THE LORD MAINTAINING CONTACT WITH HIS OWN
[p. 399] THE LORD MAINTAINING CONTACT WITH HIS OWN
John 14:15 - 25; 1 Corinthians 15:3 - 9
JT It came to me this morning that Paul’s remarks in this fifteenth chapter of his first letter to the Corinthians are particularly significant just now, as showing how the Lord though in heaven maintains contact with His people, the contact being continuous according to this passage, continuous from the time of His resurrection. We cannot say it ever terminated, but evidently it alludes to the assembly and runs on down to Paul as he reports, and this fact shows that it is maintained after He went up to heaven. Events began with the appearance to Cephas, according to verse 5, then to the twelve, then to above five hundred brethren at once, then to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all as an abortion, the apostle says, He appeared to me also. We know that He appeared at other times to Paul, and obviously it was Himself, not merely in a spiritual sense, but actually Himself. Then John 14 describes in a general way what enters into this dispensation, evidently dependent on the Spirit, as it is worked out from John 14:15, “If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you”, and then, “I will not leave you orphans, I am coming to you”, John 14:18. That is the point where we link on with 1 Corinthians, or 1 Corinthians links on with John. I was impressed at the breaking of bread this morning that the Lord maintains contact with us, actual contact with us in the assembly.
[p. 400] Ques Would you say a word as to the difference between the way the Lord maintains contact with us characteristically, with those that love Him, and yet the fact that we break bread in His absence and He comes to us specifically?
JT I think these facts we have already spoken of would imply that the Lord intended in the earlier comings and goings to accustom His saints, as forming the assembly, to the thought of His visitations. We are told in Acts 1:21 that a witness was to be chosen “of the men who have assembled with us all the time in which the Lord Jesus came in and went out among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day in which he was taken up from us”. He, therefore, accustomed them to that principle of coming in and going out amongst His own, apparently intending to carry it on after He died and rose and went to heaven. He could have effected the same thing in a certain sense in a mediatorial way coming through others, taking up servants and using them in a representative way, but He evidently desired to do the thing Himself. Of course, the Spirit would be here, and I think this thought is worked out from that fact — that He would be here. At the same time the Lord is clearly saying He would act Himself, and Paul also said that He did come Himself, and he is a testimony to it.
AJG Is that intended to impress us with the special intimacy that is to exist between Christ and the assembly?
JT I think on those lines. Verses 15, 16 and 17 of John 14 contemplate very great intimacy between Himself and the disciples, and He calls attention to the fact “that he may be with you”. “I will beg the Father, and he will give you another Comforter”, John 14:16, the word is ‘Paraclete’, one with us all the time, alongside of us, corresponding with the Lord’s presence above. There is a point of contact between [p. 401] the Spirit and the Lord. He would accustom them to the Spirit as He came down, as if the Lord would make it a matter of custom, so that they should understand the Spirit’s presence here, and here permanently, so He says, “another Comforter, that he may be with you for ever, the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see him nor know him: but ye know him, for he abides with you, and shall be in you”, that is the Spirit was there, I apprehend, in the Lord Himself, which would enable them to become acquainted with Him in the manner of His dwelling in the Lord Jesus. “I will not leave you orphans, I am coming to you”, as though the Lord intended to make them accustomed to the great facts of the movements of divine Persons, particularly His own.
Rem So that the contact between the Lord and the assembly is really maintained by reason of the fact of the Spirit being here, and yet it is the Lord Himself.
JT While the Lord was here the Spirit was here in Him, and they thus became accustomed to the manner of the Spirit’s presence here, but it would be more so when He was not only with them, but in them.
AJG Does that imply we should be more sensitive to the Spirit’s presence and movements, as well as sensitive to the Lord’s own drawing near?
JT That is an important matter. I wonder whether we can discern holy, divine Persons severally. It seems to me as if the Lord would tell us that it can be so.
JRS Have you in your mind the Holy Spirit being here permanently would prepare the disciples for these visitations?
JT I think that is right. His own promise would prepare them for that, and His own habit, too,
[p. 402] before He died. He came in and went out amongst them. All that was educational.
Ques Do you think if we were more in the characteristic recognition of the presence of the Spirit the ability to discern the Lord’s movements would be developed with us?
JT I think that is the way it works out. We are really entering on a matter which is inscrutable. In a general sense who could undertake to say it is the Lord, and not the Father, the Spirit and not the Lord, yet the Lord intimates that they may be discerned.
Ques Have you specially in mind the Supper, and the peculiar way that affords opportunity for the Lord to come to us?
JT I think that is right. The Lord is teaching us in a very tender way. He intended the Supper to be the beginning of things as regards the service of God, because clearly it goes deeper and deeper. We have the idea of the depths of God, and we go deeper and deeper as we proceed in the Lord’s supper. We go deeper and deeper, and it makes way for other things, and these other things make way for the Father. The Lord has His intercourse with the assembly initially, then His intercourse with us maritally, as we might say, when there is clearly in His mind a time that should be devoted to that. We were speaking this morning about Isaac’s dallying with Rebecca, and his relation to her was not disclosed publicly until it happened, that is to say, after a long sojourn in Gerar, among the Philistines. The king of the Philistines looked out through a window and saw this, and called attention to it, and it was evidenced that she was his wife, not only his sister. I think that enters into the ever-deepening of the relations both with His saints viewed as the assembly specifically, and then His relations with the Father; the Spirit, too, coming in in the whole [p. 403] course of the meeting. The Spirit has His place with ourselves, even in our houses, and on the way to the meeting, and in the meeting, and then the Lord taking account of the saints viewed as the assembly in a feminine sense, then there is the thought of what the Spirit is. The Father is pleased to speak of Him as the Spirit of adoption — the Spirit of sonship, so that it seems to me clear that divine Persons are intended to be known severally.
Rem And each making room for each other, the Father being content that the Son should have something for Himself, but the Son Himself anxious that the Father should have His portion. Do you think we get, as it were, the unselfishness of divine love?
JT Just so. The Scriptures abound with illustrations of the matter, because it is the greatest possible matter, it must be; especially in the Song of Songs there are illustrations, and in certain remarks of Paul’s in his letters to Corinth and Ephesus.
Ques Do you think Paul’s prayer in Ephesians 1:17 would help in this matter of discernment, “that ... the Father of glory, would give you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the full knowledge of him, being enlightened in the eyes of your heart?”
JT I think that is very appropriate to bring in here. You can understand how the Father would open up things for us in that sense, and especially in view of His own inheritance. What a domain it is, how wide, and how the spirit of liberty governs and enters into it throughout.
Ques May we refer back for a moment to the thought of dallying in Genesis 26? You were speaking this morning of time being given for it. Would the bride in the Song of Songs be in keeping with that in her charge to the daughters of Jerusalem to “stir not up nor awake my love till he please?” Song of Songs 2:7. Is it in your mind that the saints should have a particular portion for Christ in their minds as understanding [p. 404] He would fill it out before taking us on to the service of God?
JT What touches there are as to feelings between the feminine and masculine speakers. There is no reference really, you may say, to God, as though we are intended to think that the Lord Jesus takes up the time with the assembly, the Father, as it were leaves Him with that.
JJT Why does the apostle link this great matter with the glad tidings?
JT I think to bring out the truth of the dispensation in Corinth. It was what they had received, “For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; and that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures; and that he was seen of Cephas”, and then the list, as though he intended that these great facts should run down into the dispensation. I believe that is the intent. The dispensation is unique; there has never been one like it, and never will be. The Lord intended that He should have His way in it, and Paul, of course, writes by the Spirit, and gives us these facts, ending the list with himself.
GWB I should like to ask, to grasp what is in your mind, you do not say, do you, there is any manifestation by the Lord apart from the Spirit?
JT I should not like to say that. What have you in your mind?
GWB I thought that you were distinguishing between the Lord coming and the Spirit being with us.
JT You speak of manifestations.
GWB I mean what you referred to at the beginning, the Lord coming to us.
JT What is your question?
GWB Whether the Lord would come to us in any way apart from the [p. 405] Spirit?
JT I do not see why you should say that, because Paul’s record applies, that the Lord literally came out of heaven to see him. I should say at this point the Spirit was not in Paul, is that not so?
AJG You are referring to the Lord appearing to him on the road to Damascus?
JT That is what Paul is alluding to here.
FW What is the difference between manifestation and appearing?
JT The word here is ‘appearing’.
FW One seems to be conditional, that is in John which is a love matter; in 1 Corinthians it is the Lord’s operations in view of what He has in mind.
JT Manifestation in John is a characteristic word. As regards appearing, what we are dealing with now is whether the Lord could appear otherwise than by the Spirit, or in relation to the Spirit, and I think what has been said shows that He could or did. What do you think about that, Mr. G.?
AJG I was looking up the passage in the Acts where it says, “the following night the Lord stood by him”, Acts 23:11. Would that link on with what you are saying?
JT Chapter 9 is the first instance.
WC In the second passage Paul had received the Spirit.
JT Quite so. In chapter 9 certainly not so, and that is important, although I must confess the question has never been raised before.
AJG I think we have always rather assumed that the Lord manifesting Himself to us in assembly was conditional, and dependent on the presence of the Spirit.
JT No doubt. Our brother has raised the question now, and this passage in Acts 9:4 has been cited: “Saul, Saul, why dost thou persecute me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutes!” — that is the Lord personally — “[p. 406] But rise up and enter into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do ... And Saul rose up from the earth, and his eyes being opened he saw no one. But leading him by the hand they brought him into Damascus. And he was three days without seeing, and neither ate nor drank”. Now elsewhere we are told that he received the Spirit. “Arise and get baptised, and have thy sins washed away”, Ananias told him, Acts 22:16, and he became indwelt by the Spirit.
WC Would you make a difference between appearing in grace, and appearing in love? Would the first be in relation to the gospel and the second the assembly?
JT Quite so. We cannot belittle the fact that the Spirit is here, and that is what we begin with. At the same time we may as well face the fact if it involves the truth.
GHM Does it bear upon the point that as Isaac walked in the fields it was Rebecca who detected him?
JT He did not notice Rebecca first. Isaac noted the camels, but she saw him: he was coming from the well Lahai-roi, coming and going as you might say, that was in his mind, and you cannot assume Rebecca had the Spirit typically even yet.
Rem In John 20:22 it speaks of their receiving the Spirit after Christ had appeared to them.
JT Yes, they had not got the Spirit. He breathed into them after He came in. Another instance.
Ques When the disciple whom Jesus loved said, It is the Lord, does this bear on it? I thought it was the Lord Himself — what you had in mind.
JT That is what we should see; the Lord Himself came and spoke to Paul, and He appeared to these several ones after He arose, before they had the [p. 407] Spirit.
CH Is your point that divine Persons each have a right to act by Themselves as well as in collaboration with one another?
JT I am not sure collaboration is on the same ground. The Lord says He does nothing of Himself save what He sees the Father doing. We have to analyse our words. It is all a mystery. As a matter of fact we are dealing with the most sacred, and greatest things, and in touching them need to be in the attitude of Isaac, a type of the Lord Himself; he was coming and going to the well, as if that were in his mind, and that was in the Lord’s mind as He rose from the dead until He went up to heaven. Rebecca, until she saw Isaac, is not a type of a person who has the Spirit.
Ques What would the camels suggest?
JT It is a question of the Spirit as the power for carrying.
Ques Is there any light for us in the fact that the Spirit of God is scarcely mentioned in Colossians? As though the epistle being indited by the Spirit He seems to keep Himself out of the matter, so that a clear view may be seen of Christ, that we may not have two persons in our minds — it is the greatness of Christ.
JT And the greatness of the saints as subjects of the work of the Spirit, what He has effected.
Ques What bearing has the passage in 2 Corinthians 3:17, “the Spirit of the Lord”, and, “the Lord the Spirit”?
JT Another passage which bears on it. The Lord is the quickening Spirit, but that does not mean that He is the Holy Spirit, nor the Holy Spirit in the sense of the passage which you quote. You must keep divine Persons clear in your mind.
Rem The Lord is the Spirit of the covenant.
JT I think so: it is carried down into what was said [p. 408] earlier.
Rem Yet it is the Lord — that Person.
CH I think our brother had the scripture in his mind, “even as by (the) Lord (the) Spirit”, 2 Corinthians 3:18. The two are linked together. I think we should like some help on this, because we have thought that the Lord’s coming to His own, especially in assembly, was by the medium of the Spirit of God.
JT I think the Lord is jealous about all these matters we are speaking of, and He would be jealous about His personal relations with the assembly.
JSE Is it right to say that in the measure in which we make room for the Holy Spirit and His teaching in relation to the truth of the assembly we become capacitated to discern the Lord Himself when He comes?
JT Quite so, but remember that the saints are personal entities, and are personal formations, collective formations, too, but personal entities, and have to be regarded according to what has been said in Colossians. The Spirit of God is putting forward in Colossians His own work, and that work makes much of Christ. The first chapter shows how the Colossian saints are regarded as capable of that, and Paul speaks about his face, so that whilst the Spirit is here, the power of everything, so to speak, yet His formation, His own work is in persons, and these persons are entities, and they can do things. I am only saying that to make everything clear. Whilst you say they are dependent on the Spirit, and they are, the Spirit would have us think of His own work. “What has God wrought!” (62:1), that will come out presently, and be taken account of by itself, and the assembly by itself. That will be the great word — what has God wrought! But what He is working now is the point for us, how the brethren have come through, and the Lord is ready to make much of that.
AJG Would you say what is in your mind regarding this thought of the Lord manifesting Himself [p. 409] to His own? John 14 seems to flow out of the reference to the Comforter being sent.
JT That is just what I was thinking. We should begin with, “If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will beg the Father, and he will give you another Comforter, that he may be with you for ever”. Another Comforter is another Person: the Lord was one Comforter when He was here. He was the Paraclete in the midst, by them, and the Spirit is to be the same. First He is with them, and then in them, so that it seems to me we ought to make allowance when we speak of the Spirit doing things for what He has done, what the persons are that are affected, as after all, we shall be there as persons.
WC Would “if ye love me” imply spiritual persons?
JT I should think so: it was His own work.
EH It has been said that in assembly the Spirit impersonates the Lord. What would you say about that?
JT Maybe I have said it myself.
EH I think you did.
JT We had better go by what we are saying today.
Rem I think you said the Lord impersonates Himself by the Spirit.
JT That would be nearer. There is such a thing as impersonation. In regard of Elias, it is “If ye will receive it, this is Elias, who is to come”, Matthew 11:14. In some sense he impersonated Elias. The Spirit may be viewed in that way as impersonating Christ. We cannot go all the way, but what we are saying here today is the truth, let everybody say whether it is or whether it is not. Paul was appeared to by the Lord, the Spirit was not the agent, and yet the Lord appeared to him; he says so in 1 Corinthians 15:8.
Ques Whilst you would allow that the Lord from [p. 410] His side may not choose to use that way of drawing near, from our side would it not be that the power to recognise the Lord and response largely lies in the work of the Spirit in our hearts?
JT Quite so. If you think of the brethren who form the assembly, when the Lord comes in they would recognise Him, and He them. I believe that is what is meant. He intended to make them familiar with Himself before He died. If He is thinking of making Himself personally acquainted with them He stays with them forty days, but if He is thinking of being in heaven, and the service on earth, He does not stay a day according to Luke. Why should there be such a difference? He is thinking of one thing in Acts and another in Luke. In the latter He is thinking of the great matter of administration He was going to take up. Whereas in Acts it is another view, and so the writer sees the Lord forty days on earth before He goes up, and tells us what happens in that period. But all that happened as described in 1 Corinthians 15 is not told, because Paul’s case was later, and perhaps some of the other events were later.
AM Is there a reason why Paul refers to spiritual manifestations in 1 Corinthians 12 and 1 Corinthians 14, before chapter 15? Is there any link between the latter and spiritual manifestations? The first verse of 1 Corinthians 12:1 is “concerning spiritual manifestations”, and the first verse of 1 Corinthians 14:1 is “Follow after love, and be emulous of spiritual manifestations, but rather that ye may prophesy”. In chapter 12 he brings in the thought of distinguishing between the operations of divine Persons. I wondered what relation that would have to chapter 15.
JT I do not think there is much connection; the word ‘spiritual’ is by itself. It is the idea of spirituals, what would come out doubtless in the Spirit in the assembly, and we have much of that in [p. 411] our ministry meetings. Our ministry meetings really work out from that. There is not much if there is not something of that kind, but when you come to chapter 15 the apostle is dealing with the whole matter of Christianity beginning with the gospel. Then he goes on to the appearings. He begins with Cephas. Luke says He appeared to Simon, but this in Corinthians is another view, it has reference to the assembly, the apostle is speaking of assembly material in this passage. The name Cephas was given by the Lord to Peter, and clearly is material. The same with Matthew 16 — assembly material, and I think we should bear that in mind, in chapter 15, because it is the gospel right down to the coming of the Lord and the eternal conditions — a very wide scope.
That that we began with in John 14 ought to be dealt with now, bearing in mind 1 Corinthians 15. What is said in John 14 in the passage read is collateral, as showing how the Lord familiarised the disciples with Himself, and with the Spirit, so that when the Spirit comes He was to be apprehended as a Comforter, a Person, and that He dwelt with them which would mean He was with them while the Lord was here, now dwelling in them, the same Person.
Rem He was with them while the Lord was here, in the Lord.
JT Quite so. The Spirit operated while the Lord was here, too, and yet we cannot say He operated through the Lord.
GHM Does not a good deal hinge on another side, in the sense of being additional and not substitutional?
JT The idea of the additional thought was there before the Spirit came from heaven, sent by the Father. “If I by the Spirit of God cast out demons”, Matthew 12:28. He did things by the Spirit. The Spirit did things, too, by Himself, as people were born again, Nicodemus was, I would say, “Separate me now Barnabas and Saul”, Acts 13:2, was the Spirit’s action.
CG The Lord distinguished between the Spirit coming to them and His own movements toward them. They are distinct movements from distinct Persons.
JT Quite so. It is important that the Spirit was not here officially till the Lord went up. The Lord was full of the matter that the Spirit would come. This is how it reads: “And I will beg the Father, and he will give you another Comforter, that he may be with you for ever, the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see him nor know him; but ye know him”. He had not come yet, they were not indwelt, but He says, Ye know Him, He abides with you. I understand that as being in the Lord, though He was here in a sense in the Old Testament times. This passage, however, is very definite and specific. It is emphatic. “Ye know him, for he abides with you and shall be in you”. Coming to you is another matter, the two things have to be held as they are. The Spirit would come, and the Lord would come.
CG In what sense do we know the Spirit?
JT I wish I knew, I really do, because I am sure it is a matter to be considered. I would say surely these meetings are for that purpose, suggestions come to us that have not come to us before, and we are to follow them up.
Rem In Acts 8:29 it is first the angel of the Lord. Later on the Spirit said, “Go near, and join thyself to this chariot”.
JT It is good to bring that out. It shows we are in the realm of divine operations. The angel first, and then the Spirit, we are advancing in quality, and so the Spirit says, “Go ... join thyself to this chariot”. The Spirit was thinking of the Ethiopian eunuch and thinking of Philip. He had done well in [p. 413] doing what the angel told him to do, and now he is told to join himself to the chariot, and does it, and then we are told, pursuing that subject, that the Spirit raptured Philip. That is another matter, it is His own action, too, He took Philip away.
JRS Do you think light can be gained individually apart from coming out in the meetings?
JT I would be governed by the things that happen. If, for instance, I am on the street and a car is liable to run over and kill me, and it does not, I would say that was angelic, I would know who the agent was, because the angels are deputed for that thing.
AJG As Peter preached in Acts 10 the Spirit fell on his hearers. That would seem to suggest there should be ability to recognise the Spirit’s own movements and speaking.
JT I am sure that is right, and you are speaking as I am. We should be finding out about these things.
Rem Verse 17, “The Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see him nor know him; but ye know him, for he abides with you, and shall be in you”. The last clause is prospective. Was the first one present then, “He abides with you?” Do you read that to mean the Spirit was there abiding with them, as in the Lord? The latter what He would be as coming down?
JT I do.
AM Yet it says, “that he may be with you for ever”, that would not be in the Lord.
JT I suppose the thought is both now. The constitution in the assembly is the Spirit with us and in us. No one of us has the Spirit by himself, or could contain Him by himself. The Spirit is here collectively. He has come down to the assembly. No one of us could receive the Spirit by himself, and contain Him, but the assembly can. So we have the word in John 3:34, “God gives not the Spirit by measure”.
JRS Would it greatly help us in our meetings for prayer if we recognised that the Spirit was not individual, but in the company?
JT You do not want Him that way, any more than you want to go up to heaven by yourself. We shall go up together with the brethren, and so it is that the blessed Spirit in His operations works collectively, but also individually, too, but individually as in the company.
Rem So in the beginning of Acts the Spirit “filled all the house where they were sitting”, and, “sat upon each one of them”, Acts 2:3. The collective position was there, but every individual formed an integral part of it.
JTJr Would it be right to refer to Ezekiel 43 in relation to our assembly service? “The Spirit lifted me up”, “and the man stood by me”, Ezekiel 43:6. Is the Lord apprehended in manhood?
JT That is good. The man stood by me, you could hardly say that is the Spirit. The same thing could be said when the Lord was here — a Man stood by the brethren. The Spirit operating, but not as indwelling.
CH I was wondering whether that passage, “abides with you and shall be in you”, rather confirms what you said earlier as to our depending on the Spirit in a general way, and what He has effected in the souls of the saints.
JT It would work out for us that way as to happenings. I was speaking about angelic service. I think I could discover who had acted by what was done. This meeting is not a question of angelic help, but the Lord’s voice may be heard. I would go by what was said, and how it was said. The Spirit’s voice may be heard, and would mean He is speaking in relation to the company.
AJG In addition to the great fact that [p. 415] the Spirit abides with us for ever, there is this matter of the Lord’s personal visitations.
JT I should not like to give it up; it is spiritual and mysterious and both are true. There is such a thing as the Lord coming, and these instances we have show that He can come personally.
Rem Would you not say He does come?
JT I would. When I say ‘come’, the Lord Jesus can come out of heaven any time He pleases in a corporeal sense. I do not say He does, but He could.
Rem If you say the Lord can only come by the Spirit you are limiting a divine Person, and we can all see that to do so is not correct, yet when it comes to our apprehension and enjoyment and response to the Lord’s movements, is this not contingent on the fact that the Spirit of God has worked in our hearts?
JT I think that helps us as to the part the Lord takes Himself. If He is speaking in relation to the company, or to the whole assembly, I would gather He was speaking by the Spirit. Hence when the word came to Antioch Paul and Barnabas had been there for a year. They were in the assembly and taught a great crowd for a year, which would mean that the Spirit was there operating, in a few at first, but evidently the crowd would diminish and the assembly would increase by the action of the Spirit, and then in Acts 13:2 the Spirit says, “Separate me now Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them”. Then we are told what they did, but being sent forth by the Holy Spirit was a collective matter; and we are told before the ministry that went on by these gifted men, and now the Spirit had liberty to operate, and did operate in an outstanding period when the missionary work of Paul and Barnabas began.
Ques Why is the Spirit of God mentioned in each [p. 416] chapter of the epistle to the Ephesians, and so little in Colossians?
JT It is significant He is mentioned in Ephesians and so little in Colossians. We ought to go back to the beginning of the Ephesian assembly. What was it? There were twelve men there, disciples of John, and Paul says to them, “Did ye receive the Holy Spirit when ye had believed? And they said to him, We did not even hear if the Holy Spirit was come”, Acts 19:2. When they heard that they were baptised and received the Spirit. Paul laid his hands on them, the Spirit came on them really through Paul, which is another thing, so that I suppose that is in mind in view of the place the Ephesian assembly would have in the economy. What a place it has — all the unfolding of the truth of the counsels of God.
PH When you speak of manifestations, are these manifestations made in a collective sense? Are you emphasising that side?
JT Not at all. There was one to Cephas, then to the twelve, by themselves first, as the twelve is administrative, and then the apostles as authoritative, then one to James. In regard to Cephas he is going to be a great workman by himself, and the Lord appeared to him accordingly.
CD “I will not leave you orphans”. Does He come in response to desire?
JT Possibly, or need, anyway. The Lord would not say that when they had the Spirit. As it was they were left to themselves. I am coming to you, but the Spirit came first in that sense.
Rem Much is made of the individual side — orphans, coming to you, and, Ye see me, the collective side, but John 14:21, “I will love him and will manifest myself to him”, much is left open to the individual potentially.
JT That comes down to our own time. “I will not leave you orphans”, the state they were in.
“[p. 417] Yet a little and the world sees me no longer; but ye see me; because I live ye also shall live. In that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. He that has my commandments and keeps them, he it is that loves me; but he that loves me shall be loved by my Father, and I will love him and will manifest myself to him”. We have to face all these things. Can the Lord not manifest Himself to any of us? It is a question of His ability, what He can do, and what He is at liberty to do if He wishes.
GHM Does not the Lord reserve to Himself His prerogative to present Himself living?
JT Yes.
Rem It is striking before the Spirit had come He charged them by the Holy Spirit.
JT It is remarkable.
Ques What is involved in that?
JT He is dealing with the dispensation that is going to be characterised in that way. He is saying, That is what I am doing, and you are to be marked in the same way. The Spirit is the power for it.