READINGS ON COLOSSIANS (3)
[p. 292] READINGS ON COLOSSIANS (3)
Colossians 2: 20 - 23; Colossians 3: 1 - 17
FER There are three things that the apostle warns them against in chapter 2, philosophy and vain deceit after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. Then “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days”. “Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind”. All these things must have some place in the present day.
JP If there was nothing now that answered to these things it seems to me to leave this scripture without a very practical application to ourselves.
FER I think so. You know in the history of the world the same principles are true; for instance, you get Sadducee and Pharisee continually.
JP In that sense there is nothing new under the sun.
FER They appear under different names, but the same thing appears. It is not difficult to see the Sadducee and the Pharisee. So there are the philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world. There is that kind of thing abroad in the present day. Then there is the Jewish thing. “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath”. They are a shadow of things to come. Then there is the third thing, that is an effort to pry into the unseen world. That is more seen in popery.
JP I suppose the first thing mentioned here is what might be known at the present time as rationalism. [p. 293] Is it not?
FER No; I do not think so. Philosophy is a very distinct thing in itself. It is an effort to go back to find the foundations of society, politics, etc.; the conditions of man, the rudiments of the world. It is represented in the present day more by what they call political science.
CA I suppose that man is seeking to build up a system suitable to himself.
FER Yes; and without God.
JSA What they call christian socialism is on that line. You have to make a social system to suit man’s needs.
CA Is that the fruit of not holding the Head?
FER It is the effort of man’s mind to go back to the origin of things and to construct some conditions in society. There has always been a great deal of that abroad. It came out pretty much in the French Revolution. Philosophy was the cause of the French Revolution. It was an attempt to go back to the rudiments of the world; the traditions of men; going back to the rudiments of society, and in that way an attempt to build up a kind of social system.
JSA And the great evil of this is they leave out Christ and therefore it must be false. They are not after Christ.
FER It could not be after Christ because it is after the rudiments of the world. You see when it began to act on the people it brought about revolution, then revolution brought in another thing, and that was the spirit of military despotism. That is how things work in the world.
JSA You were referring yesterday afternoon to the state of things in Germany, the forces lying underneath. Is that the kind of thing?
FER There is a dangerous element underneath. Theories are all very well so long as they are held as theories, but when you get a theory that suits the unrestrained part of the people, who have nothing particular to lose, and everything to gain in a general scramble, then those theories become mischievous.
CA I suppose, as you said yesterday, it really goes on to [p. 294] lawlessness.
FER It is lawlessness. Of course the principle of it is that all begins from the bottom. They want to get back to the beginning of things, to man in the simplest condition, and to the elements and origin of society.
JP Is that the force of the word ‘rudiments’, the elements?
FER Yes. The elements of society. The traditions of men.
ECE What is the force of the word “spoil” in verse 8?
FER It is more corrupting. It is the effort in a way to connect that kind of thing with the teaching of Christ.
CA Has not christendom done that?
FER I daresay you might find it in christendom, but it is not what you see abroad so much. There is all that kind of thing springing up continually.
JSA I suppose the first of the three dangers is the purely human, and the next the form of religion, and the next the spiritual.
FER The first appeals to the mind, the second appeals to the religious side, and the third appeals more to the imagination. You get the religious side of a man affected by judaism and that kind of thing, and then the imaginative side which is liable to be prying into things which a man has not seen.
JSA The first danger appeals more to the mass, the second to the religious people.
FER I think it appeals to the mind.
CHK Would you say that what you get in verse 23 appeals to the religious people?
FER Yes; that appeals to a sort of ascetical people.
GWH Monks, I suppose.
FER There are plenty of people besides monks who are pretty much on that line.
CHK Spiritism has a semblance of worship.
FER That is intruding into the unseen world. What is not visible to man he intrudes into. That is the world of spirits, the unseen world. That is where spiritism is.
[p. 295] There is plenty of that abroad, especially in popery. They have constituted angels mediators. Angels are made objects of reverence and worship and in that way constituted mediators. Rome has a great many mediators.
JHC Saints are also made mediators by Rome, are they not?
FER Yes.
JSA And they make them saints after they have gone.
JA I was talking with Mr. A. last night about the principle of “things unseen” and Paul’s being caught up to the third heaven. When he comes back he says, ‘I say nothing about that’. If he got a special insight for God’s particular purpose, it was outside of man’s ordinary capacity, and he says it was a sealed book.
JHC Does he not say it is impossible for a man to utter?
CA Would you say the Spirit of God introduces the thought of resurrection here as a contrast to this?
FER I think so. The Spirit of God takes up various things that affect men and warns against them. But they are things to which all men are susceptible. Different men are susceptible to different things. Some men are susceptible to what affects the mind. Another class of men is susceptible to what appeals to religious feelings. Another class is susceptible to what appeals to imagination. You get another class and what appeals to them is asceticism. All classes of people are not constituted alike, and what would in a kind of way appeal to one would not appeal to another.
CA So you think the apostle Paul writes this as a warning to the Colossians.
FER Yes; and as a warning to us because of various elements to which we are exposed. He had conflict for those who had not seen his face in the flesh.
CA I suppose really these things are more prominent in the present day than they were then.
FER They were all coming in. The Spirit of God foresaw them all, but they all appeal to men as living in [p. 296] the world. Philosophy and vain deceit contemplate man living in the world. The observance of days and months and times and seasons appeals to man as living in the world. It is very much abroad in the present day. There is the season of Lent, and Good Friday, and the festival of Christmas day, and they all appeal to man as living in the world. The same thing is true in regard to worshipping angels. It is all appealing to man as living in the world. So is asceticism. And in contrast to that the apostle brings in Christ and the ground of resurrection, where you are outside all these things. That is, things which affect man in the world have nothing to say to Christ, and those who are risen with Christ, because they belong to another order of things.
ECE I was thinking of the word “spoil you”. Because Christ has claimed them, and they are placed where they belong, and those who are walking in Christ are outside of the world.
GAM The fact for the christian is that he is dead, or should be. “If ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world”.
FER You are never dead except you are risen.
GAM But you are never risen till after you are dead. That must come first.
FER In a sense it may, but you cannot realise you are dead till you are risen. When it comes to the application of it no man can realise he is dead till he is risen.
CA Is being risen a subjective thought?
FER I think it is a question of faith. “Through the faith of the operation of God, who raised him from the dead”. It means the understanding of the operation of God who raised Him from the dead. It is a state of mind.
GWH I suppose you get the most perfect answer to these three things in verse 8, the rudiments of the world, philosophy, and vain deceit, and the answer is the death and resurrection of Christ. Then in verse 16 the Jewish order of things, and the answer to that is — they are the [p. 297] shadow of things to come, and then in regard to the last, it is holding the Head, I suppose.
FER Yes; but when men begin to ferret out things they work from the bottom, and attempt to show you how society has been constructed, and the very origin of society, etc. That is where men make a mistake when they attempt to construct philosophy. But the point in christianity is, that God does not begin from the bottom but from the top. Everything begins with the Head. “Not after Christ. For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily”. All starts from the top. Man works from the bottom, but when God looks at things He looks at things morally, and then you have to begin at the top. “In him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily, and ye are complete in him”. In Him is all the fulness and ye are complete in Him. He is the Head of all principality and power. It is a very difficult thing to attempt to work out things when the only basis you have to go on is fallen man. Philosophers try to work out things, but all they have to work on is fallen man, and the elements of the world and traditions of men. The consequence is it is really as uncertain as ever it can be on account of their basis.
JHC I heard a brother say at one time that man is in a circle of his own, and it is impossible for him to get out of it of himself. He revolves in that circle and he cannot get out of it.
FER I think so. One thing is perfectly certain on the face of it, there is no light of God in him. It is the tradition of men and the rudiments of the world, and there is no light of God there, because it is the tradition of the world when the world is departed from God.
CA It is all moral disorder.
FER Yes; because it is founded on the traditions of the world and the rudiments of man departed from God.
CA When you come to the resurrection of Christ there [p. 298] is divine order.
FER But the thing is to come to Christ Himself. “In him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily”, He is the Head of the divine system. “In him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily”. You have the complete revelation of God in Christ. That is the real starting-point of the divine system. God has come out in revelation, and the fulness of the Godhead dwells in a Man. God has come out in that way, Father, Son and Holy Spirit dwell there in Him bodily. That is in such a way as to bring God in contact with men. The Lord appeals to it continually. The works He did were the Father’s works. And so too, “if I with the finger of God cast out devils”. It was in Him all the fulness was pleased to dwell, and in that way God is brought into contact with man. That is the great fact and the starting-point now.
JHC I suppose that will always be the case, will it not?
FER I suppose so. Scripture gives us no thought that Christ will ever give up that condition.
CA The Lord then is really the Person through whom God is going to bring about perfect order out of disorder?
FER Quite so. It is “in him” — Wisdom. Then it goes onto say, “ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power”. The christian does not want to know political science or philosophy in order to be intelligent, because he is complete in Christ — morally complete.
CA I suppose man does not take things up on moral ground.
FER No. What must be the principle in a kind of way with men is, they have got certain things existing, the rudiments of the world and the traditions of men to work upon, and the thought with them is to construct the best thing they can, man being what he is. They would like to bring about the supremacy of reason over [p. 299] man.
PCR How does the trouble come in by not holding the Head?
FER I think it is because such an one does not understand the revelation of God. That is the secret. “In him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily”. The moment you apprehend this, that God has come out in such a way as to put Himself in contact with man, what follows on that is that everything must be ordered according to God. It is not a question of doing the best thing you can.
CA I suppose that the Lord displaces man.
FER Yes; man is displaced. What displaces him is the revelation of God, because you must have a man that is according to God. Once you get God coming out and putting Himself in contact with man everything must be ordered according to God.
ECE Would you say that when they say they do not understand the revelation of God, they have already pronounced that verdict on themselves? One of them says that they have come to a point where there is a limit and beyond that there is the unknown.
FER I do not mind if they say, ‘the unknown’, but they say it is the unknowable. In a certain sense they are right as far as man is concerned, but the point is whether God can put Himself in contact with man.
ECE It is a question of where they begin and the results.
FER Yes. God is left out.
CA Really, man naturally, even ourselves, we could not have known anything about it apart from the revelation of God in Christ.
FER So far as man is concerned God is unknown and unknowable, because man has departed from God. “The world by wisdom knew not God”. and “it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe”. God has found a way to put Himself in contact with man, and so “In him dwelleth all that fulness of the Godhead bodily”. You get God in contact with [p. 300] man.
JP At the same time it makes Christ the touchstone and test of everything, so that when he says here, for instance, that certain things are not after Christ, that ought to be the final condemnation of them for us, because a thing is either after Christ or not after Christ.
FER Quite so, and if a thing is not after Christ it is not after God.
JSA I remember Mr. Darby answered one of these agnostic gentlemen rather sharply. He said, “I quite believe in your ignorance, but do not tell me there is nothing except what you know”.
FER And the same about philosophy. But it is really true there is no such thing as philosophy, because if they leave God out it cannot be wisdom, and if they bring God in, it is religion. There is no such thing as philosophy in reality.
CA I suppose after all it is only the fruit of man’s mind.
FER Yes; leaving God out. Leaving out all kind of revelation. It is man’s mind working in the dark. All that man has to go upon is summed up here; the tradition of man and the rudiments of the world. It is groping in the dark, because it is man’s traditions and the elements of the world.
JSA But really there are two great questions that underlie all this: can we have a revelation of God, and secondly, have we got one? I suppose we could only have one through the incarnation. The grace of God must come down within the reach of men, and secondly, we believe that it has.
FER If you take Scripture, the proof is that in Christ dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily, and God stands in that way in contact with man.
GWH But above it all there is so much assumption on the part of men.
FER Quite so. We are not entirely unacquainted with it.
JP I suppose the safeguard against all these things [p. 301] mentioned in chapter 2 is the truth as to Christ, which is unfolded.
FER And the first principle as to Christ is that “in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily”.
GWH I suppose the practical bearing of getting the light of all this is, you refuse everything that is contrary to Christ.
FER Quite so, but the great point is to get what is in Christ. You cannot refuse what is not in Christ if you have not what is in Christ. “In him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily”.
JSA And that is the complete revelation of what God is in relation to man.
FER Yes. The Father has sent the Son, and the Holy Spirit comes forth in the name of the Son to maintain the revelation; and in that way God has come out and put Himself in contact with man, and God is known.
GWH And so it says, “ye are complete in him”.
FER Yes. You have everything you need in Him. You lack nothing. The Head brings in the thought of wisdom. He is the wisdom of all principality and power.
GWH You find your resource and supplies in Him.
FER Quite so.
CA You say we have by faith what is in Christ.
FER You have it by the Spirit more, I think. It is from that point of view I take it. You cannot have it without faith. Everything really, the revelation of God and the knowledge of Christ, must be in faith. But you want more than faith. You want the appropriation of things. Faith is the knowledge that certain things are there, but you want the appropriation of things by the Spirit “Ye are complete in him which is the head of all principality and power”.
GAM That is, we get the good things by the Spirit.
FER I think so. “Ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things”. All knowledge in that way lies in the Spirit. “The same anointing teacheth you of [p. 302] all things, and is truth, and is no lie”. The Spirit is truth and no lie.
JHC Would you say that these statements are laid hold of by faith, “ye be dead with Christ”, and so on?
FER No; I would not. I think it is that your mind is brought by the Spirit into accord with what has taken place in Christ. It is the state of mind brought about by the Spirit. I think the Spirit brings your mind into what has taken place in Christ. That is, He has died in fact, and I have died in mind. He has risen in fact, and I have risen in mind.
JSA On the same line is Romans 6, “reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord”.
FER I think it is a wonderful expression, “in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily”. And he “is the head of all principality and power”.
JHC It seems to me there is wonderful grace in that statement that God is pleased to dwell in a body.
FER I think so.
GA Perhaps we have not a statement in the whole word that takes in so much as that.
FER Except in the previous chapter, “In him all the fulness of the Godhead was pleased to dwell”. But now you get the statement in this chapter, “In him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily”. And ye are complete in Him who is the Head of all principality and power. It is really what I was bringing out last night. That kind of deep but secret influence which holds us in relation to God. God is the centre and we are held in relation to God by a subtle influence which is in the Head. It is the Head that holds us in relation to God. We do not know exactly how we are held, but it is by the Head, so that we are no longer lawless, but we are held in relation to God by the influence of the Head. It is wisdom in that way.
JP The two statements really give us two sides. That is, all the fulness of the Godhead dwells in Him bodily, and then we are complete in Him.
FER Yes. He is the Head of all principality and power.
JP There is a foot-note in Mr. Darby’s translation in connection with that. It is toward us. It is what God is. It is God putting Himself in contact with man. All the fulness of the Godhead dwells bodily in Him, that is toward us, and then we as toward God are filled full in Him who is the Head of all principality and power.
GBM Is it not true that philosophy in attempting to improve man has been trying to present the ideal man and to get mind to work toward man?
FER But see what it brought about; the French Revolution is an exhibition of it. Philosophy and atheism work together. They propounded theories which acted on uninstructed minds, and they set to work to bring in force. Philosophy intended the mind of man to be affected, but the uninstructed mind set to work to bring in forces, and overthrow all that existed, and when you get philosophy and atheism acting together on the masses you will get revolution.
GMB Christianity has over against that presented a Man in whom all divine fulness dwells.
FER That is the point. It began with the revelation of God in a Man and God putting Himself in contact with man, and therefore the practical result of that is this, that men are affected by the light of God. That is another thing entirely. That will bring about a revolution, a revolution in the mind of man, but he will never be a revolutionist.
JSA He is transformed by the renewing of his mind.
FER To prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God. But he wants to prove it in himself; not in other people. “No one has seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him”. God is declared and He came full of grace and truth, and men are affected by grace and truth. You get everything put into moral adjustment, and they never become revolutionary, because the great [p. 304] revolution is wrought in themselves. All they would attempt to do would be to affect others by the light of God; and the light of God has a very subduing effect.
ECE Would you say when the light of God comes in they recognise that they themselves are a part of the disorder?
FER Quite so. And then the grace of God teaches us that “denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ”. It puts people on that line.
JSA And as regards others, “out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water”.
EW There is no effort in that. It is flowing. “In him” seems very prominent in this epistle.
FER Yes. “Ye are complete in him which is the head of all principality and power”.
EW That would take us out of this order of things.
FER Principality and power is an expression that often occurs and is peculiar. It is very common in the epistle to the Ephesians. “Now to principalities and authorities in the heavenlies”. Then again, our conflict is not with flesh and blood, but with principalities and powers. So Christ spoiled principalities and powers, and He is the Head of all principality and power. I do not know what it means. The idea it conveys to my mind is that principalities and powers are the seat of the influences which affect men down here. Although principalities and powers belong to heaven and the unseen world, yet I judge they are the seat of the influences that affect man down here.
BCE I do think that where you said in your lecture, certain men accomplish great things, and are influenced by some unseen power, it is true.
FER I have no doubt about it. Take idolatry, I do not think it was man’s invention. These influences are not found in this world or [p. 305] in man.
GWH So unconsciously he is led on by a power superior to his own.
FER Yes.
JSA When the gentiles sacrifice to idols they sacrifice to demons. A demon is behind it.
GBM You would not deem it wise to go beyond that thought which you have expressed?
FER No, I would not; but I think it is presented in that way in scripture, and so our conflict is with the rulers of the darkness of this world, the spiritual wickedness in the heavenly places. The seat of the influences which affect men down here, scripture seems to connect with heaven. The influences affect men down here, but the source appears to lie in the unseen world.
JHC Do you not think these unseen influences are very strong in these days?
FER I think men pry into them; spiritism does.
CA Do you think the influences you have been speaking of will bring about antichrist?
FER I dare say so. Only antichrist comes to pass really consequent on principalities and powers being cast out of heaven. Then you get antichrist upon earth because the dragon is cast out of heaven and gives his power and authority to the beast.
CA So you do not get the antichrist set up till the evil is cast out of heaven.
FER No; it does not take that manifest form, but the apostle says there are many antichrists already, whereby we know it is the last time.
JSA I suppose the effect of intrusion into these things and being connected with them is to bring people under the power of them.
FER Quite so. It acts on the imagination, which is never good.
GWH I suppose the effect of Christ triumphing over the principalities and powers was that man need not be controlled [p. 306] by them.
FER I think they become exposed. “The prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me”.
GWH And the good came to light.
FER Yes. Christ submitted to all evil done against Him and in that way everything became exposed in its true character. “Now shall the prince of this world be cast out”. “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me”.
GWH And then on the other hand He was the expression of divine goodness.
FER He was the Head of all principality and power. Whatever influence could affect man, Christ is the Head of it.
CA And Christ will displace every other influence.
JSA I think there is a very interesting expression which occurs only twice in the New Testament. “But this is your hour and the power (authority) of darkness”. He went into it. And now for us it is, “Who has delivered us from the authority of darkness, and translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his love”.
GWH That is under His moral sway, I suppose, instead of under the power of darkness.
FER Quite so; the moral sway of God. It is the Son of His love.
EW It is only the natural mind that would seek to go into the unseen things, not the renewed mind.
FER No; it is the mind of the natural man.
CA Would you say the believer is introduced into the divine circle?
FER The great thing is to keep in mind the operation of God that raised Him from the dead — to see the meaning of the resurrection of Christ. God did not intend to improve this world, but to bring to pass a world on the footing of resurrection, out of the ruin of this world. That is the meaning of the resurrection of Christ. He is the Beginning, the first-born from the dead, that in all things He might have the pre-eminence, and that is the meaning of the operation of God who raised Him from the dead.
[p. 307] In the resurrection of Christ, God showed the footing on which He intended to place this world, so that death might have no authority in it. It really means victory over death. So you get the thought that, “When this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory”. What will mark the world, put on the footing of resurrection, will be victory. That is what God brings about. God says to Sheol, “I will be thy plagues ... I will be thy destruction”. He dispossesses Sheol, that is, He does it in bringing to pass a world placed on the footing of resurrection.
Now the truth is, we already belong to that order. Christ is risen, and we are risen with Him, We are circumcised; that is, we are cut off in a kind of way from the flesh, and we are buried with Him in baptism, gone out of sight as far as this world is concerned; but the point is you are risen again with Christ and you belong to that order of things of which Christ is the Beginning and centre, and that is the order of things to which we belong as christians.
JSA And in the apprehension of that you can say, “thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ”.
FER Exactly. It is a very great thing to know what order of things you belong to, and you are to be maintained in the sense of that by the Spirit. You do not belong to the order of things which is dominated by the power of sin and death. I belong to another order of things of which Christ is the beginning.
CA If you are in the sense of belonging to that order of things you refuse everything else.
FER You follow out the beginning of this chapter and the end of the last. “If ye be dead with Christ ... If ye then be risen with Christ”.
GWH Would you say a word on verse 19, “And not holding the Head”, etc.
FER I think when you come to the Head, the Head is a very wide expression, because the Head means really the controlling principle in the whole universe. That is what I understand by the Head. That is the universe of God, but it is only the body that gets the gain of that now. “From which all the body”, etc. It is not exactly from the Head to the body, it is the Head in a general sense.
EW When you speak of the Head do you mean the Head of all things? You say the body only gets the good of it now.
FER Yes.
JHC It is because it is only the body that recognises the Head.
FER Yes. He is Head over all things, and that will be made manifest in due time, but the body only gets the gain of that now. That is evident.
JHC Take those other circles of which you were speaking, Israel for instance; they did not recognise it.
CA All will recognise it in the ages to come.
FER Yes. Every circle will be centred in Him and every circle will be affected by wisdom. The only circle now is the church.
GWH And so it is only the body that “by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God”.
FER Clearly.
ECE What is the increase of God?
FER I think it is growth by the knowledge of God. It is divine increase. It grows and advances in intelligence and the knowledge of God.
JHC What do you understand by the joints and bands?
FER They are the ligaments which hold the members together.
JHC What are those ligaments?
FER I do not know at all. I hope you are One. When you come to the body the ligaments have a very [p. 309] important function. So, too, the joints have a very important function; some people do not work like joints at all, but they grow crooked and out of gear in a kind of way.
You see a joint or band is not a gift. It is a person really in a kind of way who tends to hold things together, and to the harmonious working of the body.
JSA And they are not seen. You see the hands and the eye, but the ligaments are not seen.
EW If you travel you do not see the axle, but if it gets without oil it will tie the whole thing up.
CA I suppose love will be the great principle there.
FER Yes.
GWH You were saying it is only the body which is in relation to the Head now. I suppose it is the church which has the light.
FER What is there but the church at the present Would you say God is taken up with anything else but the church?
FER No. There is nothing else existing in a sense but the church. You have mount Zion, but that does not represent a company but a principle. The city of the living God is really the church. The innumerable company of angels is only looked at as a question of numbers — myriads. Then the church of the first-born written in heaven and the spirits of just men made perfect, but they are made perfect not in body. They have only their spirits. They are made perfect in that way. The men are made perfect, but it is only the spirits you are come to, and then he drops any company, he goes on to state “to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel”. God only takes up what is existing, and what is existing is the heavenly city and the church of the firstborn.
CA And so God is really taken up exclusively with the church [p. 310] at the present time.
FER For the moment.
GWH But would you not say the church is a teacher?
FER No; the church is taught.
EW That is the thought in Catholicism.
FER Yes; but like everything else in Catholicism it is deceit, because with them the church means the clergy.
GWH The people really have nothing to say about it.
JHC According to them the church saves.
FER I suppose they would say there is no salvation except in the church, and in that I agree, the only question is what you mean by the church.
CA Would you say the church is the testimony of God in the world today?
FER It is the pillar and ground of the truth. It is God’s testimony. You have the candlestick, but then there is the warning from the outset that the candlestick would be taken out of its place if they did not repent. That warning has hung over the church from the outset.
GWH Did you say yesterday the testimony is very feeble now?
FER Dreadfully obscured. We are coming on toward the end.
EW Yesterday you were speaking of the last clause of chapter 1: 6, “knew the grace of God in truth”. You were saying grace is reigning. What enables grace to reign?
FER Redemption.
EW But then things must be right.
FER Oh! but grace is reigning and in a kind of way grace is subjugating. It is reigning in the sense of subjugating.
CA I suppose the thought of reigning would imply subjugating.
GAM Your thought was, Mr. W., that grace was reigning through righteousness.
CA I suppose grace could not reign till the question of good and evil was solved. That was solved at the cross.
EW Would you say that grace reigns in the saints?
FER I [p. 311] think so.
EW There would be no friction if it were reigning.
FER I think if it were reigning in us as it ought to reign in us, we would not be prepared for friction at all. You get that brought out at the end of Matthew 18. You do not go and take your brother by the throat and say, “Pay me that thou owest”. You have been forgiven ten thousand talents and you cannot go and exact an obligation from your brother, because you have been forgiven the thousand talents. You cannot go and tell your brother, ‘You ought to love me’. If your brother does not fulfil his obligations to you, the point is not to take him by the throat and say, “Pay me that thou owest”, but you release him. The principle of conduct is really acting toward others as God has acted to you.
CHK Is not that the principle that ought to actuate each one of us as with the other?
FER Yes.
JP So in the chapter we had this morning, “If any man have a quarrel against any”.
FER Yes. Because that is the way God has acted towards you.
JHC And then the point is it is God’s attitude toward us.
FER But then that ought to affect our attitude toward others.
JHC But then first the word ‘righteousness’ is brought in.
FER But I cannot distinguish between righteousness and grace.
JP I think I heard you say in one place you were almost prepared to use them as interchangeable terms.
FER I said that in regard to the third chapter of Romans.
JP Would you make a statement as to what you have stated elsewhere as to God’s righteousness? I think you have said it is His rights?
FER It is His rights. If no evil had ever come into the universe, God never would have asserted His rights,
[p. 312] because everything would have asserted His rights; but God has asserted His primary rights, that is, He must have first place in the affection of intelligent beings. That is God’s righteousness in His primary rights. That could effect nothing for man, because man did not respond to them. God asserted His rights in the law, but He did not get an answer to those rights; then it is that God comes out with other rights, that is, the rights of mercy, and that is the righteousness of God now, and it is in redemption that those rights are asserted. That is what made us say grace and righteousness are almost interchangeable terms.
JP And so you were saying that in Luke 10, where the Lord told the lawyer, “Go, and do thou likewise”, that was as to showing mercy. That is, you become a neighbour to some one.
FER He virtually said, you have found your neighbour, now go and act as a neighbour.
JSA And it is those who know the power of the Spirit and are in the good of redemption, who are able to answer to His primary rights. “The righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit”.
ECE I see that righteousness and lawlessness came to an issue in the cross. There is the righteousness of God asserting His rights toward man, and in asserting His rights He comes in contact with this lawlessness, and then grace comes in and meets the conditions.
FER Christ hated lawlessness and loved righteousness. The thing the Lord Jesus was bent upon was not wrath, but the making known the rights of God in mercy; cleansing the leper and raising the dead, spite of the condition of man, but then the Lord was met by man’s lawlessness in the scribes, etc. That was the continual block which was presented to Christ down here upon earth. He was asserting the mercy of God and they did not want the mercy of God; they wanted to go on with lawlessness under the profession of righteousness.
[p. 313] But the Lord loved righteousness and hated lawlessness. Now in redemption He abolished lawlessness and established righteousness — the rights of God in mercy — and at the same time man is brought to an end. The cross is the expression of the great principle of all divine ways, that is, of annulling lawlessness and establishing righteousness.
JHC It seems to me a very helpful thought that God at the present time is not bent on righteousness according to the law.
FER What God wants is faith — which owns the rights of God in mercy. It is ‘mercy from first to last’.