THE PRAISES OF ISRAEL (6)
[p. 388] THE PRAISES OF ISRAEL (6)
Luke 24:32 - 53; Acts 1:1 - 5; John 13:1
JT At the close of our meeting this morning we considered verses 39 to 46 of chapter 22, which depict the Lord’s sufferings, and it was noted that, while they are a record of His sufferings from the standpoint of this gospel, there is an indication of mitigation on the part of God, which would cover our own experiences or the experiences of the assembly; God’s eye being constantly upon us so that we should not be tempted above what we are able to bear, but that the service should go on. Sufferings give tone to the service. It says, “For it became him ... in bringing many sons to glory, to make perfect the leader of their salvation through sufferings”, (Hebrews 2:10). The book of Revelation shows how sufferings enter into the praises of God. That book is full of life, which issues in praise to God. As Hezekiah said, “The living, the living, he shall praise thee”, (Isaiah 38:19). The book of Revelation contemplates the Lamb, not in the mature sense in which the gospel of John presents Him as “the Lamb of God”, but in a diminutive sense (the diminutive noun being used in the Greek), involving the absence of protection, so that He is presented as the suffering One. Luke, whilst not ignoring Matthew and Mark, brings in the sufferings of Christ more as that in which we can share, and which gives tone to our service.
Chapter 24 is another experience, the counterpart of the sufferings; the experience of knowing the Lord risen, knowing Him in the activities of His life as risen, this involving spirituality in the most positive sense. He vanishes out of their sight, which would be out of keeping with a state of flesh and blood. It is the spiritual condition in which Christ was raised, which eventuates in spirituality in us. We are not yet in a spiritual condition [p. 389] as to our bodies; the Lord is, and He is presented objectively in that condition in resurrection, obviously for educational reasons, that the assembly should take on that character; as it is said, “being seen of them during forty days”; in chapter 24 we have the assembly in that relation. It is the assembly publicly, but nevertheless in a condition morally, to which the Lord can come. The two sides of the assembly viewed in these chapters, 22 and 24, constitute it an invulnerable vessel, like the ark of Noah: it goes through. In chapter 22 its foundations are laid, so to speak, in the presence of murderous opposition, but laid surely. That is to say, what happens is in the presence of accredited witnesses, qualified to testify to what the Lord did and said in the institution of the Supper. That is never to be lost sight of. The memorial is to retain what Christ was, as known amongst them. As it is said, “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”. (Acts 1:21, 22). All that entered into the Lord’s supper, for His heart was fully told out to them in the gift of Himself so beautifully depicted.
Then chapter 24 gives us the other side of the position, the spiritual condition in which He is now, and in virtue of which He may be with us, unseen by the world, and with all the unceasing service that He carries on, mediately now, of course, but still carried on with a view to the formation and maintenance of the assembly. The two that went to Emmaus are samples of the result of this unceasing ministry, so that the assembly should be maintained here, the idea of authority entering into it now that He is not here corporeally Himself. The eleven are there. There were twelve in chapter 22 — an unbroken number, but now there is a broken number, but still the authority is there, and the recovered ones return and find “the eleven”, as it says, “and those with them gathered together”. It is not the side presented [p. 390] in John 20, because there is no reference to apostleship there, nor to a number. Here it is still the public assembly, but with these two features of its constitution.
HD'AC Why is Jerusalem mentioned so frequently in this last chapter of Luke and in Acts 1, and not once in John 20?
JT Just for the reason that I suggested, that John is not concerned about geographical position or place, but spiritual state; nor does he touch the collective idea of the assembly, but the persons who form it. The word “assembled” is not in John 20:19 in the original.
HES Is the apprehension of the spiritual conditions into which the Lord has passed intended to bring about a spiritual state in us?
JT That is the thought; it is objective; He is moving about amongst them; “seen by them”, as it is said in Acts 1: “to whom also he presented himself living, after he had suffered, with many proofs; being seen by them”. It is an objective thought, but intended to be educational. One link between chapter 22 and chapter 24 is that of authority. What was there in chapter 22 had been severely tested and shattered, as you might say, according to the record in the end of chapter 23, but the service of the Lord brought them together, so that the features are carried through; and, although there are only eleven, yet the authority is there and recognised by persons who had been affected by the Lord’s ministry, chapter 24:33.
WAW Is it all having in view the moment of His appearing to them? Did He take account of Simon Peter and the two downcast ones, in order that that condition might be revived?
JT And to bring out the great principle as existent — the continuous service of the Lord in regard to erring ones, all with a view to the assembly being maintained. Hence, what the two from Emmaus found was that the gathered company were saying, “The Lord is [p. 391] indeed risen and has appeared to Simon”. Then, they related “what had happened on the way, and how he was made known to them in the breaking of bread”. It is to bring out that side, what proceeds in the assembly, the recognition of the Lord’s service, which is carried on in relation to the sign of His love, namely, the breaking of the bread. For it is not simply bread, but the bread, for the article should be there, as if the idea was prominent in their minds.
HES In Leviticus 8, in the consecration of the priests, the sacrifice was boiled and not roast with fire. Is that the priestly apprehension of the sufferings of Christ?
JT That is what I understand. Boiling alludes to Luke — and John too; the sufferings are there, but presented in a modified way.
Ques Is there the suggestion that the service of the Lord more than recovers what seems to be lost in Judas, in that two men are available and put before the Lord in Acts 1? You were suggesting the importance of this service of the Lord, so that the service of praise should be filled out according to the divine intention.
JT And it will be noticed that in the beginning of chapter 24 there are two men at the sepulchre. Connecting it with what you remark, although there may be a breach — as, alas! there have been many — yet God supplies adequate testimony for His purpose. If Judas is lost, as he was, we have two men at the sepulchre, as if to say there is adequate testimony; and in the two referred to in Acts 1 we see how there were those qualified for apostleship. They were such as had assembled with the others “all the time in which the Lord Jesus came in and went out among us”(Acts 1:21). I think we ought to be encouraged in that, that the Lord will have such as are suitable to fill up what is needed for the testimony until the end.
Rem Is their state borne witness to by the fact that when there is the sovereign choice of the Lord,
[p. 392] the brethren are left in perfect harmony and united, Acts 2:1. There is no jealousy because one had been promoted over another.
JT The matter is put into the hands of the Lord — into the “lap” — and the one chosen is recognised afterwards, because Paul says that He appeared to the “twelve”, 1 Corinthians 15:5.
EuR Would this activity of the Lord with regard to the erring one, and the two as discouraged, tend to elevate our thoughts with regard to such, that they might be available for the vessel of praise again?
JT It really honours the Lord to view the matter thus. It is His own way of recovery. He appears to Simon and He goes a long way after the other two, and indicates that He will go further. It is the untiring, vigilant service that the Lord maintains in regard of His own, which I believe continues and goes on to the end, with a view to the replenishment and maintenance of the assembly.
RB-n There could not be the complete volume of praise from this company with the two away at Emmaus, and so they are recovered through His own sovereign work and as recovered He is able to come into their midst.
JT Yes, they have assembly instincts which is an important matter. It is not that the shepherd went after the sheep and laid it upon His shoulders and carried it home rejoicing; that is not the side presented here; it is the present mode of the Lord’s recovery of His own. They are recovered, not only through their hearts, but through their understandings. Their hearts burned, as He spoke to them on the way, but the burning of their hearts did not bring them back to Jerusalem; it was what they saw. That is the principle governing the period of the forty days; He was “seen by them”. Now that is wholly spiritual, and so the keenness of vision is stressed, as was said about Elisha. Elijah said, “If thou see me when I am taken from thee”(2 Kings 2:10); and, at [p. 393] the ascension of Christ, it is said, the disciples “beholding him”. They saw Him go up, and then the angels say to them, “This Jesus who has been taken up from you into heaven, shall thus come in the manner in which ye have beheld him going into heaven”(Acts 1:11). So the suggestion is of spiritual power of vision.
Ques Is it a mark of definite recovery that their contribution was in harmony with what was already being said?
JT It fitted in as a necessary part. It is the suggestion of an instrument, of what is being constructed. Their contribution was necessary. First there was absolute grace in the appearing to Simon; for it is the reign of grace, and grace prevails in this new system. Simon was the last one that ought to have been noticed, reckoning according to human thoughts. And then the testimony of the two, what they experienced and what they saw; it says, “they related what had happened on the way, and how he was made known to them in the breaking of bread”.
FSM Would not the volume of praise be greater and the song sweeter as the result of the Lord’s service of recovery in the case of the two and of Simon? So, are we not encouraged to seek to be developed in this service of recovery under the Lord, not only that individuals might be recovered to the assembly, but that the volume and sweetness of the praise might be increased?
JT I am sure that is right. Both Peter and those two would sing more sweetly and with deeper tone than they could have done had they not strayed. Not that there is any premium on straying, but it brings out the character of the Lord’s workmanship.
AL Is it like the expression in the end of Hebrews, “the great shepherd of the sheep”,(Hebrews 13:20) and then. He will “perfect you in every good work”(Hebrews 13:21)?
JT Just so.
Ques David speaks of the “instruments of music which I have made”(1 Chronicles 23:5), is this the counterpart of that?
JT That is right. “They related”, it says, “what had happened on the way, and how he was made known to them in the breaking of bread”. It should read “the breaking of the bread”. I believe the wording is to bring out the prominence which this was acquiring amongst the saints. Then we have the Lord’s recognition of what they were saying; it says, “as they were saying these things, he himself stood in their midst, and says to them. Peace be unto you”. It is “their midst”, “to them“and “unto you”, the persons so gathered and occupied are before His mind in a peculiar way here.
CG Would Jeremiah 18, as to the potter and the vessel he makes on the wheel, fit in with what we have had before us as to the vessel of praise?
JT Yes. The first vessel mentioned was marred; “and he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make” (Jeremiah 18:4).
RB-n It was emphasised just now that the Lord comes into their midst. Would you say a little more about that?
JT It is to emphasise how pleased He was with them as they were saying these things. What they were saying conveyed the state of things as He intended them to be, that is, that grace was prominent; and there was the breaking of the bread, which maintains in the assembly a constant sense of the Lord, who He is, and what He is, and how He is to be known amongst His own, so that He has His place in leading the praises.
HD'AC It is remarkable that they had hardly finished speaking of the breaking of the bread, when Jesus was standing there in the midst.
JT Is not that to establish the thought? Because another feature of the assembly is that it is the place of right principles and thoughts; they find currency there, and they are maintained [p. 395] there.
EuR Is the idea that the assembly is like a stringed instrument, and the Lord would have each believer concerned to be available to His hand and in tune with the other strings?
JT The suggestion is that each fits in as the parts in music. What they said was not said promiscuously; it fitted in. I believe that the saints suffer, and our service of song in the assembly is marred, by the method of applying tunes in our meetings. The application of music does not appear to be regarded as a spiritual matter at times; it seems just a question of any one raising any tune that seems suitable to the hymn, without much sense of waiting on the Lord about it.
JHT With regard to that point, musical instruments are first referred to by David as “the instruments of God”, (1 Chronicles 16:42), and then as “the instruments which I made”, (1 Chronicles 23:5); does formation come into view there? Then, in the days of recovery, they used the musical instruments of David, the man of God, Nehemiah 12:36. Over against that, we have to record what is said in Amos, that they “invent them instruments of music, like David”, (chapter 6:5). The latter is mere imitation.
JT Yes. The other passages you quote show that the music is a part of the service, that it is not a mechanical thing that any one can supply, but is spiritual.
WC Does “I will sing with the spirit, but I will sing also with the understanding”, (1 Corinthians 14:15), bear on the tunes?
JT As we have had already, 1 Corinthians seems to carry with it the idea of instruments of music — it may not be very pronounced, but it seems to be there. The Corinthians were certainly devoid of harmony in the different parties that existed among them, one group sitting down by themselves, and another group by themselves. You would get no musical harmony there. Chapter 12 insists on unity. Chapter 14 speaks of distinction of sounds in what is piped or harped, and [p. 396] this enters into the singing with the spirit and with the understanding. Music is necessarily part of the singing. In heaven, harps are used. God looks for harmony. When the ark was brought into the temple, 2 Chronicles 5, it is said, “when the trumpeters and singers were as one”(verse 13), that the glory filled the house. It is as if Jehovah honoured the perfectly blended harmony.
JS The Lord said to them, “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was yet with you, that all that is written concerning me in the law of Moses and prophets and psalms must be fulfilled”. Would the psalms correspond to those musical instruments and the praise going up to God?
JT The idea of music must come in there.
MWB Do you think it ought to be a question of spiritual exercise as to a brother raising a suitable tune to a hymn in the assembly?
JT It seems to enter into the constitution of the assembly which we are dwelling upon in this chapter, and in Acts 1. A tune necessarily is an integral part of the hymn as used. As it proceeds from the vocal musical powers of the saints it is governed by their affections and their intelligence; it is thus spiritual.
PL Have we that thought in the many psalms addressed to “The Chief Musician”, and then the kind of instrument upon which the psalm is to be played and sung being added?
JT Just so. As was remarked, the Lord added the psalms when speaking in the assembly, Luke 24:44, but He does not refer to the psalms in His service of recovery, verse 27.
FSM Of the singers whom David separated for the service of song in the house of God, it is said that they were all under the direction of the king, and of their fathers. Would that suggest the idea that in starting a tune we should be in subjection to the Lord and to our [p. 397] brethren?
JT Clearly. It is remarkable that “the captains of the host” were associated with David in separating those who were to be engaged in the service of song. But the fatherly element in the oversight would modify this, see 1 Chronicles 25.
GJE “Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs”(Ephesians 5:19) — would that include the tune, the singing, and the harmony, as well as the words? There are the three — psalms and hymns and spiritual songs; are they all good for the assembly?
JT Obviously the tune is included in the singing. They all belong to the assembly. I suppose a psalm embodies experience.
GJE You would not set a tune for a spiritual song to a psalm. There should be an appropriate tune.
Ques Is it not suitable that brothers should addict themselves to the service of tune-starting?
JT I think it is quite in order if carried out in a godly way.
Ques You are not suggesting that every spiritual person can start a tune, but those who can, should do it with spiritual intelligence?
JT That is the thought. If one has the ability, to sing or to provide music he is an asset to the assembly, part of the wealth of the assembly; it belongs to all.
Rem Are hymns on the same principle as in Acts 6? When it is a question of ministering, the men are to be full of the Holy Spirit, and men were chosen of that character.
JT I listened to an address by F.E.R. about thirty-seven years ago which affected me much. He said there was nothing set up at the beginning that was not in the power of the Holy Spirit. Anything outside of that was not acceptable to God, and what you say confirms that, that even the work of deacons required that the men should be full of faith and the Spirit. And hence the provision of music in the service of God should be in the power of [p. 398] the Spirit.
DLH Normally the one who gives out the hymn would also start the tune, but if he is incapable of doing it, then the Lord would be looked to, to guide in regard to the tune. Scope should be given to the person who gives out the hymn, to see whether he has also the tune that is suitable; it seems to me there ought to be more pause given to allow of this. If there were more quietness and waiting on the Lord in that way, confusion would be avoided.
JT I am sure what you have said should have universal attention.
The Lord here, as in the midst of them, stresses His humanity in resurrection, in the fact that He ate the honeycomb and the broiled fish. Not that He needed to do it, but according to the spirit of Luke’s gospel, it would come within the range of our understanding, to assure us of the reality of His humanity in a wholly spiritual condition, which is to be reflected in the assembly, although we are not yet in that condition as to our bodies. Then their understandings are opened, and intelligence is given as to the whole scope of Scripture, according to the Lord’s own way of dividing it — which is an important matter, as aiding us in our reading of the Scriptures. Then, having stressed their place as witnesses, “he led them out as far as Bethany”. I thought we might note these things as entering into our subject of the formation of a vessel of praise. The Lord emphasises His humanity in a new and eternal condition, a condition in which we are to share, and in which we share now inwardly; and then, that our intelligences are opened, so that we might understand, and then He leads us.
That brings us to the final point, that is, the Lord’s service as “minister of the sanctuary”, as opened up in the epistle to the Hebrews. In order to amplify this, Acts 1 says He presented Himself living to the apostles. The word ‘present’ is not simply that He is there, but that He shows Himself to us in such a [p. 399] way that we see Him according to His thought at the moment. He was seen of them during the forty days. And then He “assembled with them”. That is all to bring out what this vessel is, and His part in it.
Then, to link on with John’s record, the Lord’s communications at the last Supper, the beginning of chapter 13, tells us that He was going to the Father: “Jesus, knowing that his hour had come that he should depart out of this world to the Father ...” That being introductory to chapters 13 to 17, is to remind us that the mind of the Lord was toward the Father in what this section presents. The writers of the first three gospels in recording the events of the last Supper do not make any reference to His going to the Father; they are concerned about the public side, of which we have spoken, and of which we get the climax in Luke 24 and Acts 1. John brings in another line, in order to complete the instruction — that the Lord, whilst He was dealing with the Supper and the things relating to it, also had in mind the Father, to whom He was going; and He would draw them into that current. So that we get much more from John about what occurred that night than we do from the others, and all, I believe, to draw our minds and hearts into the current of the Lord’s mind. He was going to the Father, and He would have us to go with Him, not yet literally, but in spirit. In Luke He leads them out as far as to Bethany, showing how perfectly He moved in keeping with the dispensation: He did not lead them further than that, because He would let the idea of the remnant stand, which Bethany suggests; so as to continue the testimony to Israel, to give every possible advantage to the Jews. Thus at the end they are in the temple praising and blessing God, but that was not final; it was just in agreement with Bethany. So the beginning of Acts gives us more particulars as to their own movements after His going up; they returned from the mount of Olives, which [p. 400] corresponds more with the assembly, and as returned to the city they went to the upper room.
JJ Would you say that from Luke’s side, Jerusalem and the mount of Olives become a kind of spiritual position during the Lord’s absence?
JT The history of Bethany denotes the place of love. It was where the Lord specially found remnant affection. In keeping with this, the testimony of the gospel was to begin at Jerusalem, Luke 24:47. This fact ought to have appealed to the Jews.
WCG Would you say that the proof that we are shepherding according to Luke 24 is that we can supply some measure of Bethany conditions?
JT Just so. ‘Bethany conditions’ is a good expression, and the power of those conditions is seen in the movements of the disciples after the Lord was received up. It says, “they, having done him homage, returned to Jerusalem with great joy, and were continually in the temple praising and blessing God”. It was powerful testimony in the temple every day.
HES Does Luke’s gospel show the way the Lord went, and what He did, while in John it is how He felt, and what He thought?
JT Quite so. He was thinking about the Father and leading them into the current of His mind. “Part with me”, He says.
EuR Are the disciples, as in the temple, in accord with Simeon, a “man in Jerusalem”?
JT Yes. There was this powerful testimony, as to what God had effected in Christ in the way of praise. They returned “with great joy, and were continually in the temple praising and blessing God”. That ought to have had a powerful influence, in fact, more powerful in a way than preaching. A service of praise greater than that of David was there. It came from Bethany, the place of love, and which is said to signify “house of song”, as already noted.
Ques Would the end of Luke’s gospel lay [p. 401] the basis for the further movements, as seen in John?
JT Yes. Bethany was not final, but provisional. There is something beyond, and that is seen first in the fact that in Acts 1, after He has ascended, they return from the mount of Olives. It is an indication of “as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God”, (Romans 8:14). They went to the upper room, which would afford conditions for the realisation of John 13, John 14, John 15, John 16 and John 17. The great thoughts running through refer to the Father.
JJ Would you regard the first part of John 12, where Bethany is mentioned, as Jewish? Is that the end of that line, and then the first verse of chapter 13, what goes outside the world altogether?
JT I think so. The fact that it was “before the feast of the passover” (the exact time unmentioned) is, I think, to show that the occasion was not governed by the Jewish feast. The passover, and the Lord’s supper too, refer to what is here in this world as a testimony; whereas what the Lord had in mind takes us outside of all that — His going out of the world to the Father.
WCG Would John 12 be the equivalent of Luke 24 as to Bethany?
JT Pretty much; whereas the assembly is morally outside the world. The upper room corresponds.
The service of the disciples in the temple, verse 52, could not go much beyond the general service of God as inaugurated in the Old Testament, although the Lord had taught them to say Father, and they could bring affections and intelligence into it that had never been there before. It was in the temple; it was so far Jewish, but a testimony. But when they come to the upper room they are morally elevated; the assembly was there — in principle, at least.
Rem Would you say that one thought connected with praise is that of nearness, being near enough to God in moral and holy conditions to praise and bless [p. 402] Him? The two going to Emmaus knew a good deal, but at a distance; they knew nothing from personal experience of being near.
JT What we get in Luke 24 when the Lord comes in, is to touch us, how He is to be known in the assembly, and, as thus known, we give place to Him as Leader. Intelligence as to what governs the position should enter into it; when the Lord has His place, when we discern Him in the midst. He is to be recognised as the “minister of the sanctuary”, and I think John 13, John 14, John 15, John 16 and John 17 indicate the current of His mind as the “minister of the sanctuary”. He is thinking of the service Godward; the Father is before Him.
AN Do the communications of those chapters come in following upon the assembly position having been reached?
JT Yes. As soon as the Lord is apprehended in the midst, it is a question of what He will do, for He is “minister of the sanctuary”, and these chapters in John indicate the current of His mind. The thought of the Father runs right through. John begins and ends with it. In chapter 17 he gives us the Lord lifting up His eyes to heaven and saying, “Father”. That is objective, and educational for us — that we might have some idea of how to speak to the Father.
JS Would chapter 20 give us the “minister of the sanctuary”? The “minister of the sanctuary” supposes a scene of evil, whereas “my Father and your Father” would go beyond that.
JT John 20 involves our greatest and most intimate privileges, but while we are in flesh and blood the idea of the sanctuary must be always present. It is necessary owing to the very fact that we are in flesh and blood.
PL Would you say that the Lord felt it that they had not asked Him where He was going? And might we suggest that He would still feel that?
JT He said, “None of you demands of me. Where goest thou?” (John 16:5). They were not in the current of His mind nor thinking of what He was going into or of what He would draw them into. So, at the end of chapter 16 they say to Him, “Lo, now thou speakest openly and utterest no allegory. Now we know that thou knowest all things, and hast not need that any one should demand of thee. By this we believe that thou art come from God”. Then the Lord said, “Do ye now believe?”(John 16:29 - 31) So that He brings them to the point where they understand Him; and it goes on to say, “These things Jesus spoke, and lifted up his eyes to heaven and said. Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son may glorify thee”, (John 17:1). He “lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said. Father”. The disciples would never forget that. If we were to hear John and Peter and the others in the assembly, you may be sure there would be some reflection of this manner of the Lord. As they received the Spirit they would, in measure, say Father, as He did.
Ques Does this remind us of Joseph’s remarks: “behold, your eyes see, and the eyes of my brother Benjamin, that it is my mouth which speaks to you”, (Genesis 45:12)?
JT As we apprehend Him, and how He does things, we learn how to be in the assembly. It says that He “assembled with them”; they would thus learn how to assemble, from Him.
PL So we say now, in the language of Canticles, “His mouth is most sweet”, chapter 5:16.
AM And in the end of that book it says, “The companions hearken to thy voice”, chapter 8:13.
Rem Are not the three last words of John 17 most important — “I in them”? “I have made known to them thy name, and will make it known; that the love with which thou hast loved me may be in them and I in them”, John 17:26. He is the One who has made that love known, and our hearts understand and appreciate it.