REPRESENTATIVE AUTHORITY
[p. 192] REPRESENTATIVE AUTHORITY
Luke 22: 14; Luke 24:7 - 9; Luke 24:33 - 35
JT There is representative authority from the Lord whilst He is away; a fact that ought to be well noted. It is said in Mark that the Lord likened Himself to a man going out of the country having left his house and “given to his bondmen the authority” and the commandment is to “the doorkeeper that he should watch”, Mark 13: 34. The Lord intended that there should be representative authority during His absence; and I thought these scriptures in Luke would help us to see how that authority was introduced, and how it was recognised where light came into the believer’s heart. When God enlightens persons they recognise this, that is, the eleven in chapter 24, and those that are enlightened by the two men. It says, “they remembered his words; and, returning from the sepulchre, related all these things to the eleven and to all the rest”. Then the two later returned to Jerusalem and “found the eleven” — as if there was a recognition of the representative authority left by the Lord. I thought that we might see in the institution of the Lord’s supper, that He selects the twelve apostles. There were others who loved Him — they are referred to as “all the rest” in chapter 24:9, and as “those with them” in verse 33; but they are not referred to in chapter 22, but only the twelve apostles as they are called. The Lord makes His own selection for an express purpose, as was customary with Him in all His special movements while here.
HWH Had you in mind that that character of authority is maintained today?
JT I had in mind that we might see that it exists. That is what I think Mark would show, that [p. 193] the Lord left to His bondmen, not simply authority, but the authority, that is what is necessary for the ruling of the house; the doorkeeper is a thought that goes with that.
AW Is your thought that in the Supper we have a kind of ruling principle of authority in relation to all that follows?
JT I think that the twelve apostles being formally mentioned in Luke, reminds us that the thing was instituted in the presence of accredited witnesses, so that there should be no question about it. It should be the centre of authority in the sense of what arises from love, love begotten in our hearts, for the maintenance of what is due to Christ in the house must arise from the maintenance of affection. The wise woman in Proverbs sees to the ways of the house in view of the absence of the husband. If one loves the Lord he will do all in his power to maintain what is due to the Lord in the house, and the Lord will own that. But it is well to notice that it is the authority He gives to His bondmen, “and to each one his work, and commanded the doorkeeper that he should watch”, Mark 13: 34. That is His mind and it is to go on till His return, we are to watch until that time. The way it is brought in is, I think, in the institution of the Supper. We have twelve chosen persons present whom He had already named apostles and who are called that, as over against the other evangelists. Luke especially calls them apostles here; there are many other lovers of Christ, but they are not mentioned.
HWH I gather from what you say that the authority would be with sent ones.
JT That is good; I had that in mind. John brings out that side of it, “As my Father hath sent me, even so send I you”, and having said that, He breathed into them (John 20:21, 22) as if it would hinge on the presence of His Spirit in them. There is [p. 194] the sense of being sent which would be the same thing.
SR Do you mean that though the Lord is not here, the authority is still here? Is it in relation to the individual or the assembly?
JT It is in the house, according to Mark. You will notice what is said there. He likens Himself to a man who has left his house and has given to his bondmen the authority, to each man his work and to the doorkeeper to watch, so that it would be more that side, that in which His chief interest is — in the house. He made His selection of persons to be present. It has often been questioned as to why the others were not there, but I think it is clear enough that the Lord is entitled to make His own selection. He intended to convey the idea of authority in the matter — He would select those who would rightly represent that.
PL Authority in the sacrificing love which the Lord would Himself embody in the Supper?
JT Well, I think those who love have authority. There is no greater authority in the whole universe than love, because it is not arbitrary; it will do its best for you. Hence it is set where love is in the family — in the parents, would you not say? Any authority that does not arise from love to Christ and love for others is sure to be arbitrary, and unnecessarily restrictive.
AW Is that why what is presented in the Supper is the light that governs every situation in the assembly?
JT Yes; everything arises out of it; everything must germinate there.
PL It would be like parental love; the “housefather” is referred to. The Lord Himself is presented thus.
JT Quite. There can be no doubt that the element of authority would enter into their minds. He had gone all the way with them, and He takes His [p. 195] place at table and is known as the “housefather”, Luke 24: 30 (note, New Translation). He gives thanks and breaks the bread; the authority was there, and they moved in it. When they went to the city “they found the eleven”; there is no evidence that they had the number of the house, it was a matter of finding where they were — “they found the eleven”, Luke 24:33. In verse 9 of the same chapter, those that had seen the two men went to the eleven and told them, as if the things all referred to them.
ASM Does the expression “translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his love” (Colossians 1:13) suggest the authority of love we are brought into?
JT Indeed; hence the book of Proverbs, which is the expansion of that — the Son of the Father’s love; it is not arbitrary, but love acting wisely.
AW Would the recognition of authority give direction as to where the eleven were?
JT No doubt. They would not have much difficulty in finding them. But this is a very important principle; it works in parents, in meetings, and in a general way in the house of God; authority must germinate and develop in love or it is sure to be arbitrary and unduly severe — in fact persecuting.
AJG I suppose there is nothing to show that one has authority except the moral power to exercise it.
JT I think that is right, and the amount of moral power lies in the amount of love you have. All the evangelists emphasise that side. Matthew says an angel came down from heaven and rolled away the stone — that was what he did, but then he sat on it. There was power in what he was doing. It was not that he needed to do that for the Lord to come out, but love would do it to let them go in and see; love would do that. There was moral power in that he sat on it; he had a moral right to sit on it. Then it says, “his look was as lightning ... and for fear of [p. 196] him the guards trembled and became as dead men” Matthew 28:3 - 4; he was acting against evil, but that is quite compatible with love. He had in mind the women that were about to be there, and who were there. But now he says, Go to His disciples and tell them — he knew what they were after — that the Lord is risen, “Come, see the place where the Lord lay”. It was love to make way for them to see the place where the Lord lay. “Go quickly and say to his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and behold, he goes before you into Galilee, there shall ye see him”. Then he says, “Behold, I have told you”, (Matthew 28:6 - 7) that is authority. It is not Christ, but one accredited from heaven.
HWH So that in Luke we have that authority in men; there are two men here, and they speak with authority.
JT Yes, but not in the same way as the angel. He says, Behold I have told you — that is a person invested with all these symbols of authority, and the first thing he does is to roll away the stone. He would let love have its way; love in the women would see the place where the Lord lay. “Come, see the place where the Lord lay”. The Lord’s supper is, you might say, a development of that, because it refers to where the Lord was and love would dwell there, so he took away the stone and they could see the place where the Lord lay. Then he says, “I have told you”. Matthew greatly emphasises the idea of authority, for they were to go to Galilee and see the Lord, and He sends them to make disciples of all nations.
CHP Is it rather suggestive that it should come in connection with the Supper; would that regulate all that goes on during the week?
JT Well, it is very significant that He selects the twelve to be there who had been with Him and under His influence, that they should be present. There can be no question henceforward as to what was [p. 197] done and said. You have the thing authoritatively carried forward.
AJG And what would you say the authority has in view?
JT Well, I think it is love’s way; it helps to break down. It breaks down all that is against the working of the Spirit of God. You cannot have the development of the truth of the assembly aside from it, and from subjection to it.
HWH You see great exercise of authority in the apostle Paul, and the moral power to carry it out.
JT I think that is seen working out in the first letter to Corinth. It is a question of his authority; but it was an authority wielded in the greatest consideration, it was not arbitrary; had it been he would have gone there with a rod, but instead of that he sends Timotheus — a man timid and unpretentious, who, as he says, “shall put you in mind of my ways as they are in Christ”, 1 Corinthians 4: 17.
AW Does Paul continue the element of authority in relation to the Supper — “I have received of the Lord…”?
JT Yes, that is what I was thinking. “I have received of the Lord”. He had already said, “This is not to eat the Lord’s supper”. 1 Corinthians 11:20 Their conduct was denying that, so he says, “I have received of the Lord” and what he had received was exactly what the twelve had witnessed, nothing different, there was nothing added to it; it came to us gentiles therefore without any human additions.
WC Is it wisdom on our part to recognise and accept it? I suppose there would be no moral power to exercise authority with anyone unless there had been first of all subjection.
JT That is right; unless there be love, one has no moral weight among the saints. Any authority exercised aside from love is but arbitrary and very often persecuting; in fact, in the history of christendom [p. 198] that is what it has become. Authority taken up apart from love becomes like the scorching sun. The sun is benign till it becomes scorching, then it is an enemy. We see in the book of Revelation how it scorches people; Revelation 16:8.
HWH You were coupling watchfulness with the thought of authority; I was struck with that, because under David, doorkeepers have a very great place.
JT Yes, they were of the same number as the musicians — four thousand — showing how important they are. The command is to them; He gives authority to His bondmen, but the command is to the doorkeeper, showing how imperative it is that there should be a doorkeeper. A doorkeeper would keep out from the Lord’s supper and the service of God all the innovations that have been introduced since it was established, for want of a doorkeeper — evil persons creeping in unawares.
Ques What is the application of a doorkeeper? Would it be an individual or an assembly?
JT It is an element inside that challenges what would present itself. The authority is inside — to rule what is inside — but the doorkeeper challenges what presents itself.
AW Then you would link the watchfulness of the doorkeeper both in relation to what might come in among ourselves, and people desiring to partake of the Supper?
JT Authority has to do with those that are actually there. The doorkeeper would, I judge, have to do with those who present themselves, would you not say?
AW Yes, I was just trying to link up what you said about human additions at the Supper.
JT A doorkeeper might tend to keep the meeting small. The introduction of a wrong element may mean a wrong person admitted.
AJG It says, “the doors were shut where the disciples were”, John 20: 19. Does not that introduce the element of doorkeeping?
JT It does; it was “for fear of the Jews”, the reason is given, and it was for a good reason, too.
AW There seems an interesting touch in the thought of the functioning of the Supper, that room should be made for the saints to see where the Lord lay. Is that what you are pressing?
JT That was the angel’s service; he rolled away the stone and sat upon it, as if to give notice to all comers that this is the way of love. These dear people are coming here and he saw to it that they saw the place where the Lord lay; that is really what underlay it. The world’s power must not interfere with the way of love.
AJG Had you in mind that one end in view in the exercise of authority is to bring in subjection according to God. In your prayer you made a good deal of the moral beauty of subjection as fitting saints for their ultimate rule.
JT I think it does. The assembly is subjected to Christ, not merely subject, but subjected, that is the way of wisdom, the way of love. For it to reign by itself would be lawlessness; so that headship, as seen in the creation, is introduced in 1 Corinthians before you have the Lord’s supper formally introduced. The mind of God is that the assembly is subjected to Christ, there is moral order and beauty in that; it is the divine way. Now, in order that that should be maintained the Lord, I think, selected these men to be present, because His supper was to be the centre of everything during His absence. It is in His going away that all this comes to light, so that He makes His own selection. On various occasions He had made selections from the twelve — threes and fours — but here He has all the twelve, a complete administrative number, to be present at the moment when the Supper was [p. 200] instituted.
AW Does Proverbs 30 challenge our hearts as to “What is his name, and what is his son’s name, if thou knowest?” Proverbs 30:4 Then in chapter 31 you get the assembly really in figure subjected to Him.
JT I think so, quite. The king, in the beginning of the chapter, and the virtuous woman go together. The authority and moral weight supplied by love within, is that, I think, which as representative of Christ, maintains this subjection; for nothing can represent Christ aside from love, it must be that. Hence in John He breathes into them His Spirit and says, “As the Father sent me forth, I also send you”. John 20:21 He brings us into correspondence with Him, but then He qualifies us in our spirits for that.
TJM So if we see the Son taking the subject place in eternity, would not that help us to accept the authority today, and to be formed in subjection?
JT It is very beautiful to see how subjection marked Him. It is not an arbitrary thing imposed on us; it is the divine way. Hence the order in 1 Corinthians 11 — the head of Christ is God, the head of the man is Christ, and the head of the woman is the man. So that subjection is seen perfectly in Him; it is not arbitrary, it is learnt in Him.
PL “He learned obedience from the things which he suffered”. Hebrews 5:8 He learnt it, quite, so we ought to learn it from Him.
AJG So that the coming in of Christ in that way in subjection, and then the assembly brought into subjection to Him, is the way God takes to recover everything for Himself — the whole universe.
JT Hence the immensity of the subject of subjection; that is how things are worked out, the Son Himself becomes subject in the end to Him who is God and Father. Why should not we be subject to Him who is God and Father? Think of what that means, the great source of all subjection, to Him who [p. 201] is God and Father — so we are subject to Christ; He is entitled to it.
AW So as you were remarking in prayer, the day to come will be the result of what is being worked out now.
JT I think the element of subjection will mark the assembly as it comes down from heaven; it is in liberty, but it will be seen that it is entirely subject to Christ, and it will be representative of Him in the creation, because it is formed in His nature. You see it in the thought of the twelve, for that is the thing to follow up. They are twelve; it is a number that can be manipulated more than any other. You have the thing substantiated, not only in the abstract but in the most concrete way. You have the number twelve so as to be manipulated by love, it is entirely available to Christ — that would be the idea. The immensity of the moral system will be dominated by this; it is all under Christ. He can send you there and me here, and so on; untold millions of people formed in the divine nature entirely subject to Christ. There should never be a question in anybody’s mind as to what he is to do; he knows what he is to do.
Ques Will you say a word about the manipulation?
JT If you have twelve, you can divide it up into two parts, or into three parts, or into four parts, into six parts, and so on — it is the divisibility of the thing. Now if you apply that to an immensity of persons beyond our computation — what it is in the hands of a divine Person; it is what love can do with those who are thus formed.
AJG So that it stands for administration that is perfect without being rigid, but wonderfully flexible in love.
PL Does Moses’ blessing of the twelve tribes prefigure that idea? Yea, he loved the people; his love found expression [p. 202] in the twelve.
JT Yes, Jacob blesses them, but having in view the incongruities that marked them — most terrible things, but it is a question of what God can do even with such; they are all blessed in spite of their incongruities. That is what Jacob sees in them. Moses sees nothing in them but what is of God — that is the other side. Moses’ blessing, I think, lets us into the thought of the heavenly city; there is nothing there to interfere with the work of divine love. The supper is obviously the centre whence all that springs, so with any one of us attempting to exercise authority, it must be co — relative with our love, or it has no weight.
Ques Would that be seen in the third epistle of John? Diotrephes was exercising his authority arbitrarily. The apostle says “Beloved” three times. Would that be the exercise of authority in love to counteract the evil?
JT Very good, and John would deal with Diotrephes, too. He says, For this reason if I come I will bring to remembrance his works which he does, that is to say, John would use the power that he had to deal with that, just as the angel did, to make way for love, for after all, the authority that is exercised in the assembly is to make way for love, to keep love’s way clear. What can there be for God save in the way of love? for that is what God is. So Paul, in dealing with the Corinthians said he had in “readiness to avenge all disobedience when your obedience shall have been fulfilled”, 2 Corinthians 10: 6.
FS At the end of the first epistle he told them to be subject to the household of Stephanas.
JT That was a good household to be subject to. You see how these dear women in the gospel came into it, showing what it is to be in subjection, so that authority marks those who are right according to God. In Matthew the angel says, “I have told you”, “fear not ye”; they are moving under authority,
[p. 203] representative authority, and as moving in that it says, “Jesus met them, saying, Hail!” Matthew 28:9 He greeted them. So here in Luke as the men speak to them, they go “to the eleven and to all the rest”. That is, where people are right, where the work of God is taking effect, the persons know where divine authority is vested. You know where to go, and you go there.
HWH Does what you are saying about subjection account for the vast amount of discipline the Lord is exercising among His saints in the way of suffering?
JT You can reckon on that, too. It says, “For this cause many are weak and sickly”, 1 Corinthians 11:30. We are not vessels in God’s hands unless we are subject.
ASM Would the contemplation of the pathway of subjection as seen in the Lord in Philippians greatly help us? The apostle says, “Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus”. Philippians 2:5 Just so, and thus they could work out their own salvation.
PL So that the Son in love will embody this great feature eternally. He will lead in subjection, will He not, the whole universe? “Then the Son also himself shall be placed in subjection to him who put all things in subjection to him, that God may be all in all”, 1 Corinthians 15: 28.
JT There it is in eternity; it is very wonderful. The principle of absolute subjection has come out in Christ, therefore we can easily learn it, learn it from Him.
PL “That God may be all in all”. Is there any open door for God to come in without this feature with us?
JT That is how it stands, I think. We were speaking of it elsewhere, as you know; in 1 Corinthians 11, it is “I have received of the Lord” — it is a question of authority. “If any one think to [p. 204] be contentious, we have no such custom, nor the assemblies of God”. 1 Corinthians 11:16 There is no room for contention, for the exercise of individual wills in the house of God — we have no such custom. Now the next chapter is the Spirit. As we are subject, the Spirit is free to work out features of Christ, the anointing, that is to say, that with which God is identified, the anointed vessel, the Christ — “so also is the Christ”. Then in chapter 13, the way of love, that is to say you have a vessel for it — the way of love: Not that the Corinthians were that for the moment, but the apostle was that. He says, “Yet shew I unto you a way of more surpassing excellence”, but normally the assembly, the anointed vessel, is that, the way in which the love is shown, or God would not commit Himself to it; that is what He anoints. Then in chapter 14, you have the intelligence that marks the saints as they come together, the five words, and “I will pray with the spirit, but I will pray also with the understanding”. 1 Corinthians 14:15 All that is developed in the chapter hinges on what we get earlier. You can see what is available to us now in subjection, the anointing and thus the way of love. God has something here, however little, in which He can develop the way of love, and that is seen in various ways. But chapter 14 is what we are when we come together, and it seems to me that, if we had the anointed vessel, so to speak, we should have room for open meetings, for meetings in which brethren are so subject to one another and so sensitive that they can discern when there is a revelation to another sitting by, and sit down. There is the beautiful sensitiveness that the Spirit gives us as to that which He is doing in others. Thus you have the way of love seen.
Rem So that the eleven have added to them the impressions that the women had, and then the two going to Emmaus, they come and deposit their impressions with [p. 205] the eleven.
JT Yes, that is right. It would add to the eleven. It was right that they should come to the eleven, because they represented Christ, but then the contribution would simply enhance their position.
PL Sensitiveness that is the fruit of subjection to Christ is a great contrast to the hardness of spirit that marks the organisations of the will of man in christendom.
JT You cannot have anything mutual in those organisations, you cannot have the way of love in them. If the assembly is anything at all, it is a vessel for the way of love, and that implies subjection and mutual consideration for one another, so that in chapter 12, “in the power of one Spirit we have all been baptised into one body”. 1 Corinthians 12:13 We are merged in one body, but we are happily in it for we have drunk into one Spirit; it is not irksome to be there.
AW So that love would leave room for every contribution in the assembly.
JT Exactly; hence the two going to Emmaus have a very great contribution; they bring in the idea of the breaking of bread, the Lord is recognised by them in that.
Ques In regard to the open meeting, would the readings together help us in that way to learn subjection to one another’s thoughts in relation to Christ?
JT They should. They ought to tend to develop sensibilities, so that I know what is in your mind and I am ready to give place to it. If there is a revelation to one sitting by, the Holy Spirit intimates that He would like to have that. He might reveal something to you, and I might not detect it. That requires great fineness of spiritual sensibilities, and the courage to sit down when I detect that.
HWH What you are saying is very exercising, for one is conscious of an unreadiness to receive the thoughts of others, however desirable. Owing, I suppose, to want of subjection, I am not perhaps [p. 206] prepared to make room for the remark of a brother. Would that account for it?
JT Quite, very good.
PL A company of this character would provide the Lord, the chief Musician, with a well — tuned instrument of ten strings.
JT That is what the epistle to the Corinthians, I think, would do. Chapter 14 is very fine as showing what is in the mind of God — what He intended to have here.
PL You might almost say you have the music that greets the prodigal as he comes in; he falls down spell — bound by the music; see 1 Corinthians 14:24,25.
JT Quite; he is a hardened sinner if he does not — like the elder brother.
AJG The fact that the two when they returned, found them saying “The Lord is risen indeed” would indicate that they had appropriated the message brought them by the women and valued it.
JT And you will observe in the first instance, the eleven are not said to be gathered together; in the opening verses they told the eleven and the rest, but what happened during the day brought them together, showing it is the same thought; the light of God coming in leads to their being together, and as together, the mutual thing is developed, so He says, “Have ye anything here?” He is, as it were, referring back to the experiences of the day. It was a marvellous day for them, but now, what have you gathered up? “Have you anything here to eat?”
PL Would you say that the distinctive light of the moment is that which consolidates us together in an authoritative way? We have something to give now; after all, it is concentrated in the present light for the day, the Spirit’s voice in the house of God that finds us moving together.
JT Yes. There is the element of authority. It is not arbitrary but in love, and you cannot but [p. 207] respect a man who has shown you that he loves you. What he says has weight with you, it has certainty, and authority could be on no other basis. If it is, it is arbitrary. Then, too, the spirit of subjection and the exercise of authority would be found alongside in the same person.
Rem One who rules his own spirit can rule others.
Rem The One that rules over God’s house is the Son.
JT It is very remarkable that in 1 Chronicles, before you have anything about the ordering of the courses by David, you have Solomon on the throne. In chapter 23 David makes his son Solomon king before he institutes the courses, showing that it is that kind of authority. The moral weight was in David because of his experience, but the official side is in the son, and the two merge. All merges in the son, one in that relationship, that is the book of Proverbs. Hence the rule of the house of God is the rule of the Son, that is, One who is Himself brought up and nurtured in affection. Outside the Lord, and perhaps John the baptist, I suppose there is no more remarkable babe in Scripture than Solomon. We are told that Jehovah loved him.
PL Do you have this in the first three chapters of Hebrews; in the first God speaks in the Son, is that Solomon on the throne? Then in the second, you have the Lord qualifying in His path here of experience with God for His place on high in priesthood; and then the two thoughts merging in chapter 3, the Son over God’s house.
JT Very good indeed; He is over the house as Son. I think you were remarking about the combination — “Consider the apostle and high priest”. Hebrews 3:1 The allusion in the apostle is to Moses, he had the light, and, in the high priest, to Aaron, who had the love. Aaron kissed Moses when he met him; there was the perfect combination of light and love, that is in [p. 208] Christ. They are a figure of what has come in in Christ — a perfect combination — and the rule is in the one who represents the light.
HWH There were thirty years of subjection in the case of the Lord Jesus before heaven opened on Him and the Spirit descended.
JT What years those must have been; they are secret history. As in the case of Aaron, he is abruptly introduced to us as “Aaron the Levite” — that is really secret; it is what he is secretly with God, known only to God Himself. Mary had the greatest opportunity of knowing all that, but she did not gain as she might have done, but anyway it is secret history. It is to that that God commits Himself — He anoints Him. It is the secret history with God that tells. So we have nothing about Aaron till he is introduced as “the Levite” and he was then eighty — three years of age (he was three years older than Moses) but how did he become the levite save that God knew him? The Lord said to Moses, “when he seeth thee, he will be glad in his heart”, Exodus 4:14. He was a heart — man. God deals with hearts; it is what God knows that He anoints — secret history with Himself. God made no mistake, He knew Aaron and He called him the levite from the start. Why should not Moses be called a levite, he was a son of Levi, but he is not called such.
HWH You were referring the other day to the fact that God knew that he could speak well, would you say a little more about that?
JT That brings out God’s acquaintance with us in our private history.
PL Speaking to God, I suppose.
JT Very likely. No doubt God had heard him speak privately.
Ques Why is not Moses called the levite?
JT Well, all these things have a spiritual significance. It is a question of what God knew about [p. 209] Aaron, not a levite, but the levite. As Mr. L. suggests, possibly he had spoken to God many times, and learnt to pray. He was born into a remarkable house. His parents had discernment; they had seen that Moses was a proper child and had hidden him. It was a spiritual household. Then Miriam their sister, she was on the alert, she could look after her brother; she was a remarkable girl. She says, ‘I will provide a nurse’. What wisdom. So Aaron was brought up in these surroundings, and God knew it.
Rem Moses was taken up as the leader.
JT Yes, he had the light. Aaron’s subsequent history, of course, beclouds this, but that does not alter the fact that what God intended to set out at the beginning is there.
PL “Aaron the saint of the Lord”, Psalm 106:16.
JT Just so, and when God speaks of him, to make him a priest, He says, “take thou unto thee Aaron thy brother”, Exodus 28:1.