THE GLORY OF THE SON OF GOD (1)
THE GLORY OF THE SON OF GOD (1)
JT I hope that these meetings may be used of the Lord to show the bearing of John’s gospel as typical of conditions in Christendom at the present time. In order that the present application of this gospel may be clear to us, it may be noted that the things related generally took place in Judaea, which, because of its attitude toward Christ at that time, corresponds with the modern apostate religious world. The synoptic gospels generally engage us with occurrences in Galilee. Then none of the signs in John deals with demon possession, so we have not to do with these either, but with man’s trained mind, active in denial of the truth. Moreover, the word used for works of power, as is well known, is “sign”, not “miracle”; that is to say, the signs are not to call the congregation together, so to speak, like the bells of a church, as in the synoptic gospels, but to instruct the spiritual mind as to certain features of the Lord’s service. I think the Lord would help in considering this sign as regards the manifestation of His glory. “This beginning of signs did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested his glory; and his disciples believed on him”. The Spirit would indicate to us that the ‘signs’ are to be read in that light. They are the manifestation of His glory, not of course in the sense in which He will be manifested presently in glory, but in the moral sense, to the end that those who are known as His disciples should believe; therefore, although the signs are for all, they are especially for those already disciples, as is said later, “That ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and [p. 2] that believing ye might have life in his name”, (John 20:31).
Rem There are a certain number of signs through the gospel, so it would help if you would enumerate them.
JT They are: The water made wine (chapter 2:1 - 12); the nobleman’s son healed (chapter 4:46 - 54); the impotent man healed (chapter 5:1 - 16); the multitude fed (chapter 6:1 - 14); Christ walking on the water (chapter 6:15 - 21); the blind man’s eyes opened (chapter 9); Lazarus raised (chapter 11); the voice from heaven (chapter 12:28 - 30); Christ’s enemies falling to the ground when He said “I am” (chapter 18:6); His own resurrection (chapter 20); the condition of the grave clothes, the appearance of the angels, Christ’s appearance to Mary, His coming in through closed doors to the disciples (all in chapter 20); finally His manifestation to Peter and those with him (chapter 21). The Lord’s own resurrection is the greatest sign. The Jews asked, “What sign shewest thou to us, that thou doest these things?” Jesus answered, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up”. “He spoke of the temple of his body”.
Ques Are they cumulative and all leading up to a climax, so to speak?
JT I think the climax is the appearance of Christ after He arose. That is the great end in view, to draw us into the spiritual realm where Christ is known as outside of what is material, coming through closed doors. The end of chapter 20 says, “Many other signs therefore also Jesus did before his disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life in his name”, John 20:30,31. It is as if the writer intended us to consider specially the first twenty chapters. The great end in view is to draw us into the spiritual realm, the world in which Christ is [p. 3] apprehended outside of what is material, and I am sure we all own the immensity of that.
Rem The signs were in the presence of His disciples.
JT That would show, as already said, that the disciples were in view — that they might believe.
HES Your thought is of the spiritual realm as seen in chapter 20.
JT Yes, the spiritual realm is especially opened up in chapter 20, which of course we shall come to towards the end of our meetings. What is before us today is the manifestation of Christ’s glory for faith, and it may help to compare this with the first reference to His glory in chapter 1. As become flesh His glory is contemplated by certain persons: it will help to compare those two features of His glory, John 1:14 and John 2:11.
Ques How do you distinguish them, the contemplation of the glory and the manifestation?
JT The first, as I understand it, is what I should refer to as private, seen by certain persons. It alludes to what was apprehended spiritually throughout the whole course of the Lord’s sojourn here among His own. The writer of the Acts refers to the period “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. During that period I apprehend there were opportunities for discerning what was there, the relations between Himself and His Father — a very wonderful suggestion. As become flesh He dwelt among us: “The Word became flesh and dwelt”, or tabernacled, “among us”, (John 1:14) which I suppose alluded to provisional circumstances, that they were not final. His position then was not final or fixed, it was provisional, but such as would bring within our range results that are final, what He is with the Father.
Ques Is that His personal glory?
JT Yes, His glory particularly as loved: “a glory as of an only-begotten with a father”, John 1:14.
GWW You laid emphasis on the word ‘tabernacled’.
JT I thought it alluded to the transient, provisional position He had taken up. You see, it is ‘with’ or alongside the Father. It is not His service there, nor His activities mediatorially, but what He is with the Father. You want to think of Jesus according to all the lovableness and affection involved in such a relation: “an only-begotten with a father”.
Ques I was wondering, that being so, whether “full of grace and truth” would bring in mediatorship?
JT That is what they are intended to convey about Him. He was “full of grace and truth”. They would be there, and that, I think, is the secret of the word ‘sent’ in John’s gospel. It is that side of things; He is sent. He was there with the Father, full of all that was needed in His mediatorial service, and He came out thus. His personal position is alluded to, and what was seen there, not His activities.
Ques Would you distinguish between what is moral and what is personal?
JT What they contemplated was personal. It was a question of a divine Person become flesh: “The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us”, (John 1:14) meaning that He was where they could see Him, but then He is not spoken of as ‘with’ them. He “dwelt among us” is general, but the point is. He was contemplated as “with a father”. It is the secret really of understanding the economy of this gospel, that is to say, the Father and the Son. If we are to see the precious, blessed relations that existed and the glory of them, it is the glory as of an only one with a father. Any one contemplating that would understand the economy of John’s gospel, which is that “the Father loves the Son, and has given all things to be in his hand”, John 3:35. The contemplation of the relations between the Father and the Son is what gives lustre to everything.
[p. 5] Ques Would that be characteristic? It is not the Father, but “as of an only-begotten with a father”.
JT Yes; it is a relation well known among men, employed to indicate to us what was contemplated; that is to say, the peculiar glory of the relations between the Lord as Man here with the Father.
EJMcB Would Abraham and Isaac going together be a figure of it? Genesis 22.
JT Yes, indeed! The converse between them is very beautiful, pointing unmistakably to what we are now considering.
WCG How does the sentence in John’s epistle fit in: “The eternal life, which was with the Father” (1 John 1:2)?
JT It fits in exactly, but it is not there the Person that is in view, but the thing that was in Him: “that eternal life”. Some have assumed that that alluded to a past eternity, what He was in Deity, but it is not so at all. It refers to what He was as Man here. It is there eternal life is apprehended: “That which was from the beginning, that which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes; that which we contemplated, and our hands handled, concerning the word of life; (and the life has been manifested, and we have seen, and bear witness, and report to you the eternal life, which was with the Father, and has been manifested to us)” (1 John 1:1, 2).
Ques Is the thought here that whilst He was the Word become flesh and dwelling amongst them in grace and truth, they contemplated His glory as with the Father?
JT That is the idea. The tabernacling would mean that He moved about. We read of “all the time in which the Lord Jesus came in and went out among us”, Acts 1:21. They had thus opportunity of seeing in varied circumstances this beautiful thing that was discerned by some, this beautiful relation between the Father and the Son. It is said in Luke that “by day he was teaching in the temple, and by night, going out, he [p. 6] remained abroad on the mountain called the mount of Olives” (Luke 21:37). What was He doing there? That is the idea of His secret relations.
Rem What was quoted from the epistle has reference to incarnation and not to the past eternity.
JT Obviously; it is a question of “that eternal life”, which is Christ as Man, so that the first allusion to life in chapter 1 of the gospel is, “In him was life, and the life was the light of men” verse 4. It was in Him as Man that light shone.
Ques Is the thought that the life He lived here became the light of men? How could we know the Lord apart from the life He lived here?
JT John 1:1 - 3 contemplates the Lord’s eternal personality. He was in the beginning with God, and was God, and all things received being through Him. Nothing is said of light in these verses, but we have it in verse 4: “the life was the light of men”. It is what was there in that connection, that is, the life was exclusively for men. It does not go beyond men, great and glorious as it is; it was not for angels, it is for men, and it shone in Him as a Man. It could not shine otherwise to be intelligible to us. Verses 4 - 13 form an epitome of Christ’s presence in this world and its results.
ASL Verse 4 is one of those reciprocal expressions that can be put either way.
JT The parts of the statement are of equal value, showing when you come to John’s gospel that what shines is a tangible thing, that there is something substantial behind it. When God said, “Let there be light, and there was light”, (Genesis 1:3) we are not told what the light was; it is simply light, but in this gospel the light is the result of something substantial.
ASL Is it the light of the love of God: “The only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him”, verse 18? Is the light that is shining, the full revelation of God in [p. 7] Christ?
JT I think verse 18 is greater than verse 4. The word ‘revelation’ is not there. “The only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him”, John 1:18. The declaration of God goes beyond the light of life. We ought to distinguish between those two verses.
ASL I was thinking too of another verse: “The darkness is passing and the true light already shines” (1 John 2:8). What is that “true light”?
JT It is the same idea carried forward in John’s epistle, only in John 1:4 it is what shone in Christ, and in John’s epistle it is what shines in the saints. That is, the light that shone into our souls becomes life in our souls and in turn shines as “true light” to others.
ASL How would you define the expression “true light”?
JT Well, it is to expose the false things that were coming in. John’s epistle is to show that the life was a tangible thing; it was not something abstract or theoretic, but tangible. It says in the first chapter, that which we have seen, heard, and handled concerning the word of life, but in chapter 2, it is in the saints. In measure, what it was in Him, it is in the saints.
ASL “Which thing is true in him and in you” (1 John 2:8).
JT The extension of the testimony was dispersing the darkness.
ASL Then the true light has already shone.
JT It is shining in the saints. Of course, Christ is the life always, but John’s epistle deals with it as in the saints.
Rem Is the distinction between declaration and revelation of great importance? I feel the Lord is helping us as to this.
JT I think it is, because the import of declaration is to bring God out; it is not to remove a veil. The original word for revelation implies a veil removed [p. 8] that what it concealed may be seen. Declaration is God brought out, which is a different idea, and has in view our limitations, that we are not capable of looking in to see all that is there in the Deity. But the “only-begotten Son” brings God out, declares Him.
ASL Would that be at all analogous to the verse in Colossians 1, where He is spoken of as the “image of the invisible God” (Colossians 1:15)?
JT That would carry representation too, but declaration is a strong word, involving that God is brought out.
Ques Would you connect declaration with God and revelation with the Father?
JT “No one has seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him”, John 1:18. The declaration includes both I think. I should not like to leave out what is conveyed in the title Father, because in John’s gospel the Father is the name of God which conveys grace and affection; He does not judge anyone.
Ques Would the declaration of God include what was ministered by the Lord during His life as well as in His death?
JT It would include both. God is there, and no one but the Son could declare Him. The Person was Himself divine. So all that God is, was brought out. Whether it were understood or not, there it was.
SJBC Do you think the pronoun “him” is left out (verse 18) because it is the declaration of the Father and the Son? The article is left out in regard to God; it is an abstract statement, and the declaration has been made as far as our spiritual capacity can take it in.
JT The article is before ‘Father’; I think the Father is there very definitely. The declaration of God involves the Father and the Son. The Declarer has part in what is declared. The omissions you mention and the emphasis on ‘he’ in the verse, place the declaration and the Declarer in greater prominence. For the [p. 9] declaration of God a divine Person came into manhood and was owned in it as Son. The preposition “in” (Greek eis ) in verse 18 indicates that the Lord as Man had come into the position spoken of.
HFN Would you say a little more in regard to your remark as to revelation?
JT Many have the idea that it is just the removal of a veil for us to look in. Of course, there is revelation, as the Lord says, “No one knows who the Son is but the Father, and who the Father is but the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son is pleased to reveal him” Luke 10:22. There is the thought of seeing the Father, but it is in the Son, in Christ as Man, that we see the Father. It is not a veil removed for us to look into the relations of deity before incarnation; the suggestion is, of what is there in the Son. It involves what is most precious. The Lord calls the attention of certain persons to the Father in such a way that the Father is seen. There is a difference between Christ revealing the Father to certain persons, and the Father being in Him to be seen by all. The latter would be included in John 1: 18. Compare John 14:8 - 11 and John 15:24.
FSM Revelation is connected rather with the sense of sight, whereas declaration is more what is heard.
JT The idea in declaration could be illustrated by a case at court. The case is fully set out so as to be intelligible to all concerned. The matter in question is brought out by certain substantial, incontrovertible evidences. The declaration of God is public. It is not to certain persons only.
DLH Is there not in declaration the idea of showing in a public way? The word used in Romans 3:25 is “showing forth”. God’s righteousness is shown in the mercy seat. It is there for all.
JT It is there whether people see it or not. The word in John 1:18 is the strongest as to what we are [p. 10] dealing with, that is God coming out, not only in Christ in a personal sense, but in certain things that happened.
JJ Is there the thought of interpretation in John 1:18?
JT Interpretation is not strong enough as to what is in view.
ASL Is it not the idea of setting forth or making manifest?
JT It is the idea of bringing a thing out to where you are; whether it is to your intelligence or to your heart, the thing is brought out. God is declared by the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father.
MWB With regard to revelation does it imply a work in the soul, as referring to some specific person?
JT I think so. It is the Lord selecting persons to reveal to. The word is used in the last book of the Bible, but it is the same idea; it is the “Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to him, to show to his bondmen”, Revelation 1:1. It conveys the restricted thought — to certain persons.
ASL There are the two words in John 17, “manifested” and “made known”.
JT The manifestation in verse 6 would be the Father’s name made evident so as to be readily grasped; “made known” would be that the Lord had instructed the disciples as to it, and would do so. Verse 26 is deeper than verse 6.
EuR Would you say a word as to light in distinction to what you have been saying as to revelation? Is light more limited?
JT Well, it is the light of life. Life is necessarily more limited than God; that is all I was thinking. Life is spoken of by itself, and this helps us to understand John’s epistle. John’s gospel is God, the epistle rather the life.
EuR In chapter 3 it says, “Light is come into the world”, John 3:19.
JT Christ was the “true light”. John was not the true light: “The true light was that which, coming into the world, lightens every man”, John 1:9. It sheds light on everything, and that is the Person of Jesus; God shone in Him.
Ques “They ... have known truly that I came out from thee, and have believed that thou sentest me”; (John 17:8) would that be declaration?
JT The Lord is telling His Father about the disciples, how they had come into things. What He says of the disciples in John 17, while involving declaration, is more revelation. I am sure the Lord would help us as to the distinction between the glory contemplated (verse 14) and the glory manifested (verse 18). I believe the glory contemplated is the secret of coming into the economy that is opened up to us in this gospel, the relations between the Father and the Son, the beautiful relations and affections that were seen, and then the truth that subsisted in Him, so that in His public service those who companied with Him were intelligent as to what He was doing and saying. But when He begins to perform signs He is calling attention to Himself in a public way, that He might be believed on.
Ques Would you say what was indicated in the “beginning of signs”?
JT It was on the third day, as you will notice. Therefore, it is a complete testimony, and comes in, I think, as confirmatory of the teaching that is opened up in chapter 1. Chapters 1 and 2 stand together as an introduction to the book, so that this being on the third day directs us back to the other days. There is development in the truth that had been the testimony of John the baptist leading to followers of Jesus. That was the beginning of discipleship and these disciples begin to gather other disciples. In the first instance Andrew finds Simon, pointing to material for the church, then the Lord finds Philip, and Philip finds [p. 12] Nathanael, pointing to the remnant of Israel. Then the third day is the culmination of all this, in which you have not relief for man indicated, but positive blessing; that is, the first sign is joy brought in. The Lord has come, not merely to set things right, but to bring in positive joy, and thus “he manifested his glory and his disciples believed on him”.
Ques Would you say that the signs indicate the great moral results that flow from verse 18 of chapter 1?
JT Quite so. The millennial day will show the great results of what is indicated in chapter 1.
Ques Would this first sign manifesting His glory embrace both the millennial day and the present day of the Spirit?
JT Yes, Scripture has always a moral significance. Our concern now is to see not only the primary application of any sign but its present bearing, and I think we ought to be prepared for positive joy, that the Lord can bring in the very best at the end.
JJ You said at the beginning that the occurrences were mainly in reference to Judaea; why is this in Cana of Galilee?
JT I think it is to help us as to the position of the testimony now. Whilst His activities are mainly in relation to the public body, there is what is in Cana of Galilee, and the real thing goes on there. Compare Isaiah 9:1. So the first three signs are in Galilee, but it is as having come out of Judaea. It is an important matter that as having come up out of Judaea He performs these signs. It opens up the position for the moment, that there is something outside the great public system; the Lord honours that and brings in positive blessing there in household conditions.
PL Would that be Philadelphia?
JT That would be the bearing of it.
Ques Would you connect reproach with Galilee?
JT That is what it means, viewed from the stand-point of Jerusalem, and so at the end of the sign, the Lord is said to have “descended to Capernaum, he and his mother and his brethren and his disciples; and there they abode not many days”. I think the allusion is to the Lord recognising the Jewish remnant. The sign relates to the millennium; but the subsequent period is “not many days”, that is the Lord’s relations with the remnant for a little while before He takes up the church. So the next part of the chapter alludes to the truth of the assembly, but those few days which He spent with His mother and brethren and disciples, bear on the position in the early part of Acts. But it is only a few days awaiting Paul’s ministry, which brought those few days to an end.
CHW Does the thought of His glory manifested there refer to Him as Christ the Son of God? I was wondering whether it is contrasted with the glory of God in chapter 11.
JT “His glory” here is general, giving character to all the signs. In this connection His disciples are said to have believed on Him.
Rem Those “not many days” would be practically ended when Paul says, “Lo, we turn to the gentiles”, Acts 13:46.
JT That is what I understand. Christ rebukes His mother because she associated herself with Him on natural lines, yet He does recognise her in the testimony, for He descends to Capernaum with her, which I think refers to His ministry in a sphere of special testimony. Compare Matthew 11:23.
Rem The connection you make between “not many days” at Capernaum and the early part of Acts is most interesting and instructive, and seems to indicate the line of the operation of the Spirit which prepares for the assembly to emerge out of the remnant, and so be ready for Paul’s ministry.
JT That is what I understand; and then the cleansing of the temple which the Lord calls His Father’s house, is another reference to that. They said it was forty and six years in building, which was quite to be [p. 14] expected from them, for the natural man makes much of what he has. But the Lord did not intend to refer to Herod’s great structure. He did not mean to honour Herod at all; He was thinking of His Father’s house. They said it took forty and six years to build, but He spoke of the temple of His body. Now we are coming into something that fits in with Paul; it is the inner side, something that would contain the whole mind of God, which Israel never did nor could. So, when He was raised from the dead His disciples believed the Scriptures and the things which Jesus had said. You have the full bearing of the Scriptures and the things that Jesus said at the end of the chapter, which I think brings us on to ground on which there is preparation for the assembly.
EJMcB I was very interested in your reference to the Lord remaining some days with the remnant of Israel. It was rather intended to lead them out to the new thing.
JT “Not many days” does not suggest that the circumstances suited His heart; He had something more than that before Him. It was a combination of His mother and brethren and disciples; His disciples come last. Presently the first two disappear and the disciples will be everything, for that is the point; His disciples believed on Him, not yet His mother and His brethren.
PL In Acts 1 the disciples are referred to and then His mother and brethren; the order is reversed.
JT The order in Acts 1 is really the apostles first, those who represented Christ, and I think that Mary and the Lord’s brethren in the upper room, mentioned last, have a spiritual significance. They are where they can be influenced and moulded, and withal they had, because of their special relations with Him, much that even Peter could not have. This especially refers to His mother. It is when we are in accord with our [p. 15] relative importance that we are of true value. The upper room in Acts 1 has the assembly in view.
EJMcB Do I understand that the secret of John lies in the fact that we have a joy that is beyond any known joy here — the new wine?
JT Yes. That is the first sign which shows the character of the present position. It is not merely a question of setting things right, but that there is positive joy for all, and if we are not in possession of that there will be very little testimony. The faith of the disciples is in relation to that joy, and it is brought about by vessels being filled with water up to the brim. And as they are filled, the Lord says, “Draw out now”. It is a fitting sign to be first, but in a moral sense it indicates what is happening. “Draw out now” from such full water-pots, and you have the very best wine.
Ques. Why is it six?
JT It is beyond five, which is the human number. I suppose there is allusion to something to be added for completion; the addition of the water is the complete exercise.
PL Would you have a suggestion of this in Nehemiah, you have the purifying and then the singing, the great joy that follows?
JT You have there what corresponds. This sign throws light on the whole inquiry. We are dealing with positive blessing, brought in on the third day. “His disciples believed on him”; it does not say His mother or His brethren did.
Ques What would be the idea of the vessels being stone vessels?
JT I think to give you the idea of permanency.
EuR Is there importance in Mary’s word, “Whatever he may say to you, do”.
JT She qualifies there, in saying that, but there is nothing said as to her believing. It is His disciples; that is the [p. 16] idea.
GJE Would you say in connection with what we have in chapters 1 and 2 of the gospel of John and the joy indicated, that it is carried forward in the first chapter of the epistle where it says “that your joy may be full” (1 John 1:4)?
JT That suggestion is helpful and opens up something of the prominence of the water in the epistle; the water is given before the blood. Coming into the joy of eternal life begins with the water; the vessels being filled up to the brim, the Lord turns what is in them into the occasion of joy.
Ques You said the water comes before the blood; you are referring to the order in John’s epistle?
JT Yes, it throws light on the position as was remarked. I believe the difficulty in entering on eternal life is from the non-application of the water, or, if it be applied, not filling up to the brim. Filling up to the brim means the exclusion of all else. It is what purifies; the stone vessels were for purification.
Ques Then do you connect the joy with the joy of eternal life?
JT Surely; it is the millennial day which is the period for the display of eternal life. It is commanded in Zion, and the nations go into it.
Ques Then would chapter 6 where it is a question of eating His flesh and drinking His blood be for the continuance of it?
JT Quite so; to support us in it now .
JJ Do you think verse 10 covers the whole of the present period from beginning to end?
JT “Every man sets on first the good wine, and when men have well drunk, then the inferior; thou hast kept the good wine till now”. In its present bearing it covers the whole period, but it is properly millennial in its application. It is the public thing. The millennial day is the day of eternal life, and therefore it is the best kept to the last; but the Lord would have us have the best, although we get it in a different way. We get it in [p. 17] a faith period which is the time of special blessedness. They get it in the time of sight. In the book of Revelation there are seven blessednesses available. Special blessednesses are of course above the ordinary, and while this sign primarily alludes to the millennial day, believers have it now. As the Lord says, “Blessed they who have not seen and have believed”, John 20:29. One golden thread running through John’s gospel is faith, the person who believes misses nothing; he gets the very best, even the companionship of the Father, and the Son, chapter 14:23.
Ques Is the expression “Draw out now” for our present enjoyment?
JT Exactly; it is a question of drawing out now what is there.
Ques Why did the Lord have to be invited? What follows is consequent upon that, is it not?
JT The passage shows how the Lord in His service takes advantage of ordinary circumstances. This was a very ordinary circumstance in Cana of Galilee and the Lord took advantage of it. It is just possible that He was linked in some way with the family by personal relations, but He uses the opportunity to bring in the best.
SJBC Going back to the water for a moment, do you think this chapter is life out of death?
JT It is purification; it was “according to the purification of the Jews”. It is the water that purifies; the idea of purification in a vessel, that is, in you or in me. It is the idea of the application of the death of Christ so that the Lord can change it into an occasion of joy, and that would be life.
HFN Does the best involve the whole of John’s ministry as reserved for the saints in these last days?
JT That is just the point. In this first sign in which the Lord manifests His glory that we might believe on Him, we begin with what is best and that is kept to [p. 18] the last.
MWB In that connection what link do you see between the glory manifested here and the glory which they beheld?
JT The glory they contemplated was a question of the relations between Him and His Father, but this glory comes out in the Lord’s service. The former is the greater of the two; it is linked up with His Father.
MWB I wondered whether the wine would imply the enjoyment connected with the intimacy of that relationship into which we may be brought now through redemption.
JT I think that is right. It may be carried intelligently and profitably into John’s epistle. We are not to be content with anything less than the fulness of joy.