THE MOVEMENTS OF THE TESTIMONY
THE MOVEMENTS OF THE TESTIMONY
JT It is hoped that we shall see, as we proceed at this time, that the functions of the Spirit as seen in this remarkable chapter are enhanced, the apostolic function in the twelve apparently receding somewhat. It is hoped that, in taking account of things thus, we may get a fresh view of christianity. It would seem as if the time has arrived for the brethren to review the whole position of christianity and see the bearing of the inaugural period at Pentecost upon the present time as nearing the end. The chapter we have read calls attention in verse 4 to a memorial before God, from among the nations: meaning that there was a distinct movement upward, toward heaven, resulting from the work of God among the nations. No doubt it was more or less seen as Paul came in, but the great departure since has affected it adversely, and it is a question now, whether it is really understood that the position is from heaven, the operations are from heaven. Hence Cornelius is taken up, and although not having yet received the Spirit, his value is such as to give him a place before God above. Then we have the vision to Peter in his ecstasy, and the sheet coming down from heaven stressing the point that things are from above; yet they have not come to stay, for the end is, that they are going up: all is going up. There is the cleansing: “What God has cleansed”, not ceremonial cleansing, not what baptism affords, but what God does for men so that they are fit to go up. Along with this there is the acknowledgement of Peter’s part in the work according to the divine thought at the beginning, but decidedly [p. 2] lessened, it appears, in its importance, for the Spirit came in while Peter was speaking, not waiting for him to finish, as if there was something else to come. There is a certain urgency in the stress given to the Spirit, and so correspondingly, a result in men is to be expected, because the preparation is evidently going on in heaven. It has been so always, but evidently stressed at times in order to bring about a better condition amongst the brethren, and state for translation into heaven.
AJG Would you say what there is for us in the fact that the vessel is seen descending out of heaven?
JT Well, God intended that christianity should be a wholly heavenly thing, left down here in testimony, but to be taken up again. It was done thrice, as a complete witness to what was there, what God had done among men: the animals being typical of men that He had cleansed, so that they could be sent down and taken up, and taken up finally. It is to impress us with the idea of testimony at this juncture.
HH Was there to be a certain change because of God having Paul’s ministry in view, which came along soon after this?
JT I would say that. It had Paul’s ministry in view, because Paul appears in chapter 9, in a miraculous way. The Lord appeared to him and announced that he was an elect vessel to Him; meaning that there were great things in view. The idea of a vessel stressing what was there.
We are directed back to Numbers 9 in which the movements of the tabernacle in the wilderness are depicted, representing the movements of the testimony in christianity. What we have in Acts 10 is perhaps the most remarkable of these movements. It is christianity that is in mind in the tabernacle, and although previous movements in Acts would be also typified in Numbers 9, yet Acts 10 is pre-eminently contemplated. There was no way in the wilderness, and there [p. 3] is no way now; whatever the nations may supply on the lines of travel, there is really no way spiritually, and we have to see that we understand this movement. It had not taken place yet, of course, but it is doubtful whether it was understood. One line of things, as in the work of the twelve, was proceeding under God; then another comes in somewhat superseding it and enlarging the view.
WC Would there be something analogous in the seventy going out in Luke 10 and the Lord speaking of their names written in heaven?
JT I think that is a good suggestion, for it brings heaven into view especially from Luke’s point of view; of course, Luke wrote the Acts, too. In Luke 2, the Lord is celebrated as born, and the announcement included peace on earth, good pleasure in men. Then the Lord Himself entered on His service, and having sent out the seventy, the view became broadened, and He stresses the fact that the names of the seventy were written in heaven, and that they were not to rejoice in the overthrow of the demons, however important that may have been and is, but rather to rejoice because their names were written in heaven. Then in chapter 19 the multitude say “peace in heaven, and glory in the highest”, Luke 19:38, meaning preparatory peace, and the casting out of the devil. The Lord had announced in chapter 10 that He saw Satan as lightning fall out of heaven, Luke 10:18, but there was more than that needed, and the Lord has in mind that there is to be a place found for Himself and the assembly in heaven. It is one of the greatest thoughts, I believe, and there must be ample room found for the Lord as espoused, for the Bridegroom, and the bride. John brings this out more in the book of the Revelation in view of the conflict with Michael and the devil; the devil being cast out, and then the Lord coming out of heaven in a military sense on the white horse. So that Luke makes room for [p. 4] peace; peace in heaven first, and then the peace on earth announced in chapter 2 would come in its time, but peace in heaven must come first, and that is what is now imminent; that is to say, the clearance of heaven of all evil and the establishment there of Christ and the assembly.
PHH Are you suggesting that the coming of the vessel out of heaven in chapter 10 is to show that the assembly has a heavenly status and a right there?
JT I think so, and Peter was to be impressed with that. He had not been, and that would, I suppose, apply to the twelve, and in fact to all the saints up to that time. But in the sheet it is a question of man, and the means God has of cleansing man, so that we should be ready for heaven.
AJG In what does this heavenly status consist? Is it simply a matter of the good pleasure of God, His purpose, or is there something more than that?
JT I suppose the angelic word in chapter 2 points to the importance of the incarnation, what God would bring about on earth, in view of Christ coming in in His ministry. But then the further thing is, that He is gone into heaven. Hence Luke says, in chapter 9, “the days of his receiving up were fulfilled”. Luke 9:51. That was most important in the eyes of heaven. Luke would bring them out already in many ways. In Luke 9 Moses and Elias were speaking to the Lord on high about His decease which He should accomplish at Jerusalem, implying that He was going out and going up, for already the days of His receiving up had come about: it would be a great event, and Moses and Elias were speaking to the Lord about the way in which this would be accomplished; he would go up to Jerusalem and die there.
In Luke 24 the Lord proceeds to recover those that were straying, but He had more than that in mind; it was not simply to bring them back to Jerusalem, but to bring them back to the assembly, and to furnish [p. 5] instruction to fit them for the further testimony that He was about to inaugurate among the nations beginning at Jerusalem. He says nothing about the forty days in Luke; He was going up to heaven; that was what was in His mind. It was not to be delayed, because the administration that He was taking on, that the Father had given into His hands, would be from there. He went up, He was carried up, we are told. It is not John’s point of view, Luke is expressing heaven’s delight in Christ, in accord with Paul’s word, that He was “received up in glory”, 1 Timothy 3:16. It was to give effect to what He had in mind, and, however long that has taken to accomplish, for it is still going on, it was a matter of prime importance in the Lord’s mind, that He should be in heaven, that He should go up. Some of us were speaking of Elijah saying to Elisha, If ye see me when I go up. That is to say, we are reminded of the importance of what is in heaven, and what God had in mind heaven should be, with men in it. The first thing is peace in heaven and that is with man in it, with Christ in it.
Ques Does that await the presence of the assembly, “peace in heaven”?
JT I would think so. The conflict with Michael and the devil would mean that the evil is not to be tolerated there. God must be free in His own domain, and of course we belong to that, and that is the point with us, I am sure. The time of our receiving up has come.
Ques Is there a particular point in the straightway in Acts 10:16: “this took place thrice, and the vessel was straightway taken up into heaven”. Does it show that there is a need of urgency, that as soon as the testimony is finished, there is an immediate and forthwith movement to catch the vessel into heaven?
JT Very good, that is just what it is: “the vessel was straightway taken up into heaven”, Acts 10:16 Do you think we are nearing that time?
JT I do indeed. I think we can see there is such [p. 6] a movement among the brethren in this country and generally.
WC Would you say something about the description of the great sheet and then the vessel?
JT There is a link between this and the word “vessel” in chapter 9: “this [man] is an elect vessel to me”, Acts 9:15. It is an operative idea, both in Paul as a vessel and the vessel alluding to the assembly. The passage in 1 Corinthians 12:12, “so also is the Christ”, would allude to the anointed vessel; that is, to what is operative in testimony, but it is to be there in a numerical sense in “many” for God’s pleasure as well as Christ’s.
WC Would the sheet refer to the great expanse of God’s operations?
JT I should think the idea of a sheet would be that; it is called a vessel.
Ques Do the contents of the sheet refer to the results of Paul’s ministry in the way it embraced all the Gentiles?
JT I think so. “For God is one, and the mediator of God and men one, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all, the testimony to be rendered in its own times”, 1 Timothy 2:5. Paul said that his testimony extended from Jerusalem round about to Illyricum, pointing to a vast expanse of territory, and it was in order to get the assembly out of it. I believe that is the position exactly, and hence certain allusions in the Acts point to the West being in mind for the particular property God had and which He needed in heaven.
Ques Does the cleansing involve the removing of features not pleasurable to heaven and the producing of features in which heaven can find its delight?
JT Quite so. Hence baptism is intended to result in that; it is not a mere sacrament to give people an outward status on earth, but intended to be a cleansing matter. Paul writing to Titus says that “according to his own mercy he saved us through the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit”, Titus 3:5. That is in God’s mind, a real washing, and the renewing of the Holy Spirit coming in upon it.
PHH As Peter was in an ecstasy he beholds the heavens opened. Does an ecstasy lead our minds to think of something heavenly?
JT I think God is making him fit for the great matter, for there would be certain joy in what he had, in the “ecstasy”. He needed adjustment, but it was to be a pleasant one, so to speak: it was God’s own operation, and through it, Peter is made ready and then, “the Spirit said to him”. The Spirit is the one of the divine Persons who acts here. It says in verse 19, “as Peter continued pondering over the vision, the Spirit said to him, Behold, three men seek thee; but rise up, go down, and go with them, nothing doubting, because I have sent them”. Acts 10:19,20 The Spirit is asserting Himself and speaking. Peter would understand that his own apostleship is not now the point, although it remained, of course, for he had the keys, but there is a widening out of the position; that is, the tabernacle of witness is moving into a wider sphere. I believe that is what is in mind; the Spirit of God Himself is in charge of the operations. It is not the Lord, nor God, it is the Spirit Himself, emphatically; He says, “because I have sent them”. Acts 10:20. The Spirit is in charge, so to speak, and it is for us to see whether we can readjust ourselves if we are not adjusted already to the truth of the Spirit’s presence and operations, and make Him everything. Let us see whether the gifts that are operating are really under Him, whether the whole service is under the Spirit and whether it is all in accord. For we cannot but see that in the Spirit’s coming and taking over believers, Cornelius and his company, there is a certain slight on Peter’s ministry, although he is not affected adversely at all, for he accepts it, and says that God is doing the thing, taking it, as it were, from His hand.
Ques Would this be one of the cases where the [p. 8] Spirit would come in and take of the things of Christ and make them known?
JT Just so, it is a wide thought. It is God, the Spirit of God, acting, because Peter’s comment afterwards is, “I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, John baptised with water, but ye shall be baptised with the Holy Spirit. If then God has given them the same gift as also to us when we had believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, who indeed was I to be able to forbid God”? Acts 11:16,17. It was God, but then the Spirit taking it on by Himself is to be noticed, because it points to the place He has had ever since in christianity.
Ques Do we need discernment to see who it is that is acting, for with Cornelius at the beginning of the chapter it says, “an angel of God” appears to him; he addresses him as Lord, but here it says the Spirit sent Peter.
JT Well, Cornelius was quite right. It was in keeping with the moment that it should be an angel, but it was a remarkable thing that Cornelius had already built up a memorial before God; that is a thing I am sure ought to be observed. In the passage before us, it is not an angel, but the Spirit Himself.
Rem Would you say a little about the memorial from amongst the gentiles.
JT It points to what God was doing among the gentiles. In fact, He had been operating, we might say, for long, even during Israel’s brightest days, God was carrying on His work amongst the nations. He is the God of the nations, but now it is a fuller thought. Here is a man, as we get in Romans 2, who is already anticipating christianity; in the mind of heaven it was so, for it is said, “Thy prayers and thine alms have gone up for a memorial before God”, Acts 10:4. There is no idea of a new family being started, or being in mind, in God taking up Cornelius, although he possessed qualities according to God in his prayers and his alms, but he is being prepared for the assembly, for the great sheet, there [p. 9] is no other: the great sheet represents what is current now.
Rem So being let down by four corners would be the universal position as such.
JT Quite so; showing it is held there, I might say, too; it is held firmly.
Ques Is the Holy Spirit expressing His delight in the increased liberty He had among the gentiles in Cornelius?
JT I think it is well that that should be noticed: it is the delight divine Persons have in the current operations. For instance, in Luke 15, how the divine Persons are seen engaged in delight in the prodigal’s return.
AJG Does it really involve that God is moving freely now among all men and that in connection with His best thoughts?
JT His best thoughts; I am thankful you said that, for we are to keep to His best thoughts in all our services, and make way for them. If it be the assembly and its use, the vessel here, we should have the best thoughts of God about it, and not drag it down to the level of ordinary matters.
Ques Is that seen in the contrast between Peter and Dorcas? She could make memorials on earth, but there were no prayers or alms of hers, or memorial of her taken account of in heaven.
JT That is a good point. It comes in at the end of Acts 9, in Peter’s own ministry. Peter was sensible of the change that was coming in, for it is said of him, in that section, that he went to all quarters, corresponding to the sheet, with what was in the mind of God, showing how, in our sensibilities as christians, especially if we are spiritual, we anticipate what may come out in testimony. So Peter said to Aeneas, “rise up, and make thy couch for thyself”, Acts 9:34. This is instruction as to how the truth should work out in localities, that the brethren [p. 10] should do things for themselves, and not be always writing to others at a distance and asking them questions. If we relied more on the temple of God in the place, I am sure we would get our questions answered quicker and better than by writing three thousand miles away. Acts 9:32 would indicate that Peter was ready for all that was about to transpire in his outlook on the Mediterranean and what he saw at Joppa. As to Dorcas, the widows who were weeping for her were all put out, showing that Peter was alive to the position. He was in full accord with what was coming in, at least in chapter 9.
ER In the preaching Peter says, “he is Lord of all things”, Acts 10:36. Would that involve the Lord’s universal operations?
JT Quite so; all things. Another thing that arises in connection with that point is brought out in Mark 8. The man at Bethsaida was taken up, the blind man whose eyes the Lord opened, and the final result was that he “saw all things clearly”. That is just the point at the present time, that we should see all things clearly, not only all persons, but all things, involving principles.
Ques Has the thought of piety a large place in this section?
JT That is what is said of Cornelius. “A certain man in Caesarea, — by name Cornelius, a centurion of the band called Italic, pious, and fearing God with all his house”, Acts 10:1,2. Another point to be noticed, is that his house is brought into it, anticipating what Paul would enlarge on.
Ques Is Cornelius an example of “patient continuance of good works”, as we get in Romans 2:7?
JT Just so, anticipating christianity really.
Ques In verse 2 we read that he “gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway”; Acts 10:2, but in verse 31 the angel said, “thy prayer has been heard, and thy alms have come in remembrance before God”, Acts 10:31. They are reversed in verses 2 and 31. Is one Godward and the [p. 11] other manward; the quality of the man showing itself in those two ways?
JT Just so. Giving much alms to the people, not to the poor exactly, but to the people, which is quite right too. We do not need to withhold our giving if there is any legitimate need, until the person is at his last resource. The only thing is, “Let not the assembly be charged”, 1 Timothy 5:16, but we are to give bountifully if the man or woman is in need, or has not quite enough to take care of his family; it is the people here.
Ques You mean that alms come under the heading of personal giving?
JT I think that is the way it stands, and there is plenty of room for that, but do not let the assembly be charged, making it a drudge, letting it pay all the bills. It is not right, it is not in accord with heaven, or the dignity of the assembly.
Ques You mean we should follow Cornelius’ example in the way of individual giving?
JT Yes: they did in Acts 11 at Antioch. There is plenty of room for individual giving, but let us never forget that the assembly is a great vessel; a great and glorious institution that God would honour; that, in fact, it is spoken of as being akin to Christ. The point that Abraham made was that Rebecca must be of the same family as Isaac: so she must not be degraded.
HFN Would you say a little more about the thought of Isaac being kindred with Rebecca?
JT Well, it is a well-known passage. Years ago it used to be greatly stressed, with Hebrews 2, that the brethren of Christ are akin to Christ, they are of the same order, the same family; they are not deified, of course, but they are sons of God, they are children of God; it is a question of lineage, the matter of birth and family. Everything in Scripture as to the assembly is to be kept at its proper dignified level.
Ques How should the matter of providing for the [p. 12] food of the brethren during the interval at such a meeting as this be regarded? Is it an assembly matter, or does it come under individual giving?
JT I think it is individual. It should be done by the brethren, of course, but done as if you were entertaining them in your house, at your table. It is not on the level of the Lord’s supper where we eat and drink as an act of fellowship. The point to understand is that it is not on the same level as the fellowship of the Lord’s supper. The use of the word fellowship in the Lord’s supper, is on a different level from ordinary eating and drinking. There may be persons here today, perhaps not converted at all, or not in fellowship, but they partake of the bounty of the saints: that in itself shows it is not on the same level as the Lord’s supper, and the assembly must be maintained on its proper level. The Corinthians were not doing this.
Ques Do you mean that because it is not on the level of the Lord’s supper, it is not right to meet the expenses from the collections taken on that occasion?
JT Quite so. There are plenty of means of meeting the matter without trying to put it on the same level as the Lord’s supper. There is great need for careful analysis of the scriptures that treat of the Lord’s supper. One observes that the idea of a memorial is hardly touched with many. We hear of the Lord being remembered in His death, whereas the memorial is of Christ in heaven, alive as He is now; it is to recall Him, to bring Him back to mind. So in order to have the facts of it, the Lord clearly considered what had been done and how loosely things had been done, and gave the facts to Paul after He rose. The record of the Lord’s words to Paul is in 1 Corinthians 11, beginning with verse 23 and reaching down to the record as to the cup, and some things we get in the gospels are left out. The Lord omits certain things that are mentioned in the gospels, and He adds certain things that are not [p. 13] mentioned there. Similarly, in Exodus 12 the passover is given by Jehovah to Moses at length, but when Moses gives it to Israel it is greatly reduced, it is epitomised and some things added. There is great correspondence between the two incidents; what Moses did in recording the passover and what Paul did, and what the Lord Himself did, in recording His supper.
AM Is the memorial of an absent Christ?
Ques Is it not to make way for the realisation of His presence?
JT It is well to stress the absence, to make way for Him, for His love: for it is a love matter, and hence the importance of clearing our minds, so that all we are is excluded for the moment in order to give the Lord a good time, speaking reverently; to give Him what He is looking for, the joy that is set before Him in principle.
Ques Why have we practically no instruction in Paul’s ministry as to the meeting of righteous obligations incurred assemblywise?
JT I think the matter of righteousness ought to have the first place with us. The brethren ought to see that as to the matter of a room in which to meet, and fuel, and the like, it is obvious that these things should be met. I believe the Lord counts on our knowing something. There are many things He leaves to us; for instance, if He said, “Give ye them to eat”, Luke 9:13. He meant they should know what to do.
Rem I was trying to get clear as to the difference you would make between righteous obligations, as we speak of them, and expenses incurred in relation to the food.
JT I would make a difference as to the rent of a room, for a room had to be provided for the passover and other things, such as a loaf laid on the table and all the accompanying things, but when you come to eating and drinking, for our physical needs, because of our weakness, you are on other ground. The Spirit of God [p. 14] differentiates between that, as already said, and the Lord’s supper, the assembly.
WC In what he said in 2 Corinthians 8:21, “for we provide for things honest, not only before the Lord, but also before men”, is he just covering in a brief way the matter of righteous obligations?
JT I think so. I think generally he would leave them with us. There are many things the Lord leaves with us.
AJG You are pointing out that in Corinth the apostle connects eating and drinking with our houses, and thus distinguishes it from what is proper to the assembly?
JT Quite so, that is plain enough, and it helps as to other points as well.
PHH In the hiring of this hall, is there not a testimonial matter which bears on the assembly?
JT I think there is. What we are engaged with just now is on a high level — the great things of God. I would have no difficulty as to the assembly being charged with the rent of a hall like this for that purpose.
Rem If a collection were taken on such an occasion, there may be many amongst us not in fellowship, but enjoying what may be provided, who would wish to contribute. It would be very hard to obviate that if a box were passed round.
JT It could easily be announced, that it is only for those in fellowship. After all it is only a matter of a meal.
Rem In using the term fellowship meetings, I do not think it has been in our minds that the eating and drinking then is on the same level as the assembly.
JT Well, it has been the same giving, from the same box.
Ques Would the giving of Barzillai bear on this matter at all?
JT Well, Barzillai was one of the people in David’s [p. 15] realm.
Ques Who should be the recipients of a bounty?
JT We can take what was said to Paul, that he should remember the poor, which he said he was always diligent to do, Galatians 2:10. He directed the brethren in Corinth to lay by on the first day of the week according as God had prospered each of them, for the poor 1 Corinthians 16:2.
Ques At Philippi they ministered to the apostle freely.
JT Quite so, that is customary. We are not referring to what the brethren are doing in that relation.
AJG Is what you are saying now all flowing out of the heavenly dignity of the assembly as a distinctive feature of this dispensation?
JT That is it. The great thing is the vessel coming down out of heaven.
EuR Does the vessel coming down and being caught up into heaven involve origin and destiny, and in being caught up finally that in her testimony here the assembly is heavenly all the time?
JT Quite so, just as the Lord came down and went up.
There are further points in this chapter, Acts 10, that are most interesting. In verse 35 Peter speaks of those who are “accepted with him”, and then he goes on to preach the gospel to them. And in verse 43 it says, “To him all the prophets bear witness, that every one that believes on him will receive through his name remission of sins”, Acts 10:43 and then it says, “While Peter was yet speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were hearing the word. And the faithful of the circumcision were astonished, as many as came with Peter, that upon the nations also the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out”, Acts 10:43 - 45 “And he commanded them to be baptised in the name of the Lord”, Acts 10:48. So that Peter’s position is clear He was preaching the word and the Spirit of God [p. 16] intervened and took charge, as it were, of the persons who were hearing. It says, “While Peter was yet speaking these words the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were hearing the word”, Acts 10:44. The position is clear and dignified, but the Holy Spirit is greatly emphasised in it, and it is shown that what happened at Pentecost is now happening, only in an additional way; and perhaps what the Lord would help us to see by this is, how recent happenings are intended to prepare us for other things, for a wider view of the truth and that there may be more preparation for the ascension.
AW Would you say a word as to why Peter here baptises them in the name of the Lord, but in Matthew’s gospel, where it is a question of discipling the nations, they are said to be baptised to the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit?
JT Matthew, I think, has the full thought of christianity in mind, but what Peter said here is also in keeping with the truth of course.
Ques Was it to bring them under the recognition of the authority of the Lord here?
JT Yes, I would think that. There is power in the thought, “in the name of the Lord”. They are brought under the protection of the Lord, but there is power involved in it, so that christianity is a real thing if anyone wants to come into it.
Ques You would use both terms in baptising?
JT I always do, myself.
Rem In chapter 19, verse 5, it is baptised “to the name of the Lord Jesus”, Acts 19:5.
JT Yes, it is in here. Chapter 19 would make the Lord more definitely an object, a centre; whereas here the in, as has been remarked, would I think imply protection and power. Christianity affords that to those who come into it.
Ques What is the significance here of the Holy Spirit falling on unbaptised [p. 17] persons?
JT I think to stress what we have already remarked, that the Spirit of God is emphasising Himself as a divine Person. He is having to do with the matter, and why not? It is a divine matter. Already an unbaptised person is said to have established a memorial in heaven by prayer and almsgiving. The people are listening to the word; they are honoured in that sense, the Spirit honours them. All this enters into christianity, and what is involved in it.
ECM Would receiving the Holy Spirit be in view of Cornelius coming into the assembly?
JT Yes, he would now be in it. He would know ultimately, by teaching, that what Peter saw in the vessel come down from heaven, was really the assembly.
Ques So that if anyone desiring to break bread had not been baptised, it would be necessary for them to be so?
JT I would think so; they were baptised here. Peter commanded them to be baptised.
Ques Would you expect the Spirit to come on unbaptised persons today?
JT I do not see why He should not. The Spirit did it here and we cannot complain of what He did. I think we need to leave it as it stands. I do not know that the apostles themselves were baptised.
Ques What is the difference between words and word in verse 44. “While Peter was yet speaking these words the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were hearing the word”, Acts 10:44. Does that honour Peter’s choice of language as in the power of the Spirit he was preaching? Would the word in the second use of it be the impression conveyed? “These words” would be honouring what Peter actually said, but “the word” would be the logos.
JT I think that is good: I am sure the Spirit would do that.
ECM A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver.