THE WITNESS OF GOD - THE LORD JESUS
[p. 250] THE WITNESS OF GOD - THE LORD JESUS
Revelation 3:14; John 3:11 - 18
JT So far we have considered the witness God gave of Himself in the creation, viewed as evidence of His eternal power and divinity. We have considered also that part of creation in which man is immediately set (the earth and the heavens which stand in relation to the earth), viewed as a witness to His goodness. I think that distinction should be kept in view in regard to the creation, what is general and what pertains specially to man. “By faith we apprehend that the worlds were framed by the word of God”, Hebrews 11:3. That is a general thought, in which is witnessed the eternal power and divinity of God. Then there was that part of creation which stood related to man immediately. According to Genesis 1, the heavens and the waters which were above were set in relation to the earth, so that God had there means of refreshment for the earth; and the earth as having emerged from the inundation was fertile. There was that in it inherently that produced fruit. “Let the earth bring forth”, Genesis 1:11 it says; there was that brought forth which was an evidence of God’s goodness to man in the way of food.
And then we have had before us the testimony of the prophets and the law, which contained prophetic witness, pointing ever to Christ. Finally, the ministry of John, who was specially (or as we might say, miraculously) fitted to be the final witness to Christ, so that he was unique, his testimony really merging into the testimony of the apostles of our own dispensation.
AFM Where would the witness of Christ begin?
JT I think particularly when the Holy Spirit [p. 251] came upon Him, although, of course, as here on earth there was that to be taken note of from the outset, particularly His presence in the temple announcing that He was about His Father’s business (Luke 2:49), and that He grew in favour with God and with men; Luke 2:52. But I think that His witness properly began when the Spirit came upon Him, anointing Him.
AFM I would think so, and I was wondering as to the distinction between witness and revelation. How would you distinguish between the two in the ministry of Jesus?
JT Revelation involves His Person. He was a divine Person. Witnessing, I think, alludes to His being a Man and taking a servant’s form. Revelation has to be kept in view but I think our inquiry would circle around the position of Christ here as having taken a servant’s form. Revelation was involved, but He has to be viewed, I think, as in the position of a servant, as John was. Others witnessed, but as revealing God, Christ is, of course, alone. As we have said, He came in also as a Servant. He said, “Suffer it to be so now, for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness”, Matthew 3:15. John was there as a servant, and the Lord takes His place by him as a witness. “It becometh us”. John had no part in revelation, but he had part in witnessing, and the Lord was to have part in witnessing. “Being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself”, Philippians 2:8. He took a servant’s place. In the book of Revelation the idea of witness is prominent. It is not a question of the revelation of God, but of witnessing, involving martyrdom. The force of it is that one would die if necessary for what he witnessed.
AFM Is that the force of what the Lord says in John 18:37, “To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth”?
JT That is it. That is included in the Lord’s witness, because, in order to understand fully the bearing of His witness, we have to read those chapters that record His appearance before the high priest at Jerusalem and before Pilate, leading up to His death, not from the side of love exactly, but from the side of witnessing for God, so as to be an example for us. In the same circumstances there was the declaration of God, which was by the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father.
AFM So He witnessed a good confession before Pilate.
JT Exactly. Timothy is charged “before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession”, 1 Timothy 6:13. He is before us there as a martyr, and so the position of this verse in Revelation 3 is particularly important, because it is the close of the church’s period here. It is how Christ is to be known in that assembly, or in those overcoming in it “the amen, the faithful and true witness”, Revelation 3:14.
AFM It would suppose that the public witness had broken down?
JT I think that is the point, so that it comes in there as a word to those who have part in the closing days of the assembly. There is One who is faithful and true as a Witness.
HG Would you suggest that, as found in the closing days, we should have the spirit of martyrdom?
JT Well, I thought so. I think that is the attitude you take up in witnessing, that it necessarily involves martyrdom. Whatever form that martyrdom may take, you accept it.
HG You accept the culmination of the part of the milch kine in 1 Samuel 6. That wonderful pathway along the road to Beth-shemesh ends in their [p. 253] being offered up as a burnt-offering — an end like that of the Lord. His testimony culminates in death.
EGMcA In John’s introduction of the Lord, he speaks of Him as the One who baptises with the Holy Spirit. Is that baptism necessary in order to go on in the spirit of martyrdom?
JT It is in the power of the Spirit that you witness. We will come to that in the application of the subject to ourselves. The Lord is presented to us at the close as the faithful and true Witness — not simply a faithful and true Witness, but the faithful and true Witness, as if there were only one. You therefore get perfection presented.
AEH Is that the principle that grace and truth ‘subsists’ in Him, carried down through death in Jesus Christ?
JT That would be alluding more to His Person, more the greatness of His Person; these two great principles subsist there, grace and truth. The law came by Moses. It did not subsist in Moses; it came by him. It was ordained through angels in the hand of a mediator (Galatians 3:19), but Christ was these things. He was not merely a minister of the grace of God and the truth; He was these things. “Of his fulness have we all received”. John 1:16. It was a question of His greatness.
AFM That would be more revelation, would it?
JT More in that connection. Grace and truth ‘subsists’ — one idea. Grace relieves men and truth adjusts them in relation to God.
HG The thought of testimony culminating in martyrdom, does it not involve that that to which He bears testimony will not be accepted by the world, or by man in the flesh, and that everything must of necessity be taken up for God on the other side of death?
JT Just so; so that He says here, “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness”, John 3:11.
[p. 254] This is not an historical statement simply; it pointed to the state of the Jews — “ye receive not”. Then the Lord accepted that and He knew in what it would culminate. It would culminate in His martyrdom.
AL Is that why He comes out as the faithful and true Witness, the conclusion of the whole testimony?
JT Just so. He had sealed it in His death, so that we have in John more about witness than in any other of the evangelists or, we may say, anywhere else in Scripture. His epistle and the book of Revelation are on the same line, showing that, as intended for the last days, the ministry of John is witness so that people might believe in spite of so much that is contrary. Hence God brings in witnesses that are convincing, so that John has this “Verily, verily”. He is the only one who has it thus. It is as if everything now is on the ground of “verily, verily”. That is, there is no doubt about it.
AL It is the word ‘Amen’.
JT Yes, used in this double form twenty-four times in this gospel. Then John reminds us what the gospel is intended to effect in us. It is to produce faith; there are witnesses that are convincing. Everything is that you might believe, that we should not be in unbelief.
WB The ‘signs’ in this gospel would have the same effect.
JT Exactly. “These are written that ye might believe”, etc. John 20:31. The unbelief that is in us (not that is abroad, but that is in us who are professedly walking in the truth) is very extensive. If we analyse our hearts and minds we shall find this to be so.
GAT This charge that He makes (John 3:11) is against the nation, is it not? Not to Nicodemus only, but to the nation?
JT Oh, it is the nation. ‘Ye’ is the Jew; it is the Jews of whom He is speaking.
AFM You say there is a great deal of unbelief in us. Would you enlarge on it a little bit? Perhaps we are not prepared to receive that all at once.
JT Well, I think that John’s gospel is intended to remind us that we may be affected by the testimony of Christ without believing it in our hearts. It is that very thing which brings in this section in the second chapter. Many believed on Him when they saw the signs which He wrought, but the Lord did not commit Himself to them, because He knew all men: He knew what was in man.
JB-t What is the relation of the light, as we get it in verse 9 of the first chapter of John’s gospel, “That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world”, John 1:9 to the witness?
JT That is more revelation. John witnessed to the light. In the second chapter there were those who believed because of the signs, but in the opening of the third there is a man who is serious about it. Nicodemus is a type of person who is concerned seriously and who is prepared to receive the testimony. That is the foundation of true Christianity — resolve of soul to arrive at the truth and to accept the testimony in its entirety; so that he came to Jesus by night and says, “we know that thou art a Teacher come from God”. John 3:2. That is as far as he had got, but there was genuine exercise with him, for he is connecting what he saw in Christ with God.
AFM The beginning of Nicodemus was like the beginning with us all. We have to begin very small. Does not this gospel enable believers to believe, to advance in their faith?
JT That is what I thought. “His disciples believed on him”. The faith of the saints is in the light of the glory He “manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him”, John 2:[p. 256] 11.
AN Would you say that there is a distinction between what the Lord said and what He was? Do you think that would imply that what He said was witness; what He was was revelation?
JT Of course He was what He said, and what He said entered into the revelation or declaration of God. Hence John speaks in his epistle of what he had seen and heard. What the Lord witnessed to was revealed, but witness in itself does not rise to the height of revelation.
AN Witness would be facts that are attested, like resurrection. Resurrection is a fact well attested, as in 1 Corinthians 15. There were those that could bear witness to it. Resurrection was involved in the revelation of God.
JT It was the evidence of God’s power. The word in John 1:18 is ‘declared’. “The only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him”. What has to be borne in mind in regard to revelation, or declaration, is the mediatorial position taken up by Christ.
Ques When does that cease?
JT I am rather inclined to believe it never ceases. The mediatorial position, or condition, taken up by the Lord is relatively below what He is personally. He took it up in order to make the declaration of God possible. Had He remained “in the form of God”, Philippians 2:6 revelation could not have taken place. “The only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him”. John 1:18. Although the Son, He is received here in manhood. The mediatorial thought enters into this and so it remains, for Christ never ceases to be Man.
AN That would underlie the Lord’s answer to Philip’s question: “Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us” John 14:8; as if to say, ‘We know You; we are attached to You, but show us the Father’. The Lord’s answer is, “Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father”. John 14:9 [p. 257] He was in His own Person the revelation of the Father.
JT That is it.
AN Then He goes on to say: “the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself; but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works”. John 14:10. He attributes all to the Father, so that as was remarked, revelation would come in equally well in that which He did and in what He said.
JB-t Would you say that the receiving of the witness would prepare the soul for revelation?
JT I think that is about how it stands: the attention of your soul is called to what is revealed.
J B-t. I was thinking of the great witness of the love of God in the memorials which we have at the Lord’s supper, and to what that really leads. That is a witness, is it not?
JT Quite.
HG What do you mean by the mediatorial position never being given up? Do you mean, referring to the Lord as Man, holding the whole scene in regard to God eternally?
JT Yes. The word ‘Mediator’ is perhaps the best one we can get. I am using it with reference to the condition the Lord took up, which He never relinquishes. It is in becoming Man and so placing Himself within the range of men that revelation was possible.
AL He gives up the kingdom. Years ago you said that same thing, that He gives up the kingdom, yet do I understand you to mean that He does not give up that which is mediatorial?
JT He never does, as far as I see.
AL He gives up the kingdom, but never the mediatorial position?
JT He remains Man. How shall we continue on in the enjoyment of the knowledge of God save as [p. 258] the Person remains in whom that is presented to us? If He were to give up humanity, and merge into Deity, then what have we? You say, ‘We have light’. Of course, but we have nothing tangible, so that John speaks of what was tangible — “which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled”, 1 John 1:1. That is within our range, and shall ever remain within our range, and all our blessing lies in that, because we shall never know God otherwise. Christ as Man will be there — we shall be eternally with Him. God will be there in Him.
AL I would like to get a little help on declaration. Is it the moral qualities of God that are declared? Is that the thought?
JT What God is.
AL In His moral attributes?
JT And in His nature. You know what He is as revealed in Christ. God is love.
AL We are apt to be mystical about it, are we not?
JT Well, I think that is so. What is revealed is something that can be taken in by us. It is within our range.
BTF Would you say that the mediatorial position would be down-stooping, that is, you were comparing the mediatorial position with His place in the Godhead, and so the Mediator is the Man Christ Jesus?
JT That is right, but to reveal God He must be equal with God, a divine Person. As Job said, He must “lay his hand upon us both”, Job 9:33.
HG We do not even know the Son. We know Him who is Son, but we do not even know the Son. “No man knoweth the Son, but the Father”, Matthew 11:27.
JT What is presented to us is the knowledge of God in Christ, and what we are to arrive at in that [p. 259] knowledge is the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ; that is to say, there is a standard set up. What is presented to me in the way of revelation is one thing; what I am to arrive at is another thing.
AFM Going back for a moment to the thought of the Lord Jesus occupying the mediatorial position in eternity, according to 1 Corinthians 15 God assumes supremacy after the kingdom, does He not? “That God may be all in all” 1 Corinthians 15:28; but that does not militate against the thought which you have suggested of the Lord Jesus occupying a mediatorial position as holding everything, all families, in relation to God eternally.
JT The knowledge of God is there; it remains there. What we shall enjoy eternally is in Christ. It is what is in Christ, but it is what is in Christ as coming within our range. How could it be otherwise? The creation as we know it will have gone, and the witness of the law and the prophets will not be there. What is there, is what is in Christ as Man.
AFM There is a common thought in Christendom, that when we get to heaven we are going to see three Persons — the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit. Do you think that?
JT That is a mistake. We shall see Christ; the Father is known in Him.
JB-t All things are eternally headed up in Christ, are they not?
JT There you have millennial administration “things in the heavens and things upon the earth” Ephesians 1:10, but Ephesians 3 deals with an eternal state of things. There is the Father, of whom every family in the heavens and the earth is named, and then there is Christ, whose love is to be known, “to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge”, Ephesians 3:19 and then there is God, unto whose fulness we are to be filled, to whom glory is to be in the assembly in Christ Jesus unto all generations of the age of ages. That, I apprehend, is the eternal state of things,
[p. 260] but as regards what is actually there, as I may say, tangibly, I do not know a better word, John implies it in his epistle — Christ. How can I understand anything without Him? It is as having come into manhood that He is within our range, and He remains in that condition so that all that there is is available tangibly, as it were, in Him. John speaks, as I said, of “that which we have heard ... seen with our eyes ... contemplated, and our hands handled”, 1 John 1:1.
AFM Where it says, “to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge” Ephesians 3:19, is that what you refer to as tangible?
JT Well, the Person in whom it is. As our brother quoted, “Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me?” John 14:9. There was One there who could be known, but in knowing Him I know the Father. I know what the Father is, and I know what is in the Spirit. Everything that there is to be known is in that Man. Of course I am not referring to others who shall be seen in heaven — I am speaking of divine Persons only.
BTF Would you say a word, to give us a little further light about the knowledge of God in the old dispensation?
JT In the creation the invisible things are clearly seen, His eternal power and divinity (Romans 1:20); and then there is the testimony of the law and the prophets, which pointed on to Christ and prophesied until John. That is to say, it is one finger-post all the way through, pointing to something in the future. The knowledge of God (what was known of Him) was in it in whatever measure it was taken in; but it was meagre. Faith was the power which substantiated what was coming in. God came in, of course, in various forms, but there was nothing permanently tangible there; therefore there could be nothing final or permanent. It was all a question of prophesying, pointing on to a coming thing, when the Lord should become Man. Then God was there, “Manifest in the flesh”. 1 Timothy 3:16. Not only was it that Christ was personally God, but God, in all that He is, was manifested.
BTF But in the Psalms, for instance, would not David have a certain knowledge of God and hear God’s voice in a way?
JT He would, but we must remember that the inspired record clothes things for us. Things are clothed with a view to our knowledge. David had nothing tangible before him. There were things presented that faith laid hold of, but it was revealed to them that the things were not ministered to them, but to us; 1 Peter 1:12. It was a continual stream of prophetic ministry (even the law itself was prophetic) pointing to Christ. Abraham saw Christ’s day and Isaiah “saw his glory” etc. John 12:41. Certain things were presented suggestive of Christ, which their faith laid hold of, but all was pointing on to the future; hence their waiting attitude.
GAT Would you say that the Lord would explain it to the two that went to Emmaus? “Beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself”, Luke 24:27.
JT That is the thing; He would point out the bearing of the prophetic testimony. But when you come to John 1 the evangelist does not allude to that at all. He alludes to God, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things received being through him ... . In him was life, and the life was the light of men”. John 1:1 - 4. And then (verse 14): “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us”. John 1:14. Now you have the tangible thing. You have God here Himself, but here in flesh and therefore you have the word ‘contemplate’; men, can take account of Him — “we have contemplated his glory, a glory as of an only-begotten with a Father, full of grace and truth”, John 1:14.
[p. 262] and John the baptist is quoted immediately. “This was he of whom I said, He that comes after me is preferred before me, for he was before me”. John 1:15. So you see it is a divine Person here, but here in such wise as to be within man’s range, and He remains in that condition for eternity.
AFM Do you think the Old Testament saints had much understanding of the titles of God, such as, Elohim and Jehovah? I mean the titles which are prominent in the Old Testament, or have we the greater value of them with the light of Christ, of revelation?
JT There were, of course, indications in them of what God is, enough to sustain their faith, but even in the tabernacle they were reminded that He dwelt in “thick darkness”. 1 Kings 8:12, 1 Chronicles 6:1. They did not understand them fully. These things all had in view the incarnation of Christ and the presence of the Holy Spirit here. Without these two things the Scriptures would be unintelligible to us now. There are things, of course, that interest men naturally, but what can they arrive at? With the Jews today all is darkness, but with Christ and the Spirit every page is light and glory.
AFM So the prophets ministered to us.
JT Yes. There was enough to sustain faith, but everything pointed on to the coming of Christ and the present dispensation. Peter tells us (1 Peter 1:12) that they ministered not unto themselves but to us. John says: “No one has seen God at any time”. John 1:18. ‘Well’, it may be said, ‘Abraham saw God; Moses saw God’. They saw the God of Israel, it says so. But, we are dealing now with God in His essential Being, not God as coming in through an angel. The law was given by angels through the hand of a mediator. What Moses, Aaron, and the seventy elders saw was God come in in some representative way; but no one has seen God at any time, at any time. “The only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him”. John 1:18.
[p. 263] There was, of course, the evidence of God’s presence in Israel, but He was hidden. It is said that they saw “no form” Deuteronomy 4:12,15 at Horeb, but heard the voice of words only. It was said of Moses, however, “The form of Jehovah doth he behold”, Numbers 12:8. This would refer to some special representative of God, but it was denied him to see His face, for “no man can see my face and live”. Exodus 33:20. Moses saw God in Jesus on the holy mount.
AFM I suppose Jehovah came quite near when He came to Abraham in the form of a man.
JT But, then, what can you say about that? We can go back to it and say much, but what are we talking about? We are talking about what is now revealed in Christ. It says, “The only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father” John 1:18; that is to say, He is in the place of the love. He is in the bosom of the Father — not He was there, but He is. “In the beginning was the Word”, John 1:1 but in this passage it is not that. It is “the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father”. He is where the love is.
AL In regard to the point you have been raising, do you not think that we sometimes stumble over that scripture in Corinthians “that God may be all in all”, 1 Corinthians 15:28 and we have just come to a rash conclusion that Christ had given up His mediatorial position?
JT Perhaps the mediatorial service of Christ is limited by some to the Kingdom, but I think it must be admitted that His mediatorial position refers to His Manhood. It thus remains; otherwise, what shall become of us? God is ever known in Christ as Man. If we are filled unto all the fulness of God, it is God as in Him.
AL The tabernacle of God is with men; Revelation 21:3. That involves Christ mediatorially?
JT Certainly. I quite recognise, of course, that the three Persons in the Godhead have to be apprehended [p. 264] separately, and that the Father spoke out of heaven to the Son as on earth, but when it is a question of seeing the Father the Lord directs Philip to Himself.
JB-t The kingdom will be given up.
JT Quite. I suppose there is no further need for it really. It is handed back to God. But, then, God shall be all in all. How is He to be all in all save as He is known through Christ? The revelation remains. God is there, but He is there in Christ, and known through Him.
AL In regard to life, we live in the revelation. Is it not so? There is no life outside that revelation.
JT That is where we live. The eternal life is to “know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent”, John 17:3.
GAT I do not just understand what that means — living in revelation.
AL In a simple way, that God has been revealed and that is the life of my soul. I cannot give you a further explanation of it, but I see that one’s soul lives in the light of the revelation that has been made in Christ.
JT So that in Revelation 15 you get angels coming out of the temple with the vials of wrath, and they are girded about the breasts with golden girdles, meaning that the light of the revelation of God has been beclouded, that men have brought in darkness. What shone so beautifully in the ministry of the apostles, the revelation of God in Christ, has been beclouded. The world system in its varied features, therefore, comes under these vials of wrath. God is so indignant that the thought of revelation has been darkened by the world in its various forms, and by Rome particularly (she comes before God for judgment in chapter 16) that it comes under these vials from these angels. God is indignant with the world, and with those who pretend to represent Him, in that [p. 265] they have beclouded, and indeed effaced, the whole thought of revelation. Christendom has lost the idea of it, so God will come in in judgment. Hence the great importance at the present time of having the thing clearly before us that revelation is in the Word becoming flesh and, as becoming flesh, as Man He is in the bosom of the Father being the only begotten Son. It is not where He was; it is where He is. He is in the place of the love and, as in the place of the love, He makes it known.
AL “The light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not”, John 1:5 it says. It does not dispel the darkness. That darkness is the opposition, is it not, of the religious world?
JT Quite. It was the religious world at Jerusalem that did not receive the light, and it is the religious world today that is beclouding the revelation of God.
AFM Would you mind telling us why you read all those verses in John 3?
JT Well, we have been occupied with revelation. What we have before us does not rise to the height of revelation, but more Christ as a Witness, and so He introduced Himself to Nicodemus as One who is competent. He says: “We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen”.
I think He thus introduces Himself formally as a Witness. He knew what He was speaking of. He had seen it. He speaks of having witnessed to earthly things and they did not believe; “how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?”
HG In the Lord Jesus, would not His witness pretty much correspond to revelation? I mean to say His testimony must have been from the standpoint of knowing God perfectly.
JT As has been said, it necessarily is included in revelation, as the greater includes the less, but I [p. 266] think that the Lord as a Witness is more a pattern for us. If you think of revelation, that is not our side; but if you think of a witness, He introduces Himself here. He says: “We speak that we do know”. The great point in witnessing is that you know whereof you are speaking.
AN I think that is clear. Revelation includes witness, but all witness is not revelation.
JT Revelation is not put in that way. As in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him. It is more like the sun shining in its dignity and greatness, whereas witness is different. I am down here on the level of men and I am saying certain things, or bearing witness to certain things.
AN And the Lord, speaking of the disciples in that way, says: “Ye shall be witnesses unto me”, Acts 1:8. They could speak of it personally. Then, of course, that is where He is referring too to the witness of the Spirit, how the Spirit would bring demonstration. There were certain facts that would be brought out significantly, and all that they meant, but revelation in itself would be distinct.
JT I think so. It is well to keep that distinction here. Here the Lord sets out a principle of which every one of us should take note. If we speak anything, we should know what we are saying.
HG And the witness just speaks to the point. In a way he does not give more than is necessary in regard to the point in question.
JT Sometimes you may becloud what you really mean to convey by adding on other things that may not be clear to you; the Lord makes a point of speaking the things He knew and testifying what He had seen. And so John speaks of what he had heard, seen and handled and of that he witnessed.
AFM Would there be an example of witness in what follows?
JT I thought that it rises up to and touches on [p. 267] revelation. A great point with John is, as it were, the witness stand. It is a question of what I say on it, and the Lord is here, I think, the perfect Model for us in bearing witness. He first witnesses to what should be easily understood and then He says: “how, if I say the heavenly things to you, will ye believe?” He says further, “no one has gone up into heaven save he who came down out of heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven”. Now, there is another thing. He is going to speak about the heavenly, and it is as One who is in heaven — not who was in it, but who is in it. Things may change, but the point is it is the present thing; it is what is.
AFM Would that be His competency to speak of heavenly things, being the Son of man who is in heaven?
JT I think it is for that He mentions it. As in heaven, He can as a Man bring things out which can be intelligible to us — not an angel witnessing, but a Man, and that Man in heaven, so that you have the thing presented accurately and sympathetically. Then He says something that corresponds with martyrdom: “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up”. That is the end of the Witness — lifted up, as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness. “Must” means that it was due to God, if men were to have eternal life.
JB-t That would be the culmination of the Witness. All things witnessed to would point there.
JT Quite. The great result, too, from all this witnessing culminates in the believer, the one who believes the testimony, having everlasting life.
GAT In verses 13 and 14 it is the Son of man; in verses 16 and 17 it is the Son of God. Why the difference?
JT As the Son of man He is on our side, but as on God’s side He is the Son of God, so that in verse 16 it is “God so loved the world”. The term changes to the Son of God immediately. “He gave his only begotten Son”.
JB-t I think it is very impressive that the lifting up of the Son of man, “as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness”, is the great witness to man.
JT Quite. You can see the bearing of it in the wilderness. Everyone in the camp could see the serpent lifted up. The Lord is lifted up so that He can be seen.
AFM Much people had died and many were bitten, but the serpent being lifted would be a testimony on the part of God, would it not?
JT Yes. It represented the people. The Son of man is connected with men. He stands on man’s side, and He has dealt with the thing in its source as a Witness. In the position of a Witness He goes the full limit in dealing with what man suffers from, and the result of the great testimony borne is that the believer has everlasting life. The whole point in witnessing is that there should be believers. What am I a witness for if it is not that those who hear me should believe what I am saying? The point is that there should be believers, and as believers, have everlasting life. The death of Christ witnesses on the one hand to sin judged in its source, and on the other to the love of God.
BTF All this is the subject of faith, made good by the Spirit.
JT Yes. That is the point — faith, that we should believe. The believer comes into what love secures.
AEH This witness is all in relation to the earth. When do we touch the witness as connected with heavenly things?
JT Well, the Lord, in speaking about the heavenly, I suppose, alluded to what would come out later. The heavenly testimony was presented to the Jews,
no doubt in the Lord’s own ministry, but particularly as the Holy Spirit came down from heaven. The heavenly things were presented and they did not receive them. We know how virulently Paul’s ministry was refused by the Jews.
AFM In seeing a witness in the Lord, we should see One who knew that every word He uttered that could be used against Him would be, but He speaks as One who was prepared to lay down His life for His testimony. It gives force and point to all the Lord said. So today, the Lord does not want leaders merely, but men who are prepared to go into death for what they say.
JT As you have the Son of man lifted up — the full result of His position as a Witness on our side — God’s side is brought in, for we would not have it otherwise. True enough, I have eternal life in seeing the Son of man lifted up. I have it, but in verse 16 I have it in the full light of what God is. It is God’s love that is the source of all. He gives the believer eternal life.
AN Would you say, in regard to the witness to earthly things, that everything went to show the necessity for man’s being born again before he could have anything to say to God; that is, the witness was more in reference to man’s side: but when you come to the witness as to heavenly things, it is more the witness to God; that is, as man’s condition has been demonstrated, the heavenly things come into view? There is witness to the heavenly things?
JT Just so, and verse 16 therefore, would lay the basis for Paul’s ministry. It is all a question of the love of God. What would the love of God not do? John does not go the full length here. The epistle to the Ephesians shows the complete result of divine love.
J B-t. I thought the Lord was going on to heavenly things in verse 16.
JT [p. 270] He would go on to it, but He does not unfold it here. The love of God is witnessed in the gift and the believer has everlasting life, but there is more than that. In Ephesians it is not simply the love of God, but His great love, so that there is the full unfolding of heavenly things to the saints. Here it is, “God so loved the world”.
AEH Following upon revelation?
JT Exactly.
AFM Is this the world that then existed?
JT I think so. I have taken it to mean the world viewed as creation, the world as God created it, over which man was set. The world was made by Him, as said in the first chapter, and the world “knew him not”. John 1:10 “Knew him not” does not refer to the inanimate things exactly. It refers to men, but the material is included. Man was responsible and gave character to all, but God has never given up the beautiful thing which He created and in which He set man. He loved that. I should say, therefore, that “the world” here is viewed abstractly.
GAT It is different from what John speaks of in his epistle: “If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him”, 1 John 2:15. That is another thing?
JT That is the moral thing as alienated from God. He surely did not love that.
AN Why do you think the thought of perishing is introduced here as contrasted with the thought of eternal life given? Why I ask it, is that commonly in the presentation of the gospel it is said that if man has to bear the penalty for his sins, the just judgment of God will mean that he will perish eternally, but it is not exactly that here. How far does it go?
JT I think it goes the whole length of eternal punishment, only perishing is not punishment. Perishing is the outcome of a condition from which God will save [p. 271] us.
AN There were those who perished in the wilderness.
JT There you have the two things combined. God had said that they would fall in the wilderness, and He had said to Adam that the day he ate he should die. There was that general thought, but then sin became a condition. Judgement became the outcome of a condition in the race, and God, I think, compassionates the race as in that condition and would save men from it, from a condition arising out of his own conduct. He would save men from that. He wills not that that any should perish.
AN “Thou turnest man to destruction. And sayest, Return, ye children of men”, Psalm 90:3.
AFM Would you think that perishing would culminate in death, and what follows would be the lake of fire? Is that your thought?
JT Well, the judgment of God was there, but for the moment the Lord is not raising that question. Man is in a perishing condition and God is compassionate of him in it and would rescue him out of it. The present time is not the time of judgment, but nevertheless the perishing condition exists and God would rescue men out of that. The Lord goes on to say that God had not sent His Son into the world to judge it, but that it might be saved through Him.
EGMcA That marks out the believer.
JT The believer is marked out as rescued from it. Judgment existed, but he that believes on the Son is not judged.
AFM And he lives.
GAT Would you say God leaves it to man’s own responsibility here?
JT Well, the point is to bring out what God is, that He does not will that anyone should perish. The perishing is not presented here as punitive but as the outcome of man’s condition. Even when judgment is spoken of it is because one does not believe on the [p. 272] Son, and that he loves darkness rather than light, the latter having come into the world. “Perishing” and “judgment” here must involve eternal punishment, but they are presented as the result of the unbeliever’s course, rather than as being inflicted by God.
AFM As with the prodigal son, “I perish”. Luke 15:16.
JT Just so. If he remained there, he would perish. I think it is very beautiful to see the Lord as a Witness here, both as regards the earthly and the heavenly. He brings God in. “God so loved the world” — rather than the heavenly things.
AN The question is a very interesting one. Do we present the gospel in relation to man’s need as a guilty creature, or do we present it to him as a perishing creature?
JT We should present it in both ways, you mean?
AN I wonder whether we would be considered correct in presenting both.
JT I think so. Inasmuch as the world is in reconciliation (as we have been taught by those who came before us), the present is not the time of judgment. Judgment is revealed and wrath is revealed, but it is more the state in which man is, where he is as away from God, that is emphasised in the gospel appeal. Romans treats of men as responsible, and so all the world is proved guilty.
Ques Do you mean that if men do not believe the wrath of God abides on them?
JT That would not be true, because the wrath of God is not abiding on the world as in reconciliation. It could only refer to the Jewish world, because they were dealt with specially. The Jews were dealt with specially.
AFM We used to say that the wrath of God abides on one who does not believe.
JT I know, but it is not true, because the Gentile world is in reconciliation. “Wrath is come upon them” 1 Thessalonians 2:16,
[p. 273] it says, and it remains on them as Jews, but on the Gentile world there is no wrath. It is in reconciliation.
AN What is apostate there is absolutely no hope for. The wrath of God abideth on that.
GAT “It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment”, Hebrews 9:27. What does that mean?
JT That is a general fact. It refers back to Genesis 3. “It is appointed unto men once to die”; but “after this the judgment” is an additional statement. It was further light. The appointment to die was in Genesis 3; but further light has come out as to God’s judgment, which is not contained in Genesis 3.
EGMcA Is there an element brought in in John 3:16 regarding the believer, which is unknown in the natural man? He shall not perish. The natural man is perishing.
JT Quite. The believer does not perish, so that the present announcement of the gospel is that God has intervened in mercy to rescue man from the perishing condition into which he has brought himself. While wrath is revealed in our dispensation, it is not applied. In regard to the Jewish dispensation it was applied; hence the meaning of the passage, “the wrath of God abideth on him”. John 3:36. The Jew refused the testimony that Christ is the Son of God and so come under wrath.
AL For the Gentile world, according to 1 Thessalonians 1:10, there is coming wrath, “Our deliverer from the coming wrath”. 1 Thessalonians 1:10.
JT Exactly. That is how it stands; not wrath on the unbeliever now.
GWH-n What is eternal life?
JT That, of course, is a big subject. The best way that I know of to find out what eternal life is, is [p. 274] to go to the One who has the words of it; John 6:68. The thing has to be enjoyed to be known. Peter said, “thou hast the words”. John 6:68. I understand by that that Peter knew that the Lord had the thing in detail, as well as in general; and it came home to me lately that in the controversy about eternal life thirty-five years ago the mistake many of us made was in not going to the One who has the words of it. It stands in contrast to the state and environment in which men were. They were in a perishing condition, death being on them, whereas now the believer is taken out of all that and placed in conditions of life according to God, himself quickened. It is a totally new order of things, to which Satan or death can have nothing to say. It is eternal life.
The Scriptures, of course, speak about it. It is referred to both in the Old and New Testaments. The Lord says, “This is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent”, John 17:3. We have that, but nevertheless I can never know it unless I go to Him who has the words of it, “To whom shall we go? Thou hast words of life eternal; and we have believed and known that thou art the holy one of God”, John 6:68,69. Peter here is a characteristic believer, “We have believed and known”.
AL There is a beautiful reference to eternal life and not perishing in what — the Lord says in John 10: “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: and I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish” John 10:27,28, so that if there is that attentive ear and heart to His voice, the entering into eternal life is not such a difficult thing.
GWH-n In contrast to perishing, the Lord would give to them the knowledge of the true God, in contrast to all that was untrue around; so that, instead of the soul perishing, it might be livingly, day by day, in the knowledge of the true God.
AN [p. 275] At the time you refer to, the great difficulty that had to be contended with was that faith was put in a wrong way; that is, if you believe you will get it, whereas the statement of Scripture (John 5:24) is that the believer has it. Mr. Darby in treating of John 5 refers to the Lord speaking to the disciples about this wonderful blessing, eternal life, that they might think it was far beyond them, but the Lord made it known to them that as to those who believed in Him it was true of them. They did not believe to get it exactly, but it was true of the believer. That helped me greatly. It is the believer who has it.
AL Would not you say that “believing” in John is not just a soul believing in the gospel, and the transaction finished, but it is a condition of belief? It is continuous.
AN It is continuous.
JT The kind of person who has eternal life is the believer. “He that eats my flesh and drinks my blood has life eternal”, John 6:54. John thus presents what is characteristic and continuous.
AL Not because he believes and is saved, and so on, but it is a continuous state of soul before God.
JT We do well to take note of these ‘verilies’ in John, because there is so much to produce unbelief now. We need to be on our guard so that we may really be in this state, as those who are believers. As it says in this gospel: “That ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life”, John 20:31. “Believing ye might have” it not exactly get it, but have it.
GWH-n Conscious knowledge.
JT It involves that, so John says, “These things have I written to you that ye may know [have the consciousness] that ye have eternal life, who believe on the name of the Son of God”, 1 John 5:13.