⬇ EPUB

AUTHORITY IN DOCTRINE AND FELLOWSHIP (1)

JT This chapter, which records the inauguration of the assembly, furnishes many principles that go through to the end of the dispensation. Indeed, all divine principles go through, and one especially is that of authority — authority in teaching or doctrine, and authority in fellowship. It seems as if the Lord, whilst ministering to His people freely, would stress from time to time, that the teaching He furnishes has authority in it, and that the fellowship bound up with it also involves authority. The section shows that the apostles were not simply appointed as persons selected by the Lord, but that they had a moral history behind, entering into the authority that should mark their teaching and fellowship. Peter’s remarks as to the apostle to be appointed to take the place of Judas, suggest that a moral history necessarily precedes public ministry, so that he says, “It is necessary therefore that 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, one of these should be a witness with us of His resurrection”, Acts 1:21, 22. What that remark conveys enters into the ministry; it shows the need for experience with the Lord, and not only with the Lord but with His people, as assembling with them “all the time”, as it says, “in which the Lord Jesus came in and went out among us”.

^[p. 258] The history of the apostle Paul, too, bears this out. He, as converted, was directed by the Lord to go into the city to be told what to do, and as told what to do he obeys, and remains with the disciples certain days, and then preached; then he went to Arabia, and later to Jerusalem to make acquaintance with Peter; and then went to his own place Tarsus, and was finally sought out by Barnabas for the ministry and was a year at Antioch, before he was formally called by the Spirit. These facts remind us of the need of experience with the Lord in relation to His people so that ministry or teaching should be authoritative.

HMS Is it also expressed in the apostle’s word to Timothy: “knowing of whom thou hast learned them”, 2 Timothy 3:14?

JT Yes. We shall see that the personal feature is suggested in Paul. As he says to Timothy, “Have an outline of sound words, which words thou hast heard of me”, 2 Timothy 1:13, and so here, “thou hast been thoroughly acquainted with my teaching, conduct, purpose, faith”, and so on; but the personal side, that is to say, what is particularly heavenly and personal, attaches to Paul as an apostle: “my teaching”, he says.

Ques Would you say that the word of the apostles would have authority as taking character from the Apostle? “Consider the Apostle”, (Hebrews 3:1).

JT I think that is right: “the Apostle and High Priest of our confession”, alluding of course to Moses and Aaron as jointly a type of Christ. Moses received communications directly from Jehovah at the bush, and he was to act as God to Aaron. Aaron was to be his prophet; that is, Aaron represented the brotherly side, the manner of speech, the grace in which the thing should be ministered, but Moses represented the authority; in this sense no less a thought attached to him than that of God Himself. So that the word of God is God Himself: “the word of God is living and operative, and sharper than any two-edged sword, and ^[p. 259] penetrating to the division of soul and spirit, both of joints and marrow, and a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. And there is not a creature unapparent before him; but all things are naked and laid bare to his eyes, with whom we have to do”, (Hebrews 4:12, 13). Through whomsoever it may be ministered, it comes to us as God’s word.

AS In what way do you connect authority with fellowship?

JT It enters into the fellowship. We shall see later that fellowship is presented elsewhere in another way, but it is called the apostles’ fellowship here.

Ques Have you in mind that this authority is liable to be called in question, that other kinds of teaching may be put on the same level?

JT Yes. The most effective way to set aside the truth is to bring in something else that tends to undermine the truth and to make it collateral as though it were the truth. There is nothing more undermining than something brought in collaterally with the truth, and yet not the truth, aiming to undermine it, as in Galatia. It was something different, but not directly or formally opposed.

Ques Would tradition do that in contrast to the commandments of God?

JT That is exactly what the Lord said: “ye have made void the commandment of God on account of your traditional teaching” (Matthew 15:6). That has been very effective in the history of the assembly, culminating in current public Christianity; it is simply something else, different from that which the apostles taught, and it has subverted it.

JRS Do you consider that the scriptures might be used to that purpose?

JT Well, they are perverted sometimes. The leading Christian denomination maintains the Bible, as we know, in its creed, but effectively sets it aside in ^[p. 260] almost every point. It is the introduction of something else without openly assuming to be opposed.

EuR Is this element of authority suggested in Luke 12:42? “Who then is the faithful and prudent steward, whom his lord will set over his household?” It may be said that the household is greater than the bondman, but it is said that the Lord has set the bondman over the household to give food in season, and that has to be maintained.

JT He is a bondman, but also a steward, having, as it were, charge of the food supply. He is set over the household in this sense, and of course has authority. I think we might pay special attention to the antecedent history here, so that the word goes out, “knowing of whom thou hast learned them”. Those through whom truth comes are to be accredited. In connection with our subject, the first thing to understand is, what constituted the apostles, because personality has so much to do with Christianity, whether it be persons who are spiritually attractive so as to be lovable, or persons with moral history involving weight. The Spirit of God makes a great deal of persons; and the Lord, of course, is the great model of all the personnel of the assembly; whether we be viewed as attractive or as having experience. The Lord’s thirty years of private life were not merely accidental, nor simply that He should wait until He was thirty before He preaches; there was moral history in them which the voice from heaven recognised.

HES Is the perfect pattern set forth in the Lord Himself when He said He was “Altogether that which I also say to you”, John 8:25?

JT Exactly; that is the ground of ministry — that one is all that one says. And so in Acts 1 it is “all things which Jesus began both to do and to teach”, verse 1. The doing comes first.

FI So that before we receive doctrine without reserve, we should be sure of the antecedents of those who give ^[p. 261] it?

JT Yes; and so the history of the apostles enters into their service. Peter shows in his first remarks among the brethren in chapter 1 how he had learned even before the Holy Spirit came. He knew what to say, and he linked on what he had to say with what existed. That is one feature of the testimony of God; it links on, it is one whole. So that he is able to cite the Psalms, and then to bring forward what was needed in an apostle, namely, that he must be one who had assembled with the others during all the time the Lord had gone in and out among them, from the baptism of John until He was received up. What was needed for apostleship is stressed. There was no discrepancy between them as seen at the end of the Lord’s life before the cross, and at His resurrection; they are all there (Judas’ treachery being fully owned), as the list given to us in Acts 1 shows. Mark specially stresses that they were to be with the Lord: He “appointed twelve that they might be with him, and that he might send them to preach”, chapter 3:14; and so in chapter 16, when the light of the resurrection is brought, it is brought to “those that had been with Him”; and Acts 1 shows that they are the very same persons, and they are in the upper room. They are seen as fully answering to the bearing of the Lord’s instruction. They are in the upper room, that is to say, they are withdrawn from ordinary religious currents; they are not to be affected by worldly religious influence. We are very easily affected by what is current, not only in the normal worship of God, but in our service. They are mentioned, not as in the temple in chapter 1, but in the upper room, and there is room there with them for all that might have been gathered up in the Lord’s life before He was owned from heaven, that is, Mary His mother is there. All that might have been gathered up from the Lord before and after His anointing is there.

EuR So would the “crowd of names” there imply personality?

JT Yes, “name” implies personal distinctness. Here it would indicate that the one hundred and twenty had been formed by the Lord’s ministry and influence. He had gone up; they saw Him go up, and they went to the upper room. They are not there just temporarily, they are staying there; it marks them; and Mary is there and other women, and the brethren of the Lord. Then, when Peter stands up to preach, instead of saying. Listen to the word of God, he says, “give heed to my words”; that is, personal authority is asserted. Then, when the converts want to know further what they are to do, it says, “they ... said to Peter and the other apostles ...” (Acts 2:37) showing that the idea of apostleship even entered into the minds of the converts — that it was not a one-man affair. Christianity is not that in its administration here; it is authority vested, not in one person, but in persons. Hence the Lord has it everywhere. Where His people are in subjection, the principle of authority is available to us; whether in China or India or anywhere in the western hemisphere, the authority is available.

PL It says. He gave them “the authority”, Mark 13:34.

JT That confirms what we are saying; it involves the whole idea of it.

HES Is your thought that authority from God can only be connected with suitable moral conditions?

JT That is what comes out, so that we have to consider the antecedents of any who minister. “Knowing of whom thou hast learned them”, the apostle says.

Rem That is why the word is, “Remember your leaders who have spoken to you the word of God; and considering the issue of their conversation, imitate their faith”, (Hebrews 13:7).

MWB Would you say a word as to how we can now discern this authority, because there is great pretension to authority in Christendom, and many young ones are deceived by the feigned authority in so ^[p. 263] many?

JT We cannot conceive that the Lord would leave His people here without the means of discerning what is of Himself. So there are the letters to the assemblies — seven in number, which would mean that the whole assembly is addressed, not only at that time, but throughout its whole history on earth, and it implies that there is a word from the Lord governing every stage of the assembly’s history. Then the next thing is that the Spirit speaks, and he that has an ear to hear will say that that speaking, through whomsoever it may be, is authoritative: “He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the assemblies”, Revelation 2:7. Any such ear will discern that it is the Spirit, and hence has authority; it has double authority, because what the Spirit says is just the unfolding of what the Lord says. The Lord says very little to the assemblies; the seven addresses are in two comparatively short chapters in Revelation, but the ministry of the Spirit unfolding them extends over centuries. We can read the actual words of the Lord in the addresses, and they have authority; they can be appealed to at any time. They are ground for action, and so also is 2 Timothy in our times; but the ministry of the Spirit, which amplifies the Lord’s direct words, is discerned by those who have ears to hear. Later on, God will speak in thunder (Revelation 10); but now the Spirit speaks in intelligible ministry, but it is authoritative. The work of God is implied in those who have ears to hear. If there be no ears to hear, the testimony God presents must be ineffective; but from the outset God worked in men in relation to what He set before them; and therefore the Scripture is a record of what God has said, but also that there were those that were hearing.

WRP What about that word, “ye have the unction from the holy one, and ye know all things”, (1 John 2:20)?

JT That fits in. It refers to the Spirit “the same unction teaches you as to all things, and is true”, so that “ye have not need that any one should teach you”, (verse 27). In fact, what we are saying raises the whole question as to whether the Spirit of truth is ministering to the people of God, and whether His voice is heard; whether there is a possibility of knowing the truth, or whether we are always in the stage of enquiry. The Lord’s remarks, as well as those of His apostles, show that we may know the truth. He says, “ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free”, (John 8:32). Well, if we are to know the truth, something must come to us in the way of authority. The Scriptures are formal authority, but the Spirit of God ministering impresses the ear that can hear, so that it discerns that it is the voice of the Spirit.

Ques Is it not remarkable that in the address to Thyatira the Lord says, “But to you I say, the rest who are in Thyatira, as many as have not this doctrine ...”,(Revelation 2:24) as if the Lord could count on the remnant discerning and refusing the evil doctrine then current, and maintaining the pure doctrine of the apostles?

JT Exactly. Up to Thyatira the Lord contemplates that there is an ear to hear without an overcomer, but from Thyatira on, the ear to hear is dependent upon an overcomer. Where there is an overcomer there is an ear to hear, and where there is an ear to hear there is the recognition of authority; and the voice of the Spirit has authority, as we have said. But what the Spirit says is always in agreement with the Scripture; and that is why I thought we might read the verses in 2 Timothy, because they run on to the Scriptures.

Ques Do you suggest there is a moral reason where this authority cannot be discerned by persons?

JT Yes. If I do not hear the voice of the Spirit, there is a moral reason — I am not overcoming.

WCG Does the hearing ear develop from, “If any man will do his will”? There is the purpose of ^[p. 265] heart to do His will and the hearing ear is the fruit of that, and so it is, “he shall know”.

JT “If any one desire to practise his will, he shall know concerning the doctrine, whether it is of God”, (John 7:17).

WCG A person morally right is doing the will of God.

Ques Is there a great deal in recognising where the authority is? The note to verse 10 says, “thou hast followed up”, that is, persevered in Paul’s doctrine.

JT What ought to be clearly before us is “the apostles”, who they were, and what they were. The high priesthood at Jerusalem, or the Pharisees, would not discern them, but then those in whom God works owned them. We must keep in mind that there is the subjective work of God going on, and we are exposed as to whether we are the subjects of it or not, by the presentation of what is of God objectively. The leading apostles were fishermen from Galilee, and their speech indicated that they were not learned men; they were not men of Jerusalem; they were regarded as unlettered. Who will recognise them? Well, there were three thousand people converted by the preaching of one of them; and notice that he stood up with the eleven, because that is the point — not with the hundred and twenty, but with the eleven. Authority is thus stressed. The eleven are in evidence alongside Peter, and Peter is preaching. Now, if it be merely that three thousand people are swayed by oratory or human influence of any kind, the man who influences them will be their leader, they will look to him for everything. But it is not so here. The converts recognised all those in whom the authority was. They “said to Peter and the other apostles. What shall we do, brethren?” — showing that the subjects of a work of God discern those in whom His authority is. That ought to be specially observed, because the subjective work of God in men and women ^[p. 266] and children will show itself in the recognition of what is of God presented objectively in whomsoever it may be, whether it be in Galilean fishermen or in educated men like Paul. The work of God will show itself in the recognition of divine authority. I think the brethren will bear with me in pressing that point, because it brings into proper relation the presentation of the testimony in chosen vessels, and the subjective operations of God. Those two things must run together.

MWB Then would you say there are really the three things necessary — the ear to hear; and then the discernment that the persons speaking possess certain qualities that give them the right to speak; and then, thirdly, what they say is in keeping with God’s revealed mind?

JT That is the way the truth stands, so when Paul went to Thessalonica it says that he went in among them, and opened up and laid down the truth concerning Christ that He must suffer and rise from the dead, and certain believed; Acts 17:2 - 4. There was a mixed result, and then in Berea he ministered, and they searched the Scriptures. “These were more noble than those in Thessalonica”, (Acts 17:11) it says. It was the same minister, but those at Berea searched the Scriptures to see “if these things were so”. That sets out how the matter stands. The greatest of ministers is ministering, and those who are the subjects of the work of God pay attention, but they search the Scriptures. They are more noble than the Thessalonians, in that sense. So we do not want to be behind. There is a thought that runs through in relation to Paul’s ministry of what is “more excellent”, and the Bereans were more noble in the sense that they appealed to the Scriptures: we have the Scriptures, and it is for us to prove what is ministered by them.

HMS Do we have the same process in the mind of Timothy? There is first of all the unfeigned faith in his grandmother Lois, and then in his mother ^[p. 267] Eunice, and then this child knows the Holy Scriptures, and has faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

JT Exactly; and Paul says to him, “thou hast been thoroughly acquainted with my teaching”. The three thousand converted at Pentecost discerned that the ability to help was not only in Peter but in the others, and then they persevered, we are told, in the teaching, not of Peter alone, but of the apostles; this is evidently mentioned to bring out that the whole idea of divine authority is recognised in whomsoever it may be, by those who are the subjects of the work of God.

HES That principle is set forth in 1 Corinthians 2 — the spiritual discerns all things.

CCE Do you think that the enormous defection that has come in, is really due to the fact that the subjective work of God has been deficient?

JT That is the thing to notice. We should move in relation to what God is doing in a subjective way, that is, by the power of the Holy Spirit here on earth. We have the suggestion in the very first verses of the Bible: “the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters”. (Genesis 1:2) That is an idea that must run through; and the next reference we get is that He is striving with men, chapter 6:3. What is presented of God objectively will be recognised by the effect of the Spirit here, and where there is disregard of what is manifestly of God, the work of God is either stopped or is not there at all.

EuR What relation is there between this thought of authority connected with doctrine, and authority as connected with eldership?

JT Eldership came out later. The apostles Barnabas and Paul appointed elders in each assembly. Acts 14, and then Titus is directed to appoint elders in every city. In either case (Titus being an apostolic delegate) they have the character of apostolic authority, but then the appointment of elders is always founded on moral qualities. You never get one elder in a city or assembly;

^[p. 268] it is always elders; there is no idea of a bishop of a city. It is a question of the distribution of authority in vessels suited for it and that authority is recognised wherever God is working.

EuR It should be a concern that there might be those conditions in each locality so that there might be something the Lord could add to.

JT For instance, in Acts 14, in Lystra, where you have the man lame from infancy, it is said that he “heard Paul speaking”. Now it is not simply what Paul said, but Paul speaking. That is, he had an ear for that kind of speaking, and Paul discerned in him “that he had faith to be healed”(Acts 14:9). That is how the facts are stated. There was the recognition of that kind of speaking. The speaking was from heaven, and this man heard it. Others doubtless heard it with their natural ears, but the Holy Spirit pays no attention to that. Paul discerned in the man that he had faith. There was no act of faith outwardly in him, but that he heard Paul speaking, and Paul discerned that he had faith to be healed. God was working in the man. Then Paul spake with a loud voice, as if to aid his hearing, “Rise up straight upon thy feet; and he sprang up and walked”(Acts 14:10).

Ques Would that be the Lord encouraging the spirit of subjection in the man? There is the objective and the subjective together.

JT I think so. The loud voice of Paul would make the testimony enter more clearly into his ears, and he responds at once; he springs up. In that man you have the idea of intelligence, a man that discerns that kind of speaking; and then there is power to stand on his feet. He is material for the assembly; and what is seen in him must run through the dispensation. So in that chapter the apostles appointed elders in each assembly, which would mean that there would be intelligent authority there, and withal that the assemblies would be furnished; they would stand, each one on its own feet.

FF ^[p. 269] So Paul encourages Timothy not to be “ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me his prisoner” — does that come into what you are saying?

JT Yes, the testimony of our Lord would convey His authority, and Paul being a prisoner would convey the reproach attached to it; and Timothy was to be in full accord with those two things.

FSM Would the thought of authority be connected with a four-fold basis? First of all, the authority of the Lord recognised; secondly, the power of the Holy Spirit present; thirdly, the inspiration of the Holy Scriptures bowed to; and fourthly, the work of God in the soul — if those four bases were recognised there would be unquestionable authority.

JT Yes. There is, in 2 Timothy 3:10, a remarkable grouping of what we are speaking about, “thou hast been thoroughly acquainted with my teaching”. The Lord would direct our thoughts to Paul’s teaching, that we should be conversant with it; and 2 Timothy is clearly for the last days. Indeed, it speaks of them in this chapter, and that ought to appeal to every one of us, especially young men in the ministry, that there should be a full acquaintance with it, and one may say too with all that helps as to it. In the Old Testament you have the idea of books that are not now extant, but were then, and any increased interest that one might have in any subject, in a king’s life, etc., might be further gratified by appealing to a certain book, the name of which would be given. Whether it be the narrative of Gad, or the narrative of Nathan, you are directed to that book. If one is in the spirit of 1 and 2 Chronicles, for instance, one would look up everything that referred to David and his life. His own life was so important, was so full, that anyone concerned about the life of David, if God was working in his soul, would say: I must get that book, that book is worth reading. And so, today, God has graciously provided for us,

^[p. 270] especially in the Collected Writings and other writings of the great servants that were used to recover the truth, particularly Paul’s doctrine; and we cannot do without them. If we want to follow up Paul’s doctrine, we must not lose sight of any aid that God has given as to it.

HMS With regard to your reference to “thou hast been thoroughly acquainted with my teaching”, supposing I find difficulty in receiving certain ministry, it may possibly be because I am not sufficiently acquainted with Paul’s teaching, and I need to learn that before I can understand what troubles me.

JT Just so. I am afraid many of us have neglected the curriculum. We have in connection with Paul’s doctrine the school of Tyrannus, and that name is mentioned for a specific reason. He is a school-master, not in the sense that the law is, but in the sense of one who knew how to teach with authority, a most important thing; he would require the young disciple to look into Romans, to see to that, to get grounded so that he can take root downwards. Brethren who do not go through Romans carefully do not take root downwards. We are said there to be planted in the likeness of Christ’s death, chapter 6:5, which implies taking root downwards; we have there the principle of analysis, which is a most important lesson in our spiritual education, to analyse what is inside of us spiritually, so that we get a clear knowledge of it, and that God has dealt with the flesh to His own glory: “having sent his own Son, in likeness of flesh of sin, and for sin, has condemned sin in the flesh”, chapter 8:3. I believe the difficulty with us is, either that we have not been grounded in Romans, or if we have been, we have allowed something to darken our vision.

EuR Is there not a spiritual link between what the Lord gave in the last century — what we have preserved in the Collected Writings and so on — and the ministry He is giving ^[p. 271] today?

JT There is, and we cannot afford to miss it. “Thou hast been thoroughly acquainted with (or followed up) my teaching”, etc. If the Holy Spirit is speaking, it is to be followed up, and we are to test everything; “Prove all things”. There may be imperfection in the vessels the Lord is using, but is there that which the Spirit is saying? If there be that, we cannot afford to be without it, and if we neglect it we shall be in error; God has furnished it for us.

Ques Is your thought that if we were more watchful for God’s ways with us, we should see that He wants the truth built into our souls?

JT Yes. Timothy is a good example for all of us. It says, “thou hast been thoroughly acquainted with my teaching, conduct, purpose, faith, long-suffering, love, endurance, persecutions, sufferings”. That challenges those who are in any way seeking to serve, not only as to what they are putting out in the way of doctrine, but as to their conduct, their manner of life. If we are to know those from whom we have learned the things of God we must consider their manner of life.

CCE I notice how very frequently in Timothy we get the expression “doctrine” or “teaching”. It is used a very large number of times, and does that not show the importance of it?

JT It does. One has been looking into it a little in regard of Paul’s ministry, how the Spirit of God stresses it. Paul and Barnabas go through the whole length of the island of Cyprus, and they find Bar-jesus who was with the deputy of the island, who is said to be an intelligent man, which is a very notable thing. He was a man in whom God was working, but on the line of intelligence. So when Paul had looked on Bar-jesus and he had become blind, it says that the deputy was “amazed at the teaching of the Lord”(Acts 13:12), which means he had ability to discern that kind of teaching; he had never met the like before. And so right through you have that thought. When you come ^[p. 272] to Ephesus you have Paul teaching in the school of Tyrannus for two whole years; it is that kind of authoritative teaching; it so affected Timothy that he followed it up fully, and, at the same time, he knew the character and ways of the devoted man whom God was using to unfold it.

JRS Do you think we might covet the sensibilities of Timothy, his weeping, and so on, which made him so sensitive to what Paul had to say?

JT The apostle notes that here. And he goes on, “But thou abide in those things which thou hast learned, and of which thou hast been fully persuaded, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; and that from a child thou hast known the sacred letters, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation, through faith which is in Christ Jesus”. Paul refers to the scriptures, which Timothy had known.

MWB As to following up the teaching, sometimes when the Lord may be distinctly emphasising a line of truth, as at the present time, something in relation to Himself personally, there is difficulty in the acceptance of what He may be saying because previous ministry relative to other lines has not been followed up. Is it not incumbent on all of us to take specific interest in what the Lord is saying at any time, and to be concerned as to it?

JT That is most important. It is quite obvious the testimony is cumulative. It is in links as of a chain, and I think the writer of I and 2 Chronicles suggests a man of that kind, a man like Timothy or Luke, who had thoroughly followed up the golden thread of the testimony. The writer of Chronicles begins with Adam. He says, as it were, we must not miss anything, even what there may be in Adam, and he traces the history right down. Luke takes it up in the priesthood and carries it to Paul’s position in Rome — the testimony definitely among the Gentiles. The suggestion is that all the features of the truth are linked together as one ^[p. 273] whole. And if that be applied further, since apostolic times the Holy Spirit has been ministering; He never gives up. He may be driven in by the conditions of Christendom, but He is here and always ready to minister. Can we afford to miss anything that He ministers? We cannot. If we skip one feature of His all-wise presentation of Christ in ministry, we shall be defective, and that is why I believe this is written: “thoroughly acquainted with my teaching, conduct”, etc. But the apostle shows that Timothy was also conversant with the Scriptures, grounded in them, and that he had faith; it was hereditary, it came down to him.

FSM Do you think emphasis is laid on the value of spiritual impressions in childhood? 2 Timothy 1:5 and 3:15.

JT That is true, and what the history of Timothy would denote is the interest God has in a cumulative and constructive history in a believer, so that there is nothing left out. From a child, Timothy had gone right on and taken on the best there was, that is, Paul’s ministry. He was thoroughly acquainted with it, and knew all about the life of the great servant through whom the ministry had come.

← Previous Article 22 of 30 Next →