READING ON FIRST TIMOTHY
[p. 50] READING ON FIRST TIMOTHY
1 Timothy 2: 1 - 15; 1 Timothy 3: 1 - 16
FER If a man is to know how to act in difficult times he must be imbued with what is right. The ability to judge of things that are wrong is the knowledge of what is right. If you do not know what is right you have not a standard. Therefore we want the first of these epistles before we can take up the second.
JMD Do we find things in their perfect order in the first epistle?
FER I think you get the idea of the house of God in order.
JP I suppose the knowledge of what is right would have to begin with the attitude in which God presents Himself to all men.
FER I think so. The epistles are addressed to an individual, and therefore are not doctrinal. They do not unfold the work or counsels of God. The subject of them is God’s testimony, and the place, and the vessel of it; it is that which gives importance to the house of God; the house of God is the pillar and ground of the truth. It is the depository of the testimony. In time past the ark of the covenant and the mercy-seat were connected with God’s house, so now the house of God is the depository of the gospel; and the gospel is God’s testimony to man.
JP So that in order to know how we ought to behave ourselves in the house of God we have to be intelligent as to the testimony of God.
FER I think so. In the first chapter you get the glad tidings of the glory of the blessed God which is the standard of everything; and then in chapter two the saints are, so to speak, affected by it, in communion with it; then in chapter three, we have the order of God’s house, and in the remaining part of the epistle the [p. 51] principle of piety as an antidote to evil principles that were coming in, that is, asceticism, a sort of human sanctity, and the influence of money, or worldly advantage. All these are come in, and have captured the church. The apostle saw the germs then, and brings to light the antidote to them.
JP So that in that way the first epistle to Timothy is of immense value to us because it furnishes us with a standard.
FER And at the same time with an antidote to principles that are sure to come in, for it is true that history repeats itself. What came in at the beginning is likely enough to come in now.
JP In fact, as you have said, not only likely but they have come in.
FER I think the first great thought in God’s house is that God has been pleased to place Himself near to men in blessing. God has established Himself near to man in that way.
FL Is that always the idea connected with God dwelling among His people?
FER He dwells in His people for the good of man.
JP Because the house of God has that place, the point of contact between God and man.
FER Exactly.
JP Hence the Lord said, “My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations”. So in the second chapter we are to pray God on behalf of all men according to the manner in which God has placed Himself in contact with all men for blessing.
FER That is the character of the present moment.
WM That makes it very important that we should learn how to behave ourselves in the house of God.
FER You do not want to falsify the moment or the spirit and character in which God has brought Himself close to man. The first chapter opens with the glad tidings of the blessed God with which Paul was entrusted. Many people read such expressions and do not know very [p. 52] much what they mean. Expressions have no particular significance in their minds. I wonder what people think of this expression.
JT I was going to ask you yesterday what it meant.
FER I think the glad tidings of the glory of the blessed God is the moral effulgence of God; that is that God has shone out; He has shone out in testimony.
JT Has it not reference to the place the Lord has now?
FER I would connect it more with the death of Christ.
WM You mean God was effulgent in Christ’s death.
FER “Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in him”. You get the effulgence in the death of Christ.
JP I remember in one of the meetings we have had you distinguished between the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ and the glory of Christ. I think if you would kindly state the distinction it might be helpful at this moment.
FER The glory of Christ is, I judge, His position as last Adam, so that God is glorified in Him. But the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ is the shining out of God in Christ. You get two things in Christ: one is the shining out in Him of God, and the other the position of Christ Himself as last Adam, a life-giving spirit, who communicates the Spirit to man. You have to put the two things together.
JT You get the expression, the glad tidings of the glory of Christ also.
FER The glory of Christ is His place as last Adam.
JP I remember you illustrated it, the glory of any king is the position he occupies as king, and so the glory of Christ is the position in which He is now placed.
FER I think so, for it immediately adds, “who is the image of God”. It is His place in relation to man, in contrast to this world. “In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest [p. 53] the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them”.
EW In what way is that glad tidings?
FER It is truly glad tidings that there is One who has established righteousness on man’s behalf and so can communicate the Spirit to man. He is a life-giving spirit in virtue of accomplished righteousness. I think that is pretty good glad tidings.
WM That is, in Him as last Adam, so that He is the Head in that way.
FER Yes, the last Adam is a life-giving spirit, and that is the truth of the gospel at the present time. “Whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely”. The water of life is available to every man. That is the effect of Christ being the last Adam. But then there is another thing connected with Christ, and that is, He is the effulgence of God. That is what I understand by the glory of God.
GR I think in one of the meetings you said, every attribute of God was manifest in Christ.
FER That is what we see in the cross. Everything shines out in the death of Christ.
FC So that the expression, the glory of Christ, would be what He is officially more than personally.
FER His place as last Adam. Everything comes out in the death of Christ. The glory of God is His effulgence. Nothing can add to the glory of God. What could add glory to God? ‘Glory all belongs to God’. And the glory of God must be the effulgence of God. In a certain sense glory could be given to Christ, because Christ had come into manhood and humiliation, but glory cannot be added to God.
JT Has not the accomplishment of His counsels come in?
FER But that is only shining out. It adds nothing to God. It is all of Himself. Of Him and to Him are all things.
JT But where does that principle come in the death of Christ in relation to the purposes of God?
FER Christ’s death is the shining out of God morally, and the counsels are the shining out of His wisdom. The moral effulgence of God is in the death of Christ. His wisdom comes out in His counsels. I think any thoughtful person would allow it is impossible that glory can be added to God, because all glory must be of God.
WM Christ came into the place of humiliation where He could be glorified.
FER It is as man that He is glorified. “Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in him. If God be glorified in him, God shall also glorify him in himself, and shall straightway glorify him”.
WM The house of God is not looked at here in the higher way of being the sanctuary, it is more external.
FER It is in connection with God’s testimony. What you get in the first chapter is the glad tidings of the glory of the blessed God entrusted to the apostle, and in the second chapter the saints are in sympathy with the apostle, the church is the depository of the gospel. The gospel was not given in the first instance to the church, it was entrusted to the apostle, but the apostle makes the house the depository of the gospel. We get that in 1 Corinthians 15. He makes known to the assembly the gospel which he preached and the church becomes the depository of it. That is the ground of the exhortation in the second chapter.
WM It is the pillar and base of the truth.
FER The pretension of Rome is that the truth was committed to the church, but the truth was committed to the apostle, and the apostle put it in the church.
JSA And that is why those who form the house of God should have an adequate sense in their souls of what the testimony of God is.
FER We sometimes find evangelists disposed to think that the gospel is a kind of specialty to them. It is an assumption that ought to be resisted in every way. The gospel belongs to the church.
JT And the saints are characteristically evangelical.
FER [p. 55] The gospel is of universal interest and anyone not interested in the gospel is very low down.
JP The principle of any knot of men setting up to have any special interest in the gospel is the principle that is in full bloom in Rome.
FER I think so. The gospel is the common interest of saints. That comes out clearly in the next chapter; hence the apostle is expecting the men and the women to be concerned in the testimony. He exhorts that prayer and supplication be made not on the part of a select few, but on the part of the saints generally; men and women.
JP And the men are to pray everywhere. You do not have to take a journey somewhere to pray.
FER And the women have a part in it. They are supposed to be interested in the glad tidings with which Paul had been entrusted.
JT Timothy was evidently at Ephesus and the apostle had communicated to them the whole counsel of God. It was all there.
FER Quite so.
Ques And in what place do the special gifts of the body come in as mentioned in Ephesians?
FER The light is in the church and the gifts set the light in vibration.
GWH So an evangelist is one that bears a message to others.
FER Quite so. He is to set the light in vibration so that it will reach men. That is the idea connected with a gift.
JT He does not assume to have it all to himself.
FER Nor will he bind himself with other evangelists. There is a disposition to this, and I believe the idea that the gospel or anything else is a special bond of interest is highly objectionable. There is no special interest among us.
JP It would be practically impossible to have anything put in a wider way than the Spirit of God puts [p. 56] it in the opening part of the second chapter of Timothy and in that the whole house of God is involved.
FER It is based on the essential truth that God dwells here and has brought Himself near to man in blessing; everybody ought to be affected by that. We may not all be able to preach, but we ought to be sensible of the fact that God has brought Himself close to man in blessing.
JP And if we were all in the communion of it what little gift is amongst us would be a great deal more effectual.
FER I think it would. But the effort of all would be to bring home to men the thought that God has brought Himself close to man in blessing in virtue of redemption.
GR You get the word in Revelation, “let him that heareth say, Come”, so that everyone is an evangelist in that way.
WM But in the house of God all is matter of fellowship; there are no special interests.
JT I am thankful that you have spoken as you have, because we are facing a real difficulty.
FER I think so. If you take up the subject of the gospel and how the truth of the gospel may remain with us, that is a common interest. I could not recognise that as being peculiarly the interest of preachers; it is the interest of everybody.
Ques Is it proper for us to attempt to discern those that are teachers or evangelists or pastors among us?
FER I think they are readily discerned. Any gift proves itself.
Rem What you object to is the classification of gifts and the combination of those so classified into bodies.
FER If a man has a gift let him go and prove his own gift. Not confer with other preachers or other evangelists. Let him prove his own gift. Paul did not trouble himself about Peter or Peter about Paul. They worked in fellowship and unity, but each one to the Lord.
JT The grace that [p. 57] was effectual in Peter to the circumcision was also effectual in Paul to the uncircumcision.
WM But when Peter appeared to compromise the testimony he was taken to task for it.
FER Yes, Paul reproves him.
WM Then Paul had to go to Jerusalem to explain his position as to the gentiles.
FER All service involves individual responsibility. To bind servants together in a special class of service is wrong and should be resisted.
JSA And although Paul did rebuke Peter, yet Peter speaks very highly of Paul, “our beloved brother Paul”.
FER Such grace of the Spirit was among them. They accepted reproof. Now things are different, and rather than give up reputation a man will divide brethren over matters that most can have nothing at all to say to.
JP I think of the illustration in the Lord’s answer to Peter in John 21. The Lord said to Peter, “what is that to thee? follow thou me”, and there is another where Paul wanted Apollos to go to Corinth, and he was not minded to go at all.
FER It has been said that there was an expression of grace on the part of Apollos. He would not interfere with the effect on Paul’s epistle.
JT Apollos would represent the independent action of the Spirit. He had come from Alexandria.
FER I think so, and the apostle accepted it. He did not interfere with Apollos, on the contrary he seeks an opening for Apollos, that no hindrance might be thrown in his way.
GR Would you say a meeting like this is just as much the work of the gospel as the meeting we had last night — preaching?
FER Of course there is the preaching.
GR Well, we have no other interest but the work of the gospel.
FER The gospel is the common interest of the house [p. 58] of God, and it is taken up in that way in this second chapter. You pray for kings and all in authority. God has come near to man in blessing, and the mind of God toward all men is that they should be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth. The point in the preaching is to bring that to the attention of men, to bring before men what is really existing.
JT You connect that with the house of God, I understand.
FER Yes.
WM Do you think the form in which this command is put indicates that all nationality has disappeared?
FER It is in view of God’s testimony. God’s testimony has no regard for nationality. You will find that in the gift of tongues, every man was met in his own tongue. The difficulty of nationality was overcome in the power of the Spirit; God addressed every man in his own tongue.
WM So that christians are not called upon to pray specially for the particular king in the country where they live.
FER That is not the point. God “will have all men to be saved”; so the apostle charges that prayer should “be made for all men; for kings, and for all that are in authority”. He does not say for kings and all that are in authority, and for all men, but “for all men; for kings and for all that are in authority”.
GWH What we get in Acts is an indication of God’s disposition toward all men.
FER I think so.
JT Everybody was to hear.
FER Quite so.
GR I was looking at a verse in Acts 26, Paul’s commission, where it says, “Taking thee out from among the people, and the nations”. He did not go as a Jew or gentile, but was taken out from both.
FER Then it says, “to whom I send thee”.
JSA But the idea of the house of God involves the setting aside of distinction, “In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit”.
FER Quite so.
WM Why do you make the point that “all men” are spoken of before “kings”?
FER Evidently the thought in the mind of the apostle was “all men”. All men are to come into our account because they are in the account of God.
JP And “kings and ... all that are in authority” have more to do with the ordered state of things down here, so it is connected with “that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty”.
FER Yes. But the principle is that all men have come into the view of God. God will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. It is the gracious principle pervading the saints that has all men in view. There is nothing antagonistic in the mind toward any kind of man, black or white. God’s mind is favourable to all men. That is a great thing to take account of.
JP The beginning of this chapter is morally very beautiful, because of the response in the saints down here to the disposition and attitude that God has taken up toward all men. It shows the saints in moral accord with God.
FER That is exactly it. The first chapter is the glad tidings of the glory of the blessed God. The second chapter, that the saints are in accord with it.
JSA And the final outcome is that the tabernacle of God will be with men.
JT It was a wonderful thing that it should be brought to pass here.
FER In such a world as this, where things are morally unchanged. It is an expression of great wisdom on the part of God.
Rem Do not we see in the beginning of Acts, so to speak, a total reversal of God’s attitude from that at Babel? There He came down to see the building of men [p. 60] and confounded their language and dispersed them, and now his attitude in Acts 2 is the reversal of that.
FER Yes.
GWH You get God’s thought of dwelling with men from the beginning.
FER But that points on to what is future. God looks on to a moment when He can be complacent in everything. When everything will be according to His mind, and God will be all in all.
GWH That looks on to the eternal state.
FER It looks on to what is beyond time and dispensation. The tabernacle of God will be with men, and God will be their God and they will be His people; the former things will have passed away. I think the present moment is a moment of the deepest interest. From the way in which things have been presented, the truth has not been apprehended, for there is no truth that has been so slowly recovered as that of the house of God. That comes within my recollection. Thirty or forty years ago the thought of the house of God was hardly apprehended at all. I could almost number on my fingers the brothers at that time who had any real sense of the house of God. It is a curious thing in the recovery of things that the truth of the body was got hold of much earlier than that of the house; the house of God was very poorly understood when I came into fellowship.
WM It is remarkable, because the house of God was the first idea in the Acts.
FER It was the last to be recovered.
Ques Have you any reason to give for that?
FER I only know the fact.
JT We have a very poor sense in preaching of being here in accord with God.
FER Yes. I think the great truth is that God is here, and has brought Himself close to man, not in judgement, but in blessing. That is a profound thought to my mind.
JT What do you mean by that, is it that He is here by the Spirit [p. 61] in the saints He dwells in the house, He has brought Himself close to man.
GWH Why do you attach such great importance to the present moment?
FER It is evidently a great moment in the ways of God. The moment is not final, but provisional. It really would not be so important if it were final, but in the fact of its being provisional, it is so important, because men are being tested by it.
JSA By the present moment do you mean the whole period of christianity or just now?
FER The whole period of christianity.
GWH Would you also say this is an important moment for us, in the closing days of christianity?
FER Yes, because the first principles have been more or less revived. You go outside of brethren and find any single person that knows anything about the house of God! Their idea of the house of God is a building with a steeple, or something of that sort.
GWH I suppose the truth is that we are being tested as to how far we answer to it.
FER I think so.
WM Is the idea that in the house of God people should be seen to be well conducted?
FER There is an important point to be remembered and that is the house of God is no part of this world. Christendom has made christianity part of this world. That is, in other words, the world has captured christianity; christianity has got to Babylon. The Lord predicted it. “Woe unto the world because of offences!” The offence did come and the church was caught. You find that in popery. It was imperial. That is the reason it is called Babylon. It assumed to rule over the kings of the earth. The Pope gave his law to the nations and the nations had to accept the ruling of the Pope. That has been broken in upon to a certain extent, but the next thing is state churches; that is, that christianity is captured by the state, and the head of the state is the head [p. 62] of the church, as in Germany and England. Then you get the breaking off from the state churches in the way of dissenting bodies, but then dissenting systems are as worldly and as active and eager to get influence in the world as anybody else. They are professedly christian systems, but worldly and political, so that christianity has become completely interwoven in the order of the world. But when you come to the truth of the house of God you have to remember that though the house of God is beneficent toward the world yet it is no part of the world. You cannot mix oil and water; the house of God was characterised by the Spirit of God, and you cannot mix the Spirit of God with the flesh. So the house of God was separate from the world and the course of it. God brought Himself close to man, but the house of God was never intended to form any part of the world.
JSA I think it might be that the beginning of recovery began with the body, because it is clear the body had nothing to do with the world though the house has an aspect toward the world.
FER It has an aspect, but it could have nothing to do with the world because it is a spiritual house.
WM It is established in the way of testimony.
JP Hence, externally people can only get into it by that which is a figure of the death of Christ.
JT The difficulty is now to locate it.
FER It is submerged in the mass of profession and therefore it is difficult to locate it.
Ques What are you to do? Individually discern its characteristics?
FER It is a great thing, having an apprehension of it. I am not going to connect myself with anything contrary to it. If I have to stand alone I must stand alone, but I will not connect myself with anything contrary to the truth of the house of God.
JT But you would connect yourself with what is according to it.
FER I only look to myself. Personally and individually [p. 63] I would seek to walk in the light of it. If others walk in the light of it I walk with them or they with me, but you and I seek to walk individually in the light of it. As to Brethrenism and that kind of thing I do not care for it.
JP Is it not the wisdom of God that this should come out in an epistle addressed to an individual?
FER Extremely important, and the second epistle in the same way. In church troubles I have seen that if people wanted to know where God was they had to look at individuals. I know what answer I would get to that, as to looking to men, etc., but you have often to find your way by looking at individuals.
WM I suppose the principle comes out in Paul, “be ye followers of me”.
FER Quite so.
Ques If you have to walk alone how could you behave yourself in the house of God?
FER At all events I would not behave myself contrary to the house of God.
JP But every christian is in or of the house of God.
FER But they are largely submerged.
JT But they are not all hidden from view.
FER All hidden from view except myself.
FC From your view.
FER My view. I have nothing to do with anybody else save to walk with them.
JT What about those who are walking?
FER You and I are walking together today, but we may be apart tonight. I hope not.
JT In the same epistle you are to follow with certain ones. Are they hidden from view?
FER I maybe following righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with some today and not tomorrow.
JT But if you are following it today you are following it with others who are following it.
FER It is a question of walk. It is not a question of [p. 64] anything fixed or determined. It is simply walking with those with whom you can walk.
JT But they must be in view if you can walk with them.
FER They have come into their own view and in a sense into my view.
WM But so far as anything vital is concerned, “The Lord knoweth them that are his”.
Ques Is that the point of Hebrews, “whose house are we, if we hold fast”?
FER I think so.
Ques How about Paul and Barnabas preaching together?
FER I contend against Brethrenism. Any true position at the present time is essentially individual, and anything outside of that is false.
GR I was thinking of the word, “Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine”.
FC Would you say it is in view of the present day that we get the epistle to Timothy?
FER I think so.
GWH Are we to go on without pretension, and individually, without any idea of a company?
FER Quite so.
WM I suppose the only company you recognise is the church of God, and that is submerged.
EW-e If we find half a dozen going on in the light of God we are very apt to find them together.
FER I would look for people who call on the Lord out of a pure heart. You want to follow with real christians, who call on the Lord out of a pure heart, that is the kind of people.
JSA That certainly involves that you have to look at persons.
Ques You said some time ago, when we were on a certain line of things, that the company was the great thing. Now I quite go with what you have been saying, but I do not know that it is very clear that it is the [p. 65] individual thing we have to get before us. How would you reconcile that with what a few years ago we had a good deal of, about the company?
FER Those who are walking in the truth must gravitate toward each other. That is bound to keep us.
JMD We would manifest that we were still members one of another.
FER It is a very important part of the truth that we are members one of another.
JSA Do you not think that what was quoted by Mr. L. as having been said previously really meant to include the whole company, only it degenerated in our application of it to the company of brethren?
FER I think so. In the third chapter you get the order of the house of God, and the point is that a man may know how to behave himself in the house of God. The latter part of the epistle is different. It gives warnings against certain things which would come in, and furnishes the antidote to them.
JSA I have been struck with that in connection with the last part, that there are positive evil influences at work, seducing spirits, etc.
FER They are principles which tend in a way to give importance to man; man may obtain importance in the church in two ways, by assumption of superior sanctity, as in asceticism, etc., or another principle may come in, that is the importance of money. In chapter four it is asceticism, and in chapter six it is riches. You get the high church and the dissenting principle.
WM Have you any thought as to the fifth chapter?
FER It is detail, but the great thread that runs through all the latter part of the epistle is piety.
JMD And piety must be individual.
FER Yes. I judge of things by piety. Asceticism and celibacy and abstaining from meats, are not piety. On the other hand, attaching importance to worldly advantage and money is not piety. Piety is the antidote to what would come into [p. 66] the church.
GWH And the man of God is to flee all these things.
FER Yes.
JSA What do you understand by “the mystery of piety”?
FER It is what is known to piety, but not yet manifest otherwise.
WM It is what piety apprehends, the power of piety.
FER Yes.
JSA Piety gives you the apprehension of those things that are not seen.
FER But it refuses a great deal that has a reputation in the world. Piety avails itself of every mercy that God has been pleased to place within your reach. If God has been pleased to place marriage within your reach you avail yourself of God’s mercy. So, too, with meats. They are God’s mercies. They are received with thanksgiving of them that believe and know the truth.
WM The same epistle tells Timothy to take a little wine.
FER That is a principle of piety. On the other hand, piety refuses to recognise the importance of money. Money is a great power in the church. Man is measured by his worldly importance and piety refuses to recognise that.
JP The statement was made lately by a very prominent man, ‘Brethren, the kingdom of God is to be advanced by money’.
FER That is, that gain is godliness.
JT This is a great country for temperance.
FER I think piety is an antidote to all; if you get benefits from God you will never abuse them if you are pious.
WM Piety will never make you intemperate.
FER You would not abuse anything for which you give thanks.
GWH Is there not a real connection between the [p. 67] testimony of God toward all men and piety? I was thinking of that verse in Titus, “The grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously and godly”.
FER Piety is the character which is to prevail in the house of God.
JT What would you say piety is?
FER I think the spring of it is confidence in God. “Therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe”.
JP I think I have heard you say that piety was bringing God into everything.
FER I think it is, but it follows on the early part of the epistle, that is the fact that God is dwelling here, so that you bring God into everything and accept God’s benefits. It is a poor thing to refuse God’s benefits. I accept them because they are given to be received with thanksgiving of those who believe and know the truth.
JP Because after all piety is the great moral safeguard.
FER Yes.
WM Do you think verse 16 indicates that God has been fully manifested and that God has gone up to heaven again?
FER I think so.
WM So that unseen things are a power in the christian.
FER It is unseen things because the Spirit is here.
WM “God was manifest”, and then it ends, “received up”.
FER That is Christ; but the Spirit is here; then it goes on in the next chapter to say, “the Spirit speaketh expressly”. The Spirit was dwelling here in the house and warning of what was coming in; undoubtedly that is one great gain of the Spirit dwelling here, that the Spirit advertises us of the dangers likely to arise.
JP [p. 68] The Spirit is not silent.
FER It is in the house He speaks.
WM So the good of all the manifestation of God is still here by the Spirit.
Ques Do you not think one great value of piety is that it leaves us free to peacefully hear what the Spirit says?
FER Yes, but the Spirit brings forward piety as an antidote to certain principles that were coming in.
JSA In the next epistle you get the “form of godliness (or piety), but denying the power thereof”.
FER In Scotland a great deal that the old Covenanters held remains. You may see that amongst those in fellowship. It is largely legality and hardness, not the grateful enjoyment of the benefits which God has given to men.
JT Very often legal people pass for being pious, but really true piety is not legality but liberty.
FER What I understand by piety is the thankful reception of the benefits which God has been pleased to give me down here, and that principle is the corrective to the importance of wealth; “piety with contentment is great gain. For we have brought nothing into the world: it is manifest that neither can we carry anything out. But having sustenance and covering, we will be content with these”. A pious man would never seek to be rich.
JP No, he would be like Cornelius. He was pious and he gave much alms to the people.
WM He prayed to God also.
FER I like piety, but not the affectation of piety that I see in the world. You get a straight up and down man with a long face and he gets a reputation for being a pious man.
JT Such men have influence in the world while the truly pious man would come into reproach.
FER That is what the apostle said of himself, “we both labour and suffer reproach”.
FC Is that why we get the exhortation in John’s epistle, “believe not every spirit”?
FER That is more a question of the truth. Untrue spirits have gone abroad. They were to be tested.
WM It seems that what should mark people in God’s house is to be nourished and content.
FER I think so, “nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine”.