ADMINISTRATION
[p. 18] ADMINISTRATION
Matthew 26:20; Mark 14:17; Luke 22:14; Acts 2:42 - 47
JT The subject is administration, and the passages that have been read from the gospels are to call attention to the idea as in the Lord’s mind as He instituted His supper. The passage in the Acts is to show how it was in the apostles’ minds after the Lord went up to heaven, and after Peter’s great gospel address which gathered in so many. It is said of the converts, as has been read, that “they persevered in the teaching and fellowship of the apostles, in breaking of bread and prayers”, Acts 2:42. It is thought that the idea of administration enters into christianity in a leading way, involving the whole dispensation, involving too, the unity that was initiated to mark it; so that assemblies were to be regulated by the same principles, as is said by the apostle Paul: “thus I ordain in all the assemblies”, 1 Corinthians 7:17.
The place that it had with the Lord in view of His supper, the institution of His supper, is what is now in mind. The Lord’s supper, at least outwardly, is the centre of the service of God, and it involves the administration entering into it, even if it be the gospel, but especially the service of God. It has been observed that great looseness has been in activity in regard to certain features of the government of the house of God, and the order of the assembly. It is hoped that the Lord may help us to see that unity is required, that heaven requires unity in all that is done. There is no room for individuality in an independent sense, of congregationalism, as it is called, where each assembly has its own rules. The idea in the assembly of God is unity, and yet things are done that should be done, that are needed to be done; so that in each case in the synoptic gospels, in [p. 19] each verse read, it will be noticed that the Lord came with the twelve; “And when the evening was come he lay down at table with the twelve”, Matthew 26:20. Much else has to be said, of course, bearing on the passage. Then the same in Mark; but in Luke there is considerable variation. It is said by Luke that “when the hour was come, he placed himself at table, and the twelve apostles with him”, Luke 22:14; as if the Lord was accompanied in each setting. The same thing is alluded to in each gospel, but the variation marked, that the Lord would have those with Him that represented administrative order.
GCS Would the apostles represent the authority, but the number twelve the authority of love?
JT The apostles would always designate authority, I would say that, but love would probably be more in evidence in the number twelve.
AMh Would there be the thought of moral suitability with the twelve in Matthew, conditions morally suited for the occasion?
JT The fact that He lay at table would show that. I think that things were in order; that, for the moment at least, there was no element of hostility, but the word apostles would stress the thought of authority.
NKM Why do you think that Luke specially stresses authority?
JT I think it is according to grace, so that it should be free. Luke has in mind the throne of grace, and that would be guarded by apostolic authority; not necessarily involving any punitive action, but the basis of authority is there. The apostles is the point: “the twelve apostles with him” We are apt to take licence when grace is dominant, and the Lord, I think, would guard the throne. The throne itself conveys the idea of authority, but it is a throne of grace, meaning that grace is dominant; and all should have to do with that throne. It would guard the idea: christianity requires it: the [p. 20] thought of grace, and that it should be dominant. Hence the kingdom of God is greatly in evidence in Luke. We know how grace has been disregarded in the order of christendom, and how despite has been done to “the Spirit of grace”; how we are all prone to take advantage of grace, if it is reigning, but it is a most remarkable thing that it is reigning.
Ques Is it your thought that administration flows out from the Lord’s supper?
JT I thought that. It is a gracious occasion, a time of eating, too: a time of eating which always denotes grace. The Lord would take advantage of that to bring forward the idea of administration. It is worth while having part in the divine economy now functioning since the Spirit has come.
PW Why is it evening in Matthew and Mark, and the hour in Luke?
JT I think the hour in Luke would cover the latter days of the dispensation. Luke has to do with Paul’s ministry largely. I think the evening was used, even in Paul’s time, in the Supper. Yet, undoubtedly, there was a foreshadowing of the alteration in conditions, so that the hour is more the question now. The hour of the day; not the lateness of it, but simply the particular time. We should observe time, which is perhaps little observed, but it enters into the divine economy, even as to the day in which the Lord’s supper is celebrated. I suppose the Spirit gave Luke, who is always concerned as to order or method, to mention the hour. When it was come the Lord placed Himself at table, the twelve apostles being with Him. Placed is another word the Lord uses.
ASK Does the idea of placed convey dignity?
JT Quite so: I think that is good, because we all know how hosts or hostesses look for punctuality at meals, and it certainly should enter into the Lord’s great matter of eating.
[p. 21] ASK So, without disparaging the setting in other gospels, is it in your mind that Luke’s and Paul’s ministries give us our dispensation?
JT I would say that everything awaited Paul after the inauguration of the economy in Acts 2, although the twelve ministered and were controlled until Paul was selected. When he is selected he is called by the Lord, “an elect vessel to me”, Acts 9:15, as if he was particular and things would take form, actually agreeing with heaven; a fixed situation in heaven, I would say.
ASK Luke and Paul stress particularly the heavenly side of the Lord’s supper.
JT That is what I understand. So Luke begins his second narrative with what the Lord “began both to do and to teach”, Acts 1:1; what He did, and what He taught. What He did would cover all we are saying; whatever entered into the economy on the line of administration would be in mind, and that the teaching would establish it, make it fixed. Paul, I would say, under the Lord, set up a fixed situation which has continued longer than has been anticipated, but the Lord knew, and we have come into remnant times now. The danger in remnant times is always to be lax or loose, but Luke would say, the method continues, things are fixed; and hence the terrible indictment of christendom in all its sections, the disregard for what is fixed under the Pauline regime. Hence, Paul stresses, “what I say”. For instance, in 1 Corinthians, which is particularly representative of what we are saying, we see how much is made of Paul’s authority, and the reasons for the things that he stresses, as, for instance, the matter of covering the head, and that in which he will not brook any disputation.
ASK “If any one think himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize the things that I write to you, that it is the Lord’s commandment”, 1 Corinthians 14:37.
JT Just so: “it is the Lord’s commandment” — [p. 22] one idea; that is, christianity is in mind. It is one great idea, covered by the idea of the commandment of the Lord.
Rem You cannot add to it or take from it.
JT Quite so.
PHH Are you thinking of assembly exercises generally as seen in Corinthians, or specially of the Lord’s supper?
JT The Lord’s supper, as the very centre of all; that is really what is in mind in reading these scriptures, because, they make much of the Lord’s supper, even in Acts. Nothing has been disregarded so much in christendom as the order attaching to the Lord’s supper. So, if there is anything the Lord would guard, it is that any of us who are loyal to Him should hold to the principles.
HG What had you in mind as to how the Supper would bear on us in view of administration?
JT The order that was disregarded as at Corinth. The conduct in the gathering there was really amazing, that it should begin so early after Paul left; that they should do just what they wished to do without any regard for the order that the Lord had established through Paul. So the apostle says in entering on the point, “I do not praise”, 1 Corinthians 11:17, really speaking to them as if they were children; indeed, they were in their conduct. “What shall I say to you? shall I praise you? In this point I do not praise. For I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus, in the night in which he was delivered up, took bread, and having given thanks broke it, and said, This is my body, which is for you: this do in remembrance of me”, 1 Corinthians 11:22 - 24. Then again, “In like manner also the cup, after having supped, saying, This cup is [p. 25] the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye shall drink it, in remembrance of me”, 1 Corinthians 11:25. Now he tells them that he had delivered these things to them before, which would not be very long before, and why should they turn aside from them? Is it not to [p. 23] remind us that we are so apt to disregard what appears to be non-essential, whereas it is the commandment of the Lord we are disregarding.
GCS Would it be that if we are loose as to the Supper, we are loose as to all other administration?
JT I would think that. The commandment of the Lord can never be a non-essential. It may be that it seems to be a non-essential in order to test us whether in everything we are obedient.
AMh Would the disciples assembling together to break bread on the first day of the week, Acts 20:7, give the idea of the administration in a right and proper way, in right conditions?
JT I think, so far, it would. Paul’s discourse would be irregular in that sense, but it was because it was necessary: as if he would say, I have to say much before you break bread, because you are not doing it properly. So we are reminded that Paul has the last word on that point, and, indeed, in all matters relating to the assembly. What he received from the Lord as to the Supper is of somewhat less volume than what is seen in the gospel narrative. He adds and subtracts. So in 1 Corinthians we have especially the memorial attaching to the cup, which we do not find anywhere else. We find constant allusions in our statements to the Lord, such as ‘to remember Thee in Thy death’, whereas, it is to remember Him, not anything He has done; not that that would be belittled, but it is to remember Him, and, especially as to the cup, that it is called a memorial, ‘for the calling of me to mind’ (see note to verse 24), as the apostle says, quoting the Lord.
PHH Would you say that the mind has to be fully under control and directed into certain channels?
JT I think that is what is implied; the mind is under control, and if it is not it will lead to irregularity or looseness. ‘For the calling of me to mind’. It is the Person who acts on the mind; the mind is supposed to be under [p. 24] His control. Hence the importance of disengaging oneself from aught else, so that the mind should not be affected by aught else but what the Lord said.
Ques How do we come to the Supper? As brethren in John 20, or as in the Song of Songs 8:5, “Leaning upon her beloved”?
JT I would say, as disciples, meaning that we are learners; everything we are doing, we have learnt to do. But what we are as His brethren would come in in its place; what we are as of the assembly would come in in its place: and what we are as the sons of God would come in in its place. But the idea is of teaching; “all things which Jesus began both to do and to teach”, Acts 1:1. So, in the passage read in Acts 2, “they persevered in the teaching and fellowship of the apostles”, Acts 2:42, these two things particularly; they persevered in these two things, what the apostles instituted and confirmed under the Lord’s guidance. It is to stress the authority of the apostles.
JMcM Are you seeking to bring before us the light that governs us as we sit down together?
JT Yes, but particularly as to administration, meaning, the way things are done.
APA Paul says: “Be my imitators, even as I also [am] of Christ”, 1 Corinthians 11:1. Is that a question of what he did, before he touches on the teaching?
JT The word imitators is, of course, important, and it bears on what we are speaking of. The idea of imitators is to pass on from Paul to ourselves, “as I also ... of Christ”.
PHH You referred to the cup, especially the cup. We have been helped in past years to link up the cup with the love of God, the new covenant in that aspect, and now we seem encouraged to link it more with the Person of Christ and His love. Would you help us as to “the new covenant in my blood”? 1 Corinthians 11:25.
JT It is not to be in the least ignored or minimized:
“the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye shall drink it, in remembrance of me”, 1 Corinthians 11:25. It is for a “remembrance of me”, which you do not get in Jeremiah. That is the thing to be borne in mind. It is given by the Lord Himself first and then through the apostle. As Moses delivered formally the instruction as to the passover to Israel, he reduced certain things, omitted certain things that had been in the body of the instruction and he added certain things. He reduced the volume, as anyone will see if he looks at Exodus 12. The passover, the great sacrament of Israel, is given by Jehovah to Moses in the body of the chapter; but from verse 21 to verse 28 Moses, of his own volition, furnishes what the Lord instructed him to say to Israel, and as the passage shows, the verses were only eight out of a great many. By addition and subtraction there is a change in the form of words; and now there is a striking analogy in 1 Corinthians 11. The Lord reduced the instructions recorded in the gospels as to the Supper, changing some words, and adding the idea of memorial to the cup; which would seem to point to Paul’s position being in mind and would link the ministry of the assembly with what the Lord gave to him. That fits in with what is now called the Lord’s supper, the fixity of it; and it should govern us in all our wording as to it. It should be in mind as to all we say as to it.
PHH Would it be right to say that the calling of Him to mind brings before us Christ in glory? Does the glory thus shine upon the Supper more than any other term we might use, such as remembrance of His death?
JT Quite so. It is the Lord in glory really; it is the Lord’s supper, really a heavenly matter. It is not intended to be carried on by Israel. The Lord’s supper in the assembly could not be used by Israel.
PHH So adding the memorial to the cup would be a kind of double testimony to the Lord in that way?
JT There is a dual testimony in the Lord’s supper,
[p. 26] as if the Lord had such pleasure in it that He would stress it upon our minds. In Emmaus there was only bread, as far as we know; but at Jerusalem it was clearly the Lord’s supper, the bread and the cup.
AMh Do you suggest that in the cup our minds follow into deeper thoughts of the Lord’s love as we call Him to mind? In this additional thought of remembrance connected with the cup in 1 Corinthians 11, I was wondering whether, as we proceed rightly as under the Lord, calling Him to mind, our thoughts would deepen: there would be an enrichment in the thought of His love.
JT I would think so. The word drink carries with it the thought of satisfaction. An important thing for a young christian, that he or she has come into what satisfies. The Supper is there from the very outset of the service, and the Spirit Himself, being there, is going to make everything good to us. There is no doubt the Spirit is alluded to in the drinking.
AMh Would you say that the Lord loves to come to us? Does that cover the whole Supper at that time? One has been concerned as to apprehending the real presence of the Lord with us.
JT The Lord is very thoughtful of us. Paul speaks of us as children, and the Lord Himself calls us children in John 20 and John 21. He thinks very tenderly of us and would not leave us orphans, He says. He would have us to go on with the service in the light of the fact that He is cast out of Jerusalem, as the remnant in the future will be cast out of Jerusalem. The Lord was cast out and He counts on our missing Him. He is robbed of His rights and put to death in the robbery. So I think He would be very tender with us and assure us that we are not to be left alone in the matter. As we are patient and proceed in the service, we shall find satisfaction, because the Spirit of God is there Himself, and He sheds the love of God abroad in our hearts; He operates for our satisfaction.
[p. 27] FI As to the Lord coming in, is it consequent on the remembrance in the loaf or in the cup as well? Must it be complete?
JT Each feature has its place. At Emmaus He was made known in the breaking of bread, He did not stay, He vanished; whereas in the Supper He does stay. The dual character of the thing would mean that He is all the more attracted by what moves in our hearts. He is ready to join in and teach us whatever it may be that we should know. He is ready therefore, as we have been saying: “I will not leave you orphans, I am coming to you”, John 14:18. But then we must not say He is obliged to come because we call Him to mind. We can never assume that He is obliged to do anything; we must let love have its scope, its way, in Him. Even if He were not so sensibly present at one time as another, we have to look into ourselves as to it and not assume He must come.
JC Would the Lord be watching the movements of the heart at that time.
JT He would.
Ques “We being assembled to break bread”, Acts 20:7. Would that include the cup?
JT I think that would mean that the whole matter was there, the Supper entirely, only, there is this to be said about Troas, that the apostle had something apparently in his mind that they needed in the sense of correction, because the actual Supper did not proceed at once. The fall of Eutychus intervenes, and then we are told they broke bread after that. So it must have been special as pointing to some need at Troas. Another thing to be noticed, I think, is that there were seven brothers there who were representative of Paul’s work. If you look at the names given and the places, you will see that they were there evidently for some purpose. All the brethren that are with him seem to show that Troas needed some particular instruction, and the apostle would have the witnesses there so that they would know [p. 28] how to break bread again. What happened was most distressing, the boy falling down; it was an extraordinary occasion, and cannot be taken as representing the order of the Lord’s supper. There was something that had to be corrected. Is that clear?
Rem It is sometimes thought to be normal and you indicate that it is not quite normal.
JT I would say it was an abnormal situation. The fellowship is in the light. “And there were many lights in the upper room”, Acts 20:8, which would mean, I think, that those brothers were lights and enhanced the occasion. Paul needed to speak at length, and then the matter of Eutychus should be felt by the local people as involving carelessness; that God should intervene in such a serious matter and that Paul should be so indispensable in the occasion. It is to draw attention to these things. So, in our own times, the Supper has been revived, and the Lord has been pleased to instruct us from year to year and month to month, till it would look as if the brethren had more or less the right thought now. But what we are seeking to do now is to call attention to the need of administration; the want of care in administering the wonderful things of God.
HG The apostle says: “Do ye not then know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world is judged by you, are ye unworthy of the smallest judgements”? 1 Corinthians 6:2. Does the Supper come in to bear on us in view of that?
JT I think it does; the order that becomes the Supper is seen in the eating. In the remarkable connection that eating is found in connection with the Supper, it would look as if we are reminded that it is a household matter as the passover was a household matter; and the saints will do well to look after their children. Because, if they are not old enough to have part in the institution, they are there and should be taught as to it; the need of holiness there.
PHH Paul says, “we have the mind of Christ”, 1 Corinthians 2:16. Does that mean that, as the service of God goes on and rises, whatever is needed in the mind of the Lord should have a powerful place in our minds so that we think along with Him?
JT Just so. He is looking for something beyond what the world affords. “I speak as to intelligent persons”, 1 Corinthians 10:15. What does that mean? If there were fifty brethren there as well as the sisters, he is crediting them with intelligence and they will soon be tested. They were tested at Troas, I believe, and that is why the apostle had to speak at such length to them. The Lord is thinking of what the house of God is; it is not an ordinary matter at all. The house of God is a heavenly order of things brought down into the presence of persons in this world. It is as if the Lord would say, This is the order of My house, and we are concerned to behave, we are enjoined to behave in it. “If I delay, in order that thou mayest know how one ought to conduct oneself in God’s house, which is the assembly of the living God, the pillar and base of the truth”, 1 Timothy 3:15. I think the Lord intended His people to be very sensitive as to that. The Corinthians were disgracefully abusing the Supper. Paul says of their gathering together. “it is not to eat the Lord’s supper”, 1 Corinthians 11:20; you may think it is, but it is not in my mind; that is what he means. Now we have what is from heaven, brought down to earth and it is to be revered; each one knowing how to behave himself there.
GCS “The Lord added to the assembly daily those that were to be saved”, Acts 2:47. Would the maintenance of these divine principles preserve us from what is current around?
JT Quite so; such as were to be saved. All the children among the brethren are intended to regard themselves as those who are to be saved. Every parent should regard his children in that light. That they are to [p. 30] be saved would mean that they are saved from all the wickedness and misbehaviour abroad, the unholiness. All that must enter into it: for in the passage we have, “For as often as ye shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye announce the death of the Lord, until he come. So that whosoever shall eat the bread, or drink the cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty in respect of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself, and thus eat of the bread” 1 Corinthians 11:26 - 28 — it is a question of eating and what accompanies the eating — “and drink of the cup. For the eater and drinker eats and drinks judgment to himself, not distinguishing the body. On this account many among you are weak and infirm, and a good many are fallen asleep. But if we judged ourselves, so were we not judged. But being judged, we are disciplined of the Lord, that we may not be condemned with the world. So that, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, wait for one another”, 1 Corinthians 11:28 - 33.
They were to have consideration for one another in a comely way. “If any one be hungry, let him eat at home” 1 Corinthians 11:34. How practical the apostle is! It is not a place for ordinary eating and drinking at all; they were despising the assembly of God. “Let him eat at home, that ye may not come together for judgment. But the other things, whenever I come, I will set in order” 1 Corinthians 11:34: meaning, that certain things were still in abeyance, and the point was order.
GWB Are we to move in becoming dignity consistent with the greatness and dignity of the Person we are remembering?
JT Quite so. Think of the dignity of the Lord of glory. As has already been remarked, “we have the mind of Christ”, 1 Corinthians 2:16, the means of thinking and doing things as He does. That is what is meant; the thinking faculty of the Lord, and knowing how to do things. There should be no excuse for misbehaviour. “I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you”, 1 Corinthians 11:23.
PHH [p. 31] Would that give us ability to enter into the spiritual levels that were in the Lord’s mind? I know you are speaking now more about order, but I am thinking of what we touch if things are in order: the relationships with God and the thought of the greatest things.
JT I think the apostle has that in mind. It is implied in all that he says. You are brought into wonderful things: there is nothing like it in the whole universe. It is for you; others have no part or lot in the matter. It is most exclusive, so see that you behave yourselves, so as to be there as you should be, so as to adorn the position.
Rem Conditions would make room for the Lord to come in Himself.
JT So that He can be free with us. He does not need to speak to reprove or correct. So we have the Old Testament types of the Lord’s way in the assembly, for example, in the Song of Solomon, where the assembly is seen as coming up out of the wilderness; meaning that she is free from the defilement of it. She was coming up in a comely way. Then it goes on in that very chapter to show what there was; what the daughters of Jerusalem were ready to do, and then the Lord’s matter: “in the day of his espousals, and in the day of the gladness of his heart”, Song of Songs 3:11. He would be free in that way to be with us in the Supper. The different things mentioned already, such as the idea of disciples, are there. As we leave our houses and come through the streets and sit down, we are clean and light and orderly, and ready for greater things. So when the Supper comes in we are ready for it, and there is the state there that the Lord can come to, and does come to. Then the brethren, what His brethren are to Him; and then what the assembly is to Him. The feminine side comes in there. His time with the assembly, a great and glorious thought! We, the persons who have part in it. Then God’s part comes in. The Lord sees to that. That is what we ought to look for and expect.
GCS [p. 32] Is that what you meant when you said the other day that the masculine and responsible side should come first before the feminine side? Should we come up feeling our responsibility?
JT I think so. I think the types, especially in Genesis, help us as to the Lord’s relations with the assembly viewed as representing the feminine element, of which the Scriptures are very full too, as applied to Israel; but they are also full as applied to the assembly. This is especially seen in the types in Genesis 24; Genesis 26. Then we come down to the other types, such as Abigail. We were noticing recently, in view of the great sorrow that has come in in the removal of our brother, that Samuel died, and all Israel mourned for him; see 1 Samuel 25:1. One verse is devoted to that, and then it says, “David arose and went”, 1 Samuel 25:1, and so on. Then Abigail comes into view. The whole chapter is full of Christ and the assembly; not simply Christ Himself, but Christ and the assembly, and that is an immense thing.
AG When we come together in assembly, have we all the rights of Christ in our mind? Abigail could speak of what David was coming into.
JT She does, indeed! and speaks of him in contrast to Saul. She says to David, “a man is risen up to pursue thee”, 1 Samuel 25:29. Samuel was gone; David was everything now. Christ and the assembly immediately come into view: and it is the same today, and ever since the Lord’s exaltation to heaven. He has His assembly down here, not Israel, or the nations yet, but “my assembly”. He is going on with it.
PHH Do you mean that His brethren would merge in this great feminine thought of the assembly and lead to it?
JT The brethren, or the sons, are the persons who form it, but we must understand the feminine side as in the counsels of God.
PHH I understand that, but is there not a feminine [p. 33] side which is touched in the Supper, the marital affection? Where would you bring that in?
JT I would bring it in with the masculine. The feminine is for the Lord’s enjoyment. We read of Isaac “dallying with Rebecca his wife”, (Genesis 26:8). A remarkable word! And in chapter 24, as Rebecca is about to arrive, “he lifted up his eyes and saw, and behold, camels were coming”, (Genesis 24:63); what occupied Isaac was the means by which she was carried. What are we carried by as we come into the assembly? What loveliness is there in it for the Lord? Isaac was not doing very much. He was coming and going to that well, Beer-lahai-roi. It is a question of how much the saints make of the Spirit now; and then immediately the camels are seen. Rebecca alights off the camels, but she had already learnt who the man was. She knew who he was; and, I suppose, the assembly knows: if any know, the assembly knows. Angels of God are taken up with “the all-various wisdom of God”, (Ephesians 3:10), in the assembly; not “the all-various wisdom of God”, (Ephesians 3:10) by itself, but in the assembly. As I was saying, the Spirit, in type, is now near Isaac’s place, and he is not like Joseph, a man of affairs, to take a meal with his brethren; but he is a man of leisure and presently he is “dallying with his wife”. The present time is a time of Christ and the assembly; not Israel or the nations; not a universe, but He is devoted to the assembly. So we are told in the types that a man is not to go to war for a year after he has taken a wife; see Deuteronomy 24:5. The Lord wants us with Him.
Rem In Song of Songs 2:6 “His left hand is under my head, and his right hand doth embrace me”. Would that come in?
JT Song of Solomon, of course, is full of what we are saying. Although it will have application to Israel, it is really for the present time, and the Lord has made great use of it. I think the brethren will all bear testimony [p. 34] to that, that the Lord has made great use of “The song of songs, which is Solomon’s”. Song of Songs 1:1.
HW Do you think that is in view of being “ready to depart on the morrow”, Acts 20:7? Would that feature be marking us just now?
JT They were comforted, ready to recognise all that the Lord did for them through Paul.
Ques Paul says, “I have espoused you unto one man, to present you a chaste virgin to Christ”, 2 Corinthians 11:2. Would conditions amongst us have that in view?
JT That shows how Christ was on Paul’s side in the matter. He says, “I speak as to Christ, and as to the assembly”, Ephesians 5:32. Many of us do not speak of the assembly; they speak of Christ readily, but let us speak of the assembly.
FI When you referred to the masculine in relation to the feminine, were you referring to Christ or the brethren?
JT The brethren represent that part, as we see in Jonathan and David. Jonathan’s love to David surpassed the love of women. That is masculine; later it is feminine in that chapter in Samuel. The women went out to sing praises of him, and so “all Israel and Judah loved David”, 1 Samuel 18:16.