THE GLORY OF THE SON OF GOD (2)
[p. 19] THE GLORY OF THE SON OF GOD (2)
JT Our remarks this morning reached the idea of the temple; the Lord raising His body viewed in this way pointing to what comes out in the apostle Paul’s ministry, both in its Corinthian and Ephesian aspects, not that the church is formally introduced, but the idea in the word translated temple is that the light of God is there. Chapters 1 and 2 form an introduction, showing how the truth of the gospel reaches on to the truth of the temple, in relation to which the whole scope of Scripture is apprehended, so that it says, “When therefore he was raised from among the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and believed the scripture and the word which Jesus had spoken”, (John 2:22). Then chapters 3 and 4 present the truth radically, that is, new birth, dealing with the man from top to bottom; and chapter 4 dealing with the Spirit, not given in the highest intelligent order in which He works in us, but in relation to the lower affections; and the sign which we have read, connects with the idea of a believer’s household. This doubtless has in view the spiritual house of chapter 8, where the thought of the house is introduced, without being formally stated to be the house of God. It is said in chapter 8 that the Son abides in it for ever, verse 35. We may be helped now by having in view that chapter 4 brings out the effect of the light on certain individuals so that they become sons of light, the woman in regard of her body and the nobleman in regard of his house.
Ques Just what do you mean by lower affections?
JT Those organs with which water has to do. It is not the Spirit as viewed in the sense of “breath” as in chapter 20, but the Spirit in the sense of ‘water’ having [p. 20] deliverance in view. In chapter 20 the breathing contemplates representation, the disciples being sent out, but chapter 4 is more deliverance: it is living water; the woman understood that her body was to be a vessel.
AFM Would you mind distinguishing between the water in the waterpots and the water indicated by the Lord to the woman?
JT In the first case, as we saw this morning, the use of the vessels was for purification; they allude to persons as receiving that which brings about a change in them. It is the idea of a complete change from one substance to another. Chapter 4 contemplates permanent satisfaction, as drinking the water that Christ gives we never thirst (verse 14). Whilst change takes place, it is not in the thing, but in its activities; it becomes in the believer “a fountain of water, springing up”, John 4:14. Then I think the importance of the believer’s household, as in John’s gospel, ought to be noted, because the setting is in relation to the Lord’s sojourn in Samaria; as to which, nothing is said, of anyone entertaining Him; there is nothing as to suitable accommodation.
Ques Does the fact that it is emphasised that this was again in Cana of Galilee suggest that the one is the carrying on of the other?
JT I think so. It is a sort of sequel; it was after He came out of Judaea; showing that it is something outside the realm of ordinary religious profession. “The Galileans received him”, (John 4:45).
PL Does it link up with the two believing households in the second and third epistles of John — that of the elect lady, and Gaius?
JT The idea is carried through there very clearly; here it is, “He believed, himself and his whole house”, verse 53.
AFM Is there a connection between the woman receiving the water, the men of Samaria, and the believing [p. 21] household?
JT There is clearly. The Samaritans were enlightened through the woman. They desired Him to stay there and He stayed two days, but there is nothing said about suitable accommodation for Him there.
AFM Do they not say something more than the woman? It says, “When therefore the Samaritans came to him they asked him to abide with them, and he abode there two days. And more a great deal believed on account of his word; and they said to the woman, It is no longer on account of thy saying that we believe, for we have heard him ourselves, and we know that this is indeed the Saviour of the world”. (John 4:40 - 42) Was not that a point of advance to bring about assembly conditions in Samaria?
JT No doubt, but there is nothing to indicate any accommodation for the Lord as yet; it is said, “He abode there two days”. There may be reception of light and appreciation of Christ in an evangelical way as “the Saviour of the world”, without suitable accommodation. Of course the Lord valued the desire of the Samaritans, but the setting of the believing household here is significant. The Lord is dealing with the truth in relation to man’s whole moral being in chapter 3 and the body in chapter 4; so that the whole person is involved in the two chapters, and then we have a believing household. We cannot have a believing household save as we are dealt with radically, by getting to the root of things. Our being has to be dealt with in the new birth of chapter 3 and in the living water of chapter 4. The body is affected so that the woman becomes a son of light in this respect. It is said in chapter 12, “While ye have the light, believe in the light, that ye may become sons of light” (John 12:36). I think she becomes a son of light in regard of her body, and the nobleman becomes a son of light in regard of his house; but the body involves that it is a question of the person, whether one becomes a vessel of what is spiritual. The fact that the woman left her waterpot indicates [p. 22] that she understood this.
JJ Would it be right to say that the household in John 4 corresponds with Paul’s ministry to the Corinthians, which you were speaking of as the temple of His body, and then the household in chapter 12 with Ephesians? Are those two households the outcome of the two lines?
JT Well, we have the households of Chloe and Stephanas in Corinthians; they were reliable persons. In the household of Chloe it was shown that there was full sympathy as regards the conditions in the assembly at Corinth, so that what was discerned by those of that house was the state of division amongst the Corinthians, though they did not say anything about it in their letter to Paul — nor was anything said about the wicked person in chapter 5. That chapter is based on a report, by whom we do not know, but chapter 1 speaks of the showing of the division at Corinth, which is a most important matter. It was the real difficulty there, so that I have no doubt the idea of the nobleman’s household in chapter 4 may be taken to represent what was at Corinth. In this respect the Lord had something for Himself there, and it linked on with Paul. The house in chapter 12 of this gospel is not named; but it was a house in which things could be done for Christ without much being said. A great affair took place as the Lord reached Bethany, but it was not marked by words. It was a place of silent spirituality, so that I think we may see the import in this way, of believing households.
FI The condition in the house here was the result of the son being made to live. What is the significance of that?
JT I think we have to note the thought of the son. There are two words used. The Holy Spirit says that the man besought the Lord in regard of his son (verse 47). He speaks of him as a ‘child’ to the Lord, but the Lord calls him son (verse 50). When the man arrived at his house it says, “The father therefore knew that it was in that hour in which Jesus said to him. Thy son lives; and he believed”. The idea of a nobleman and his child is dropped at the end; it is now the father and the son (verse 53). The radical truth of chapters 3 and 4 prepare for the believing household. Of course, much more is involved, but it is remarkable that this second sign comes in at the end of the instruction of chapters 3 and 4, so that it is not now a nobleman, a distinguished person in this world, whose son was healed, but a father.
HMS Would you tell us what is the force of the answer of the Lord Jesus to the nobleman, “Unless ye see signs and wonders ye will not believe”, because we might have thought that the very fact of the father coming to the Lord Jesus was a sufficient proof of his belief?
JT I think it is a general statement as to how things were, “unless ye see”. The Lord would convey to us that we ought to be able to believe without signs and wonders. Of course the signs are to the intent that we should believe, but as we increase in spirituality we believe things without signs.
HES Is the idea in John’s gospel generally that all that is natural is to be set aside so that what is spiritual may be introduced?
JT That is what I thought we might note specially; that is, in these two chapters, the dealing with what we are morally, from top to bottom.
EJMcB Do you think that the woman was purified by the word the Lord had spoken to her? and that the nobleman represented the corresponding conditions of family life in the home, brought to pass by the Lord coming back to the city where He had brought in the true joy, and then putting it into the family setting?
JT Yes. The believing household in this chapter will be seen later as bearing on the general position, so I think what has just been suggested ought to be weighed [p. 24] over; that is, the dealing with the moral being radically in its entirety, and then the person in relation to his body, because unless these are understood we may have light in our households, but not the simple, primary thought of God — the father and the son. We finish with this in verse 53. The Father is a primary thought, and belongs to God, and so is the Son.
PL Would the thought of the circumcision of his household by Abraham answer a little to chapter 3 in that way, and would the relationships of father and son seen in Abraham and Isaac be the result?
JT That is very good. In Genesis 17 circumcision is introduced into the house. There was no Isaac there as yet, but the principle of circumcision is introduced, and the test would be: Will Abraham maintain it? “God”, it says, “went up”, having “left off talking with him”, Genesis 17:22. He broke off the conversation as if it would be resumed, but that it would remain for Jehovah to see whether the resulting conditions would be suitable. Well, we are told that Abraham circumcised all the males in his house; it was thorough. That is, the house is now on the principle, not of the flesh, but of the Spirit. “We are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God, and boast in Christ Jesus, and do not trust in flesh”, (Philippians 3:3). Then, following on that in chapter 18, Abraham is in the tent door in the heat of the day, showing that he was not governed by fleshly feelings; he was not overcome by the heat; he was in vigour, and Jehovah comes. Three men come to him, and then you have the full thought of Isaac introduced. His house is right, but the world is not right, and so the destruction of Sodom follows. We see in this gospel that God intends to put houses right. He will put the world right too, that is to say, the judgment of it will come, so that it should be a suitable place for Isaac. But in the meantime the principle of the world to come is to be seen in the believer’s house, in the father and the son. Therefore the importance of considering chapter 3: “Except any one be born anew”, born throughout as we might call it. It is not merely another time, but a radical dealing with the person. “Except any one be born anew he cannot see the kingdom of God”, (John 3:3) nor enter into it.
WCG Does it correspond with the word in the epistle, “If what ye have heard from the beginning abides in you, ye also shall abide in the Son and in the Father. And this is the promise which he has promised us, life eternal” (1 John 2:24, 25)? Is it on that line?
JT I think so. It is the permanency of divine dealing with us in our moral being, and then in a judicial way, the Son of man lifted up (chapter 3:14,15). Then there is the competent witness to bring in heavenly things; and in chapter 4: the body of the believer; because what we are morally is expressed in our bodies, and the body has to be dealt with. “The body is dead on account of sin”, we are told in Romans 8:10, which enters into chapter 4, so that the woman understands now that she is a vessel herself. She had brought out the waterpot for water, but she does not take it back with her. She leaves it at the well and goes back herself and goes to the men of the city. That would mean her body was dead; she had no fear of them. She is in power, she is evidently superior now to the influences that hitherto would have damaged her.
HES Is it not the thought that now she is free from natural influences and thoughts and is moved only by what is spiritual?
JT Yes. The history of the woman has to be taken into account if you are to understand the force of the use of her body, that is, the body is dead, and without making any mention of the body, she leaves her waterpot, clearly implying that she herself could carry things, that she was a vessel of what the Lord was speaking of.
FCH What would be the bearing of water in chapter 3? “Except any one be born of water and of Spirit”, John 3:5.
[p. 26] JT It is the testimony of death entering into the fibre of our being. It is a divine operation. It is not new creation, but birth, involving things in principle, as in a babe, to be developed later.
AMH Are you including more in chapter 3 than the sovereign act of God in relation to new birth? You referred to Romans 8. Do you include the first seven chapters in John 4?
JT Chapters 3 and 4 enter into Romans 1 - Romans 8. Here the new birth is the sovereign act of God, but it involves a process in me, in that it is “born of water and of Spirit”. The person is in some sense responsible as acted upon. It is not the idea of being dead and made to live; it is the idea of birth, which no one can define. But there it is in its effects. It is a mysterious thing, but the babe carries all the members that are to be developed.
AMH You say it brings in an element of responsibility?
JT In the sense that it is not a dead person made to live, nor one created, as in Adam’s case. Adam was not born at all, he was created; but here it is birth.
Ques Does the water involve that the intelligence of the person is taken account of?
JT Well, I think there is something in that. I should not like to say much beyond what I have said. It is not a dead person acted upon, but a person with a moral being, and this transaction of God must affect the person throughout. It involves what is seen in a birth, that is to say, all the elements are there that may be developed into a man.
SJBC The Lord said, “Except a man be born again”. The individuality remains. It is the same person, so Nicodemus understood it that way: “How can a man be born when he is old” (John 3:4)?
JT The personality remains. I do not like to build too much upon it, but it is the person who has been dealt with, a person with a previous history, and it is anyone. “Except any one be born anew”, whether it be a religious man, or otherwise, this must happen.
EuR The Lord says, “That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit”, John 3:6. Would that give the idea of definiteness to what is born in that way?
JT Yes. It does not say that which is born of water is water; the water is just a testimony to the death of Christ, but ‘Spirit’ is positive, there is something there, and, I believe, all that will be developed later in the man.
EuR What is the bearing of verse 16 upon it? “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believes on him may not perish, but have life eternal”, John 3:16.
JT That is, of course, the great testimony as to the love of God. The teaching runs into that, but the great features for us now as to our formation, are in the new birth and the lifting up of the Son of man. These are two radical ideas: ideas that deal with things, not in their effects, but at the roots. The understanding of these truths enables us to appropriate and enjoy the love of God and eternal life.
SJBC I suppose it would bring in the heavenly things afterwards, the Son of man being lifted up and eternal life.
JT The passage treats of God dealing with the moral question thoroughly. Much difficulty arises in souls because the truth of John 3 and 4 is not understood.
GWW Is your thought that this radical dealing with things has in view a complete moral change in the person?
JT Yes; the identity is the same, but he is completely changed, changed in the sense of a new texture in his moral being, and new things produced on the principle of birth. It is not a change as in 2 Corinthians 3, through something presented objectively. It is a [p. 28] transaction inwardly which is seen in its effects. “The wind blows where it will”, the Lord says, “and thou hearest its voice, but knowest not whence it comes and where it goes; thus is every one that is born of the Spirit”. (John 3:8) You cannot explain it, but there is a definite result manifest.
GWW So the divine thought is, that moral effects will follow that action.
JT That is it. Then the uplifting of the Son of man deals with all that I come to realise as obnoxious to God — the flesh. That is dealt with judicially in the cross, in the Lord Jesus being lifted up. Then, chapter 4 is the Spirit making all that a matter of known power in the soul, so that the person — spirit, soul and body — is secured for the testimony, because if I am not secured for the testimony I am not of much value morally. The point is to be secured for the testimony.
GWW Does that touch on 2 Corinthians 3?
JT Well, it would, but John is dealing with what happens inside of us, as already said.
GWW You were thinking of the perfect moral transformation that new birth has in view. I wondered whether chapter 4 might at all link on with that work in 2 Corinthians 3, the moral transformation that is effected by the Spirit.
JT There is a link, only the change in 2 Corinthians 3 is said to be the result of beholding the glory of the Lord.
ASL Does Paul speak of new birth? Peter does.
JT Peter speaks of it in a more advanced way, as born by the word of God, 1 Peter 1:23.
ASL Why do you think Paul does not speak of it?
JT Paul’s ministry was toward the nations; it was not toward the Jewish world. John is dealing with the religious world. In this world, men pride themselves on being religious, but the Lord says, “Except any one be born anew”; it is to bring out the uselessness of the flesh, although most [p. 29] refined religiously.
ASL Is that not why the Lord speaks of new birth to Nicodemus?
JT Yes. It is important to notice that it is the person that is dealt with. It is the whole moral being that is dealt with, and then corresponding with that, the body in chapter 4. It is expressed here in the fact that the woman left her waterpot.
DLH When you speak of the body are you referring to the human body?
JT Yes, the woman’s body.
DLH Is not that referred to by the Lord when He says, “Shall be in him a well of water”? Does not that refer to the idea of the body?
JT Just so; the whole person is in view in the teaching of the chapter.
Ques What had the Spirit in view when He said in chapter 2, “But he spoke of the temple of his body” (John 2:21)?
JT The Lord had His own body in view; it was there that the whole mind of God was; not in the temple that Herod had built in forty and six years; it was in the Lord’s own body that the light was, where all inquiry was to be made.
DLH And the church has that character now.
JT It leads us on to Paul’s ground in Corinthians and Ephesians. In 1 Corinthians 3 it is local, and in Ephesians 2:21 it bears on the coming world.
EuR In Corinthians the apostle brings the truth of the Spirit to bear on the bodies of believers 1 Corinthians 6.
JJ Do you think the introduction of worship into chapter 4 is on account of what you have said — that the whole man has been radically dealt with in chapter 3?
JT Yes. The new birth has in view that we should be brought into accord with God. God is a Spirit and is to be worshipped in spirit and in truth; hence that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
JJ You could not speak of worship apart from the clearance of the ground, which is seen in these [p. 30] chapters.
JT If you are to have worship, the outgoing of our affections Godward, you must see how essential it is to have the internals right. The psalmist calls upon ‘all that is within’ him to praise Jehovah (Psalm 103:1). Think of that woman, of all the evil that had been within her; but now all is reversed. There is in principle purification, and the Spirit welling up, she could now call upon all that was within her to praise God. It is what is within us. Those who understand anatomy could tell us something about our bodies, but I do not think anybody understands the human body but God, and the things inside us that are so wonderfully formed for God’s praise — the means of singing and all that, and those internal organs that act of themselves. How important it is that all should be purified and cleansed, so that every automatic, as well as every organ governed by the intelligence, should be called upon to praise God.
PL You get the expression, “I will praise thee, for I am fearfully, wonderfully made”, Psalm 139:14.
JT It says, “Curiously wrought in the lower parts of the earth” (verse 15). I believe it could be brought out that all the framework, all the cavities and membranes and so on, have been designed by God, that the believer might become a vessel of God’s praise.
Rem “Present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your intelligent service” (Romans 12:1). I suppose the vessel of the woman in John 4 would be an expression of that.
JT Exactly, and the Holy Spirit says that she went to the men of the city, which I think reminds us that Christ being in us “the body is dead on account of sin, but the Spirit life on account of righteousness” (Romans 8:10). She was immune from their influences. Christ was now in her, so to speak. “Come, see a man who told me all things I had ever done: is not he the Christ?”(John 4:29)
ASL So Peter could say, “Ye denied the Holy One and the Just”, Acts 14:3.
JT He was entirely free of the effect of his own denial of Him. If you are to bear witness you must be clear of the thing that had influenced you.
Ques It says, “Go thy way”. Is there instruction there for the obedience of faith? Does it suggest a new way?
JT It is simply ‘go’ here, but the passage says the man went his way. In Mark you have the way, meaning that it is the only way, the one the Lord Himself was on; and you have that carried on into Acts. Of Saul it is said that, “if he found any who were of the way, both men and women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem”;(Acts 9:2) but here it is the man’s way, meaning, I think, that the Lord had confidence in him, that he could be trusted.
WW Is it important that the man said, “Come down ere my child die”, but Jesus said, “Go, thy son lives”? Is this according to John’s gospel, connected with the thought of life, rather than healing?
JT I think that is right. But before we come to that, there is the effect of the woman’s testimony and the desire on the part of the Samaritans to have the Lord stay with them, but there is nothing said about a house or accommodation for Him. That is to say, He is regarded as the Christ, and sought after, and believed on, and said to be the “Saviour of the world”, but there is nothing said as to suitable accommodation, and hence we have this second sign resulting in a believing household.
AFM Would Lydia be a contrast in opening her house for the testimony at Philippi?
JT That is the idea exactly. The Lord opened her heart to attend to the things spoken by Paul, but she was not content to listen merely. She opened her house to Paul. We may say. So and so is in town, I will go and hear him. That is very good, but what [p. 32] about suitable accommodation for him? Now the Samaritans went to Him and believed on Him and sought to have Him in the place. That was very well, but there is nothing said of accommodation. That is a very important side to the position, and I believe that is why this second sign comes in, so that you have living accommodation, a believing house with a father and a son.
FSM Do I understand that in each sign there is some distinctive glory of the Son of God which would enhance Him in the vision of our souls, and which signifies some phase of His personal glory? In the first sign it was the provision of joy. What would be the special feature in relation to the Son of God in connection with the second sign?
JT I think it lies in the idea of father and son. “Thy son lives”. On the ground of social status death was there, but it is no longer a nobleman and his child but a father and a son living. There is the suggestion of divine relations and affections in the house of God.
FSM Is it a household in life?
JT Exactly, but I think it is life and dignity, not simply a child living but a son living. We reach the thought of God in this way — the Father and the Son.
DLH When you speak of accommodation are you thinking of accommodation for Christ?
JT Yes, either for Him, or the testimony, or for others, such as Paul. For instance, as was remarked, the Lord opened the heart of Lydia to attend to the things spoken by Paul. Luke and Silas were there, but it was Paul. You have thus a woman whose house was available to him who specially represented the testimony of God. You get there a person who would attend to what Paul said. What a house that was; what holy converse would go on there. What would she talk about? About what Paul said. So it is a household setting of things in Philippi. Then you have the jailer. After he was converted, it says that “he laid the table for them”, Acts 16:34. He did not bring Paul and Silas in to give them something to eat merely, but he washed their stripes and laid the table, indicating that the household was in dignity. His service to the apostle was a dignified service; the accommodation was suitable. That is what I think we should see here, as the result of this sign.
Ques Is this thought of the Father and the Son the same in character as we have in chapter 1:14: “We have contemplated his glory, a glory as of an only-begotten with a father”?
JT I think the Lord wishes to accustom us in our houses to the economy of the Father and the Son; that is John’s gospel. In the end of chapter 3 you have, “The Father loves the Son and has given all things to be in his hand”, John 3:35. So the economy is formally set up, and now you come into a believing house and you have a father and a son. There is some reflection of the divine economy in that house.
PL And what a living son we see in Onesimus returning and Paul saying, “Prepare me also a lodging”, Philemon 22.
JT Onesimus would be no longer a servant but a son.
PL There are suitable conditions now, and accommodation for Paul.
JT How delightful would be the incoming of Paul to Philemon’s house with Onesimus there! The conditions would be entirely suitable. After Paul leaves the prison at Philippi he goes to Lydia and sees the brethren.
HMS In speaking of the work of God in this household is it the more remarkable because the man was a courtier? You spoke about John presenting the word in religious darkness; is there not also there the great element of worldliness? He may have been a Herodian, but the blessing extends all through the house; you have the father and the son, and then the servants are evidently affected.
[p. 34] JT It is the Lord dealing with what you might call the social side. This man does not represent the religious side but the social side; he was a courtier. He would go to court and would have correct manners, but now all is changed, and it is a father and a son. There are the manners of the divine economy, the economy of the Father and the Son.
GWW And in the house, so that the distinctiveness of this new thing in Christianity is to find this moral answer in the household.
JT Exactly; it is not Christ and the assembly. John is not dealing with that, but with the economy of the Father and the Son, and it is that which is to be reflected in believing households.
HFN Are the households in John on a higher spiritual level than in the other gospels? Does John lift them on to an entirely spiritual level?
JT Exactly. We have that here unmistakably, and then in chapter 12 the house filled with the odour of the ointment.
HES Is it the idea that this spiritual dignity that is coming in transcends all religious or social dignity?
JT Just so, and witnessed in believers.
AFM Would you mind saying a word about the fever? It says, “Yesterday at the seventh hour the fever left him”.
JT I suppose that, like the condition in Peter’s house, it is a condition of restlessness.
FWW What is involved in believing here?
JT It is general, the word is, “He believed, himself and his whole house”. The idea of believing had now become current and was understood; so if we say now that a person is a believer, we understand what is meant. It rather emphasises what we were saying, that the truth was making headway.
FWW The truth was now becoming characteristic of households.
JT It says, “Himself and his whole house”.
Ques In chapter 2 it says, “Many believed on his name, beholding his signs which he wrought. But Jesus himself did not trust himself to them”,(John 2:23,24) and here you have, “Unless ye see signs and wonders ye will not believe”. Now it comes to the point that he does believe with all his house. Would that indicate an advance?
JT I think so; it goes further than the jailer’s faith. He believed in relation to his house, but I think the faith here is attributed to every one in this man’s house. “Himself and his whole house”.
JJ This morning you referred to the days; here it seems to be a question of hours. You have the sixth hour at the beginning of the chapter, and then the seventh hour.
JT Well, hours count. They do not come into the division of time in Genesis 1; it is simply day and night, but John remarks considerably on hours. I suppose he used the Roman way of reckoning time. Then the Lord said, “Are there not twelve hours in the day?”(John 11:9) On this day there was a great work done in this particular hour and the man took notice of it. It reminds us of the importance of detail in divine things.
WRP Does the believing of verse 53 go beyond the believing of verse 50?
JT I am glad you call attention to that, because in verse 50 the Lord said, “Go, thy son lives. And the man believed the word which Jesus said to him, and went his way”. But now in verse 53 it says, “The father therefore knew that it was in that hour in which Jesus said to him. Thy son lives; and he believed, himself and his whole house”. I think it is in keeping with the idea in John of progressive faith. It is a question in John, among other things, of the work of God, and the man in chapter 9 is illustrative of this. It is progressive, and we are shown in that chapter the progress of the truth in a man’s soul. It is very fine to see a man progressing and the light spreading to his house.
Ques Is that seen in Timothy’s mother? She believed as to the progress of things.
JT She was a believing woman; she would believe the testimony as it came to her; whatever came from God she would accept.
WCG The great woman of Shunem made room for the prophet and got a living son 2 Kings 4.
HMS Do you think this man had faith in the Saviour’s power, which brought him to Jesus, and he believed His bare word, and then afterwards he believed on the Lord’s Person, so that the sign had its full effect in his soul?
JT I think so. If you went into this man’s house you would find he was, in a general way, a believer. I mean, he would not eliminate from his faith certain features of the truth as some do, as for instance household baptism. He would be a believer of any testimony God gave. Like Lydia and the things spoken by Paul, he would attend to those things. That is what I apprehend is meant by the second reference to believing; I think it is progressive.
DLH Would you get something similar in 1 Peter where they tasted that the Lord is gracious and then, “To whom coming, a living stone, cast away indeed as worthless by men, but with God chosen, precious, yourselves also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house” (1 Peter 2:4,5)? Is that anything corresponding to what we have here?
JT That is a very good scripture to bear out the thought of progress being made. Having “tasted that the Lord is gracious”, then you move towards Him, and are “being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ”, 1 Peter 2:3,5.
Ques Would what you are saying about believing lead to the remark in the close of chapter 20? “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:[p. 37] 31.
JT Exactly; this is an illustration. If the sign led this man to believe and his whole house, what about me and my house? That is the point. So that in chapter 12, the Lord said, “While ye have the light, believe in the light, that ye may become sons of light”. John 12:36 I think we see through these chapters sons of light. This man is a son of light in relation to his house. I want to be a son of light in relation to my body, and then in relation to my house.
PL So would you say in regard of John the evangelist that he was a son of light in relation to his house in that the Lord could commit His mother to him?
JT That is very beautiful; he “took her to his own home”, John 19:27. The Lord must have had the fullest confidence in that house, but, mark you, she was to be there as John’s mother. She was not to be a visitor or one cared for by charity, but there as his own mother.
Rem It is all the more beautiful because she had sons of her own. The Lord did not send her to their house.
JT The apostle John must have had an immense advantage in having the Lord’s mother in the capacity of his mother. There it is a mother and son, but here a father and son.
HD'AC The faith of this man was limited in the first case to just believing the word that Jesus had spoken, but in the second case there is no limit.
JT It is the general thought. If you went into this man’s house, you would find he would be attending to all the things that were current as coming from Christ; the things that were unfolded were matters of consequence to him.
GWW There would be a great difference between the state of the household in verse 50 and in verse 53; things would be very different, so that you would not expect to find in verse 50 the conditions that were in verse 53.
[p. 38] JT Just so; the servants were cognisant of the thing; they were in it. “Already, as he was going down, his servants met him and brought him word saying. Thy child lives. He enquired therefore from them the hour at which he got better. And they said to him. Yesterday at the seventh hour the fever left him”. They knew; they were not careless servants in this matter. Hours count in the things of God, as well as days, weeks and years. John says, “It is the last hour” 1 John 2:18, and it denotes a crisis.
Ques In verse 47 it speaks of the son being about to die; would that refer to Romans 8? “If ye live according to flesh, ye are about to die” (verse 13), and the apostle goes on to speak about the “spirit of adoption”.
JT Just so. He did not die, but he was about to die. I suppose it is the state of things marking Christians around us.
FWW Would a similar process to this go on in our own souls as the Lord’s glory is manifested to us? There is a great deal of difference between a dying child and a living son.
JT Just so. The effect of the ministry of Christ at the present time, is to bring us into dignity — the position of sons.