.

EuR Is our being Christ’s brethren like Aaron’s sons associated with Him in the service?

JT Well, we have already alluded to that in linking Hebrews 2:11 with Psalm 22, as the writer does. John 6:69, however, would bear on what we are saying; the Lord is there said to be “the holy one of God”. Aaron is spoken of as the saint of the Lord; Psalm 106. Peter says, “we have believed and known that thou art the holy one of God”. John 6:69. Aaron as seen there shows how statements come into positions as needed for use.

EuR If we are with Christ, spiritually, as His brethren, is it in your mind that we would then reciprocate the love of Christ, like ^[p. 350] Rebecca?

JT That is, of course, in Sarah’s tent, if we use the type.

HFN Would you help us in regard to the service of praise, so that we may see the spiritual import in the service of God of the position of the brethren, the assembly, and the sons?

JT To be concise, there are three things that may be mentioned. The first is the Lord’s brethren according to John 20, and the second is the assembly according to Ephesians 5, and the third is the sons of God, spoken of in Hebrews 2. Now the thought that has been often expressed, at least by myself, is that these three items may be regarded as three phases of the same group of persons. The first phase is the brethren of Christ, according to John 20, and the second the assembly, in its peculiar relations with Christ, wifely or marital relations with Christ, and the third is the sons of God; all three running on to eternity. The passage in Ephesians 3, treated of yesterday, points to what we call eternity; “all generations of the age of ages”. Ephesians 3:21. It is the nearest thought to it, I would say, that our minds can take in. It develops out of the position of Deity; that is, “the fulness of God”, Ephesians 3:19, and the thought of Deity in Christ whose love surpasses knowledge. These great thoughts enter into the doxology at the end of chapter 3, as it is said “to him be glory in the assembly in Christ Jesus unto all generations of the age of ages. Amen”. Ephesians 3:21. That position would include the three items spoken of, besides the divine Persons, of course. Certain things have been said that would seem to clash with what I am saying, but what I am saying I have said many times, and said it in Croydon nine months ago, although it was not as clear to me as it is now, and I hope the brethren will see that as far as I am concerned, it is what I understand to enter into the Lord’s supper, and that we should be free in using these terms, the spiritual import of which lead to the highest altitudes in the service of ^[p. 351] God.

Ques Is sonship the highest point we reach?

JT In our conversations three things have been spoken of as being on equal footing. I am not saying there are not modifying features, but I prefer, for clarity and brevity, that we should proceed to treat these three items as on equal footing. The quality is the same; they are the same persons, only in three different phases, in three different positions.

LPM Would you say, however, that a certain order enters into the way they are to be employed; while they are equal, they are to be employed in the service in a certain way?

JT Well, that is what I understand. Hebrews 2:10 says that it became God, a phrase we ought to bear in mind, “it became him”, (that is, God), “in bringing many sons to glory, to make perfect the leader of their salvation through sufferings”. Hebrews 2:10. God is leading them to glory so it is a wonderful thought.

Rem So that the other two relationships that you have mentioned, the brethren of Christ, and the assembly viewed femininely, run collaterally.

JT Just so, that is good.

Ques Where do you bring in the man and the woman for God’s pleasure?

JT Well, Ephesians 5, as we had it yesterday, with all the types that bear on that passage, because in Ephesians 5 we are in the presence of Christ and the assembly, and in the sense of the woman being taken out of the man; that is, the assembly being brought out of Christ. The very words are used in verse 30.

PHH So that when we arrive at the thought of union, in connection with Christ and the assembly, does that form a suitable point at which to turn to the Father as having devised this in His love?

JT I would think so. I would think, to use the scripture references of the way Matthew speaks in chapter 22 of the King making “a wedding feast for his son”, Matthew 22:2,

and John the baptist saying, “He that has the bride is the bridegroom” John 3:29, enlarging at the same time on the heavenly one, as “above all”. I think all these would bear on that. We are dependent, of course, on the Holy Spirit from beginning to end, as entering into, and dealing with these matters. It is the great cardinal fact of christianity that the Spirit of God, the other Comforter, is here to help us in all these matters. The great discourses of the Lord from John 13 to John 17 have these things in mind. The Spirit of God coming down, would enlarge on them, amongst the brethren, but it all awaited Paul for the fulness of them.

Ques Would you say that there is opportunity for us to make much of Christ as pre-eminent in the midst of His brethren?

JT Quite so.

FJF In connection with the second phase, the assembly, could we worship the Lord there? “He is thy Lord, and worship thou him”, Psalm 45:11.

JT Well, quite so, only the passage in Hebrews 2 contemplates what is adjacent to the Deity, very near to it, and in saying very near I have in mind that the assembly is the nearest feature to Deity; it is very near, but not, of course, It; it is not in It, but it is the nearest feature to Deity in creature relations, and therefore we should be very tender, and careful, and holy, in bringing in the thought of union there. We are already, as it were, on the divine threshold, the Son speaking to the Father; “in the midst of the assembly will I sing thy praises”. Hebrews 2:12.

PHH Do I gather you would have liberty to do it, but you are concerned about the way it is done, is that your thought?

JT Yes, great care is needed, because of the delicacy of the position; the great end is God; God all in all; He is all but He is in all; we are to be filled unto all the fulness of God. Whether we are ready for that, or able ^[p. 353] for it, in the service, is the question to face; holiness must enter into it.

HFN Are you stressing that as something beyond the thought of the Father to be reached in assembly service?

JT Well, I am, because the order is in John 20, My Father and your Father, My God and your God. And so in 1 Corinthians 15, God is the end, the great end, the ultimate of everything for us, the Son enabling us to carry on in relation to Him.

Ques When you speak of the thought of God being further than the thought of the Father, on our side there is nothing further than sonship, is there?

JT No; quite so. I do not think anything can be predicated of the creature beyond the thought of sonship.

Rem I ask because of a suggestion that the sons stand in relation to the Father, and men stand in relation to God.

JT Well, I would connect men and sons with God.

AJG Would it be right to think that the assembly viewed in her feminine affection for Christ is particularly for the heart of Christ, and that when union is entered upon there is in Christ and the assembly God’s full thought of man for His pleasure, the male and female.

JT Just so, because we begin with that in Genesis, and that is alluded to in Ephesians, and it helps as to Ephesians.

AEP In the thought of “God all in all”, do you include the thought of the three divine Persons?

JT I am doubtful that we are capable of doing that with intelligence. I believe Ephesians 3 is the great chapter for our consideration as to the Deity in all these matters. We see the proximity of it to us, and yet we are distinguished carefully from it. We are to know the length and the breadth and the height and the depth, and the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, and be filled unto all the fulness of God. The Godhead is near,

^[p. 354] but we are still creatures, and never get out of that relation.

Rem And though the love of Christ as surpassing knowledge would imply deity in the One so described, yet the love of Christ is the love of a Man.

JT Well, but yet it is the love of that Person.

SMcC Would the economy and the places that divine Persons have taken in it, always be a help to us in the service of God?

JT Yes, God has come into the economy, an economy of love, and it is difficult to say much, in the sense of comparison, as to nearness, but still there is what is clearly stated and yet there is a line beyond which we cannot pass. God is ever dwelling in unapproachable light; whom no man has seen, nor is able to; and we always have to bear that in mind.

Ques When you speak of “God all in all” do you have in mind the thought of supremacy?

JT God is supreme, of course; but Christ may be regarded in that light, too, only that in view of what we are dealing with now, God has to be regarded in a personal sense. I do not think we are capable of speaking of Him in a collective sense, because it is beyond us; the abstract is beyond us; that is, the abstract would mean that He is not in relation to any creature at all. He is in relation to Himself only, so that we are hardly capable of dealing with that, I would say.

AJG Would the words ‘in all‘ imply that God in His blessedness is pervading all?

JT Well, just so. We must consider how low God can come, when it is a question of His feelings and sympathies; for instance, in the case of Abraham, three persons came to him, in Mamre, as he sat in his tent door, and he discerned eventually that one of them was Jehovah. “He sat at the tent-door in the heat of the day. And he lifted up his eyes and saw, and behold, three men standing near him”. Genesis 18:1,2. That is they definitely took up that position towards him, but near him. “And when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent-door, and bowed himself to the earth, and said, Lord, if now I have found favour in thine eyes, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant. Let now a little water be fetched, that ye may wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree. And I will fetch a morsel of bread; and refresh yourselves; after that ye shall pass on; for therefore have ye passed on towards your servant. And they said, So do as thou hast said”. Genesis 18:2 - 5. This shows how God in His infiniteness may come so near, and speak, others may speak for Him, because the others were angels. Well, that, I think, is to be kept in mind — how low God can come, how low down He may come in His love for us, or His grace, or His mercy; and yet when He is asserting Himself how high He can be, and even keep us at a distance from Him, for He dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen nor can see. I think that it is wholesome to call attention to these matters, that we might be reverential in the service of God.

Ques Would you say that glory to God is to a Person whom we know? “To us there is one God, the Father”. 1 Corinthians 8:6.

JT Quite so. The Father is distinguished by the Lord Himself in His saying “the Father judgeth no man”. John 5:22. We have so much to think of as turning towards God; and when we are considering and speaking as we are now, of the Deity itself, we are to learn to leave It in the place in which It is, in the place It has designed to keep Itself; because absoluteness and abstractedness belong to God, and we have to leave it thus. The same Persons entered into relativeness because love would enter into it; but in Themselves, in Their abstractedness, They are in relation to Themselves alone.

AJM Would that suggest that Abraham apprehended the divine Persons, that God was there? He bowed down. It is the first time the word is used in ^[p. 356] scripture.

JT He did; he called one of the Persons “Lord”, distinguishing Him from the angels.

EAK Would the last phase of the service as you have spoken of it, involved in “my God and your God”, John 20:17, help to preserve us in the sense of limitation that is ever proper to creatures, and thus help forward the worship to the highest level.

JT Yes. Although He is still relative in that. I doubt that you can get anything beyond what is relative in the economy.

Ques Is not that the line which we cannot pass over?

JT Just so.