CHRIST IN THE TEMPLE
[p. 163] CHRIST IN THE TEMPLE
Mark 9: 7, 8; Acts 1: 1 - 4; Hebrews 8: 1, 2
JT I have been thinking that in view of the subject before us — Christ viewed as the Minister of the sanctuary — His relations with the temple at Jerusalem as seen in the gospels should be in mind. For undoubtedly what is related is intended to instruct us, partly at least as to His service as the Minister of the sanctuary. The temple at Jerusalem stood for the sanctuary, the idea of it having begun in the wilderness at Sinai where God was to be served, as He says, “Let my son go, that he may serve me”. As the sanctuary was in mind at Sinai, in view of the wilderness, He stressed the priesthood; that Aaron and his sons should serve Him as priests.
The Lord in His infancy was taken into the temple and spoken of there by Simeon; His great service being outlined prophetically by Simeon. Then at the age of twelve, He appears there Himself, being seen in the midst of the doctors, hearing and asking questions. As His parents are amazed at Him and ignorantly reprove Him, He says, “did ye not know that I ought to be occupied in my Father’s business?” (Luke 2: 49), as if He intended to informally set out that He knew where His Father’s business lay. That word “business” involving in His mind very much; involving something very different from what the Jewish dove-sellers, sheep-sellers, and money-changers would regard as business. Their business there was money-making, commerce, which points to the present state of christendom, where the ministry as it is called, has become a trade. The apostle speaks of those who make a trade of the word of God. The Lord at the age of twelve had a different mind. He was hearing and asking questions,
and He was marked by “understanding and answers” even then; showing what is implied in the temple; in the house, which He afterwards calls His Father’s house. Now it was His Father’s business, but later His Father’s house. So that His Father’s business and His Father’s house coalesced in that way. Later, in John 2: 13 - 16, He is seen cleansing the temple, and He calls it His Father’s house. According to Mark, He is seen looking around in it directing that no package should be taken through it. In Matthew He is seen explaining the singing, the praise of the children there; commending what they were doing.
These instances, I think, help us as to what the Lord is now engaged in as the Minister of the sanctuary, specially vindicating the praise rendered to Himself as opposed by others; a comforting thought for us in our time when those who love the Lord are carrying on the divine service unostentatiously and free from ritual — ordinary religious ritual — and coming under reproach because of it. But the Lord gives us to understand that He knows; He hears the praise, and He commends it; quoting from the Psalms, “Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou has perfected praise” (Matthew 21: 16). So having that in mind we may look at Mark 9 as the sequence of the glory. The disciples looked around, after seeing the cloud, and after hearing the voice from heaven, but saw no one save Jesus only with themselves. I think if we bear this statement in mind in regard to our position today, Jesus only with ourselves, shorn of all man’s innovations in the service of God — man’s art and device — we shall be ready for what the Spirit opens up in regard to Christ as the Minister of the sanctuary, and what the sanctuary is; how that it is wholly exclusive of man’s innovations. It is Jesus alone with ourselves, which we might say, describes eternity in a sense. How [p. 165] great He will appear! The epistle to the Hebrews opens up to us how great and glorious He is; and indeed Colossians teaches us that we do not need any other, for “in him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily”, and that we are filled full in Him. Perhaps what I have said will give some little basis for consideration for our conversation together.
EBMcC I suppose it has always been the thought of God that He should dwell among His people and have a habitation here, as He said to Moses, “let them make me a sanctuary; that I may dwell among them” (Exodus 25: 8).
JT That is right. Then, the sanctuary being built, who is to minister in it? That is what the type teaches. The priesthood appears at once, God stressing that it was as priests they were to serve, and not specifically “as sons”, but “as priests”, because what is so needed in carrying on the service in a contrary scene is intelligence, holiness, and all other traits that belong to priesthood.
CHH Is the greatness of the Person of Jesus brought home to us by divine instruction? “This is my beloved Son”.
JT Attention is called to Him on the mount, “This is my beloved Son”. As Matthew says, “in whom I have found my delight: hear him”. Attention is called to Him in the glory, that is, the glory is the background to our service, our position here on earth. But as coming down what is visible is “Jesus alone with themselves”. The human mind will not be satisfied with that, and that is the general history of christendom. The human mind was not satisfied with “Jesus alone” and the saints. It wanted to add its own devices, whereas the true priestly state would keep to that, and the Lord would have this in mind in telling the disciples not to say anything about the glory they saw until He was risen. It is a spiritual matter, so that it becomes a question [p. 166] of what is involved in this — Jesus alone with ourselves. The book of Acts opens this up, showing how He comes in Himself amongst the brethren and presents Himself living. As if He would say, I wish you to understand Me — while it is Myself and you, I want you to understand Me. No one else could present Himself as He did. He presented Himself living after He had suffered — that is the position.
JCS Do these circumstances on the mount serve to emphasise the majesty of the Lord Jesus, and His greatness as with us?
JT Yes, that is the background. They have seen all that and now they are coming down. They first look around suddenly, which you might expect. We are all apt to look around with active minds and natural desires; but it is dangerous to look around with natural desires, and say, We have only got the Lord, others have great showy things in their service, we have not.
PL Is this reference to Jesus developed in Hebrews 12: 2, where we get “looking stedfastly on Jesus”, and “Jesus, mediator of a new covenant”, and bound up with the great system of glory?
JT I think that is what Hebrews is intended to teach. It has been called, the book of the opened heavens. That is, we see what is there as over against what was then at Jerusalem — those who still served under the old system. It was a question of directing the saints away from what was visible — the great system at Jerusalem and the hierarchy there — to what is in heaven where everything centres now in the Person of Christ. So that four times over in the book He is said to have “set himself down”, up there. It is His own action; in chapter 1, at the “right hand of the greatness on high;” in chapter 8 at the “right hand of the throne of the greatness;” in chapter 10, the “right hand of God”, and chapter 12, at the “right hand of the throne of God”. Who can be greater than that? It is no less than a divine Person who is our High Priest. What is the Pope or the Archbishop, or any other religious dignitary compared with this Person? That is what Hebrews presents to us.
PL “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and today, and to the ages to come” (Hebrews 13: 8).
JCS If God by the cloud would shut out from equality with Christ even Moses and Elias, who is to come in after that?
JT So the disciples looking around after the transfiguration, is a sort of challenge to us. What would we see? Some travel about the world and see the great buildings. Even the disciples were not free from this thought. They call the Lord’s attention to the great buildings at Jerusalem, and we are apt to look around in this way, and be captivated by the religious greatness around us, whereas the true position is He and ourselves — true christians, not simply Jesus alone, but with ourselves. How much will develop out of that position? What cannot be done with it?
EBMcC We see “Jesus ... crowned with glory and honour” (Hebrews 2: 9). We see Him in that way.
JT That is the thought; we see Him there in all the greatness that is mentioned in the epistle. This is to be in our minds as seeing Him there, and then the wonderful fact is, we have Him. Of course He has us, but we have Him. Hebrews is to show how well off christians are in having “such a one high priest”.
EWC Is it that the assembly has Him in a special way?
JT It is the saints viewed in that way. The “we” would be christians characteristically.
AW Would the “babes and sucklings” suggest the attitude of mind we take up in the service of [p. 168] God?
JT That is how Matthew sets the thing before us; he treats of children in a peculiar way. He brings in Rachel weeping for her children. He accredits her, quoting from the prophets, with motherly qualities, a mother in Israel weeping for her children because they were not. The Lord Himself says to His Father, “I praise thee, Father, Lord of the heaven and of the earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them to babes. Yea, Father, for thus has it been well-pleasing in thy sight” (Matthew 11: 25, 26). Then in chapter 18 the Lord calls a little child and sets him in the midst of the brethren, as an example, as over against ambition to be great in the kingdom. Then in chapter 19 he blesses little children and departs. In chapter 21 He is in the temple dealing with the dove-sellers and others, and the children begin to praise, and the priests and elders here ask the Lord, Do you hear what they say? As much as to say, they should not be praising here; and the Lord says, in effect, Yes, I hear them. “Have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise”? I think the Lord there asserts what enters into our present position. What is despised by the religious leaders is what He hears and approves of and defends; so we may rest under His wing in carrying on that service.
AW That should help the younger brethren to make a start.
WHW Would the children in the temple be an illustration of what takes place if we are occupied with Jesus only?
JT Just so. Wonderful things develop out of that. There has never been such a service of God as that which has developed in christianity. It is the great thought of God; what He has developed from such a beginning; from babes.
[p. 169] The Lord is seen in Acts 1 as starting to set up things in view of the assembly. According to Luke He had led the disciples out as far as Bethany, and they returned to Jerusalem after He went up, and were continually in the temple praising and blessing God. But in the Acts He is looking towards the assembly in contrast to the temple, although it is still there and to be owned, but He is looking towards the assembly. Hence He presents Himself living to them. It is to occupy them with Himself; and then He assembles with them (verse 4). He has the assembly in His mind; that He is to be known there. I think you see in verse 4 some suggestion of the Minister of the sanctuary. He “assembled with them”.
WHW That is a further thought than in Mark 9, where they saw Jesus alone.
JT He is now assembled with them. The word “assembled” there would point, I think, to the sanctuary, that the Lord had in His mind that in which He should minister. I think we may see in Acts 1 that He is inaugurating a new order of things, the new service. He directs them as to the promise of the Father. He says, “await the promise of the Father, which ... ye have heard of me ... but ye shall be baptised with the Holy Spirit after now not many days”. That would be the full thought of the sanctuary. The promise of the Father — the Holy Spirit coming — would inaugurate really the new place of service.
JCS While in Mark we get “Jesus alone” emphasised, the thought here goes further, the same persons being now assembled.
JT Yes. He is now looking towards the assembly, the great service of God, and they were to do nothing, but await the promise of the Father.
EBMcC Would this go further than what you get in Ezekiel, the glory departing from [p. 170] the temple?
JT You mean the coming in of the promise of the Father would be the inauguration actually of the new system of things in which the Lord was to serve as Minister of the sanctuary, but it would be a heavenly order of things, awaiting Paul’s ministry. The full thought did not materialise until Paul came on the scene, that is, it is a heavenly order of things; the figurative representation of things in the heavens was in the tabernacle.
AW The coming of the Spirit would give the power to carry on the service inaugurated by the Lord during the forty days.
JT Just so. The forty days are educational, teaching the disciples to be spiritually minded. The coming in of the Spirit would maintain all that, and be the power for carrying it on.
AW They would look back on these as pattern days.
JT Yes, they would look back to that spiritual education, but there was something further — what came out of heaven. The Lord had not yet gone in as Man. He was going in and the Holy Spirit coming out, and what has been set up has been brought out of heaven. Christ as in heaven is Minister of the sanctuary. If He were on earth, He would not be a priest, but it is what He is in heaven as Man.
CHH Would there be a connection between the Lord presenting Himself living and the coming of the promise of the Father?
JT What He was as presenting Himself living was one thing, but the Spirit coming in would bring in more than that, it is the glorious condition He is in up there, that enters into this service.
JC Would the idea the brethren received of the Lord Jesus presenting Himself living during those forty days be carried over, and as a pattern be presented to us?
JT Yes, it was an initial thought carried over,
[p. 171] but not yet a glorious Christ; the Minister of the sanctuary is Christ in heaven, not simply Christ as risen, but Christ in heaven. What He did during the forty days was pattern, as has been remarked, but it could not be the full pattern, because the Holy Spirit would bring in the heavenly side — what Christ is there. We cannot say very much about it, as John says, “what we shall be has not yet been manifested; but we know that if it is manifested we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is” (1 John 3: 2). It is His body of glory to which we shall be conformed.
JCS Why was the conversation apparently confined to speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God?
JT Well, that was as far as the Lord went, but the coming in of the Spirit would mean more than that. It was reserved for Paul to unfold the great heavenly system, all was tentative until then. The coming in of the Spirit involved that in principle, but it awaited the doctrine of the mystery, which meant the full service of God. There can be no doubt that it was Paul who wrote Hebrews; anyway, it confirms his ministry. It is the heavenly system of things.
JCS Were these conversations really preparatory in that way?
JT They were, leading up to the full thought.
CAI Would Solomon in 2 Chronicles be typical of the Minister of the sanctuary in service?
JT In so far as it went; he did not go into the holy place, not being a priest, his service was in the court alone, but there is the great general thought of one in charge. The Minister of the sanctuary in the types is properly Aaron.
JSC Does the idea of the Minister of the sanctuary and the priestly family, the sons of Aaron, go [p. 172] as far as association as we speak of it, as in the epistle to the Colossians?
JT That is right. The first thing is to get a grasp of the Person who is Minister of the sanctuary, because He determines everything. It is He who gives character and dignity to the service. He will have to do with service on the earth, too, later on, but today the great heavenly system is set up, and all hinges on the Person — who He is — One able to set Himself down, as we are told, at the right hand of the greatness in the heavens.
EWC Was the tabernacle really pitched by the Lord, until the Holy Spirit came down?
JT Not properly; it involves the heavenly position.
JC What is the spiritual idea connected with the word “pitched”?
JT The allusion is to the tabernacle in the wilderness. That is the type in Hebrews, pitching the tent, setting it up firmly with pegs and cords and so forth. Now, that is not in view, but what the Lord has pitched finally and permanently.
WHW Is the thought in Acts 1 that the Lord as Minister of the sanctuary helps us in the way we should serve? The disciples turned to times and seasons, but the Lord passes over those.
JT He excludes that from them. It was not for them to know, so He says, “ye will receive power, the Holy Spirit having come upon you, and ye shall be my witnesses”. “My witnesses” — that is a further thought, but verse 4 is more, because He was assembled with them then.
JCS The apprehension of the greatness of the Person who is before us would influence the character of the service and give tone to it.
JT It lifts us out of the range of mere current religion, however ancient or dignified. Who is there of church dignitaries who can take a place like this?
“[p. 173] Sat down on the right hand of the throne of the greatness in the heavens” (Hebrews 8: 1).
SHB Do we need to be exercised to apprehend the Lord a little more in this particular way — as the Minister of the sanctuary?
JT I think we might have that before us — first to be content with what there is. Many of us like a little more show than is available amongst the saints who love the Lord. If we are naturally minded we like a little more show than there is. Jesus and the saints are not quite enough for us. That is the first thing to see, I think, whereas those of us who understand a little of the truth, know the background of our position is the heavenly glory, what was seen on the mount, nothing less than that, where Jesus, according to Mark, is changed. His garments became so white, as it says, “exceeding white as snow, such as fuller on earth could not whiten them”. It is a pure system of things, utterly exclusive of all human innovations. And then that there is no one to be heard in relation to this matter but Jesus — “Hear him”. He may use others, but He is the One who is speaking. “Hear him” — that is heaven’s voice, and then they look around and they see only Him and themselves. It is important that they see themselves, because the saints are essential to what is in the mind of God.
CFI Would the voice from the cloud greatly dignify Him in their eyes, and then seeing Jesus alone with themselves dignify the saints?
JT The intent is that they should carry that on. Whatever others might think of them at Jerusalem, as over against the great buildings there and the high priest, they had this secret information — those three men — Peter, James, and John — had the knowledge of the glory above, and who this Person is. Others would despise the position, but they knew, and that would sustain them. So Peter says, as he is about to die, “we have not made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, following cleverly imagined fables, but having been eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honour and glory, such a voice being uttered to him by the excellent glory: This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight; and this voice we heard uttered from heaven, being with him on the holy mountain” (2 Peter 1: 16 - 18). Who could rob him of that? Nobody. They might despise him and say he was a Galilean, that he had a Galilean accent, and was only a fisherman, but who could take that out of his heart? Nobody. What strength he would have in continuing the testimony in Jerusalem! And that is our position now — we have the secret knowledge of the glory, but the Lord says, Do not say anything about it until I am risen. It is a matter that relates to Christ in His spiritual state. We do not want to parade it to man’s natural mind — it is a spiritual matter, it does not pertain to man in flesh.
JCS What you speak of still remains in spite of the breakdown publicly.
JT That is the thing. As the captives came back together from Babylon what holy vessels were available! According to the type in Ezra, and Nehemiah, the service of God begins; the altar is set up and the service goes on, and the word was, “The latter glory of this house shall be greater than the former”.
AET When Peter spoke on the mount he linked Elijah and Moses with the Lord, but when he is giving an account in his epistle of what he saw, he leaves them out. He had come to understand “no man ... save Jesus only with themselves”.
JT I expect he had left them out long before, as well as the three tabernacles — there was only one. Moses and Elias certainly could not have a tabernacle alongside of Jesus. The truth is, the tabernacle [p. 175] would be Jesus with themselves. The saints are the tabernacle here.
JC Does baptising with the Holy Spirit secure this one idea?
JT Yes. The Spirit is the power for unity. The promise of the Father, as here, is a characteristic word; the “Father” standing for the dispensation; the relation into which He has come. He is known as Father, which implies grace, pure grace. His promise would involve the dispensation, and what would be effected by the Spirit in the disciples themselves, so that Paul’s doctrine opens up to us what is implied in the presence of the Spirit here as to unity; the body is implied. The idea of the tabernacle is developed by the presence of the Holy Spirit, so it really awaited Paul’s ministry.
EBMcC If we think of 1 Corinthians 14, the tabernacle was set up and they were speaking as the Spirit gave them utterance.
JT Quite so; there was the exercise of the gift of ministry, but then we have in chapter 10 a reference to the body. “We being many are ... one body”. That is, we are all baptised in the power of one Spirit into one body.
I am wondering whether we have grasped this position in Acts 1, whether we have followed the thought of Jesus alone with ourselves, and then His presentation of Himself to us — what He is. Only He can present Himself aright. We may present Christ in our service in one way or another, by a word in ministry to the saints, or in the gospel, but only He can present Himself perfectly, and that is the idea. We want to have a view of Christ as He wishes us to have it. It is a question of what He wishes, how He presents Himself. The first thing is, He presented Himself alive after He had suffered. It is a touching thought, the presentation of Himself living after He had suffered. That is to be in [p. 176] our minds; then His assembling with us, and then His word to wait for the promise of the Father. That would be essential to their answering to what was in His mind, and this would bring in the body, as in Paul’s ministry. What He unfolds to us requires the body, the saints coming to apprehend one another in love, not simply theoretically, but in love; because the thing has no practical form or substance aside from our regarding one another in love; the Spirit sustaining us in unity and affection. It is in that, you reach the service of God. The Lord has a place there. He comes in at the Supper as showing Himself; particularly in the bread — making Himself known. But how He presents Himself will depend on conditions.
JCS Does this, the presentation of Himself in that way, furnish us with the substance required for the occasion?
JT You have to make room for that. How will He show Himself? He showed Himself in different ways according to 1 Corinthians 15, but the point here is, He presented Himself living, after He suffered. If the service is to go on, we must have a clear apprehension of Christ as He wishes Himself to be understood.
EWC Would the presentation of Himself draw us into the power and liberty of the assembly?
JT Yes. He is very attractive as He presents Himself. It is not simply that He is there, but that He is there with us. They saw no one but Jesus alone “with themselves”, but He was not yet presenting Himself. When He begins to present Himself you get something attractive. He is seen, and it is a question of what He has in mind in the presentation.
CHH The thought of “living” is to give character to the whole position. The Lord cannot be tied down to a cut-and-dried condition of things.
JT Yes. [p. 177] It is over against a dead system of things. In the ministry to the Jewish christians, the idea of living is stressed, because they were surrounded by a dead system as we are now in christendom. You cannot have Christ presenting Himself in the rituals of christendom. You cannot fit a living Christ into any of them. A creed, a prayer-book, religious garments, and other current paraphernalia — you cannot fit Christ into all that. It is as though He would say, I wish Myself to be seen. Pilate presented Christ to the crowd, saying “Behold the man!” But He was crowned with a crown of thorns, and they had put a purple robe on Him. That was their estimate of Him. We see Him in different garments from those. He would not present Himself that way; He would present Himself to His own as He wishes to be seen by His people.
CFI Might the presentation vary on different occasions?
JT The idea of life is to be noted because it is over against a dead system of things. It is a living Christ, but a living Christ presented by Himself. He wants you to see Him in a certain way.
CFI How does that take place? Might there be an indication of the manner in the thanksgiving for the emblems?
JT The Lord comes in in His own way. Everything is mediate. He does not come in corporeally. If He comes in He wishes to be understood in a certain way, and especially that it is as living.
AW In one place He showed them His hands and His side, and in another His hands and His feet.
JT Just so. The one is Luke, the hands and the feet. He is ready to move about and serve — He supports us in our intelligence and affections — “His left hand is under my head, And his right hand doth embrace me”, as the bride says in the Song of Songs 2: 6. That would be John’s line. Luke would present [p. 178] the Lord as using His feet, too. You get this in Revelation. He walks in the midst of the seven golden lamps, but when things are happy and right He would show us that it is a question of reciprocation of affection. John presents this side.
EWC It would not be a mere objective presentation of Himself, but conveyed in the power of the Spirit to the affections of those gathered.
JT It is objective in that way. He calls attention to Himself in some way. We are to be alert to discern that.
PL It may be an appearing “in another form” as seen in Mark. Love treasures these different forms, and in so doing is ready for the next. They are sovereign.
JT Just so. It also involves their feet in Mark 16, because they were travelling into the country, and in our minds we may be. We may, while sitting in the meeting, be occupied with our farms, or cows, or business. The Lord then has to use His feet, so to speak. They went into the country, and He had to go after them. It is not His hands, but His feet in that case, but if it is a question purely of love, it is His hands and His side. His hands embracing us to sustain us in our affections.
PL If in love, like Mary, we are pouring the ointment on His feet, our feet will cause Him no concern.
JT Just so, certainly there is no concern in the picture in John 12, no concern is expressed because there is no need for it until Judas speaks. It is when a voice like that of Judas is heard in the meeting the Lord has to come in with reproof. He may have to do that any time because the best meeting may have a Judas element. At Bethany everything was in outward order, and yet one brings in a discordant, criticising, withering element, and the Lord rebukes that. So we can never tell what the Lord may have [p. 179] to do. We cannot say it must be so-and-so, because there may be someone like Judas, and He would have to deal with that element.
JC Does it work out through the brethren today?
JT It is all mediate now. The Spirit being here makes it possible.
Rem The man in John 9 had Jesus before him, and we have to know something of that before we can go to Him outside the camp.
JT That helps as to what we are saying. It is a question of how the Lord presents Himself. It is in Acts 1 as living after He had suffered; but in John 9 it is as the Son of God. “Dost thou believe on the Son of God?” That is the idea; it is a thought further now.
Ques Would finding the Lord as His centre make that man an assembly man?
JT Yes. I think the culminating point in the instruction is reached in chapter 12.
JCS In presenting Himself living to the affections of the saints, would that have the effect of moving their affections? There would be spiritual emotions.
JT If we have an eye for beauty — for spiritual beauty — we shall be moved, because that is what David represents in the type. He was ruddy and beautiful, and anyone with an eye for beauty would be moved as seeing Jesus, how He presents Himself.
PL God would say, “Arise, anoint him, for this is he”.
JT Just so, that is the man, not an official, but a delightful man. He must have the pre-eminence.
WHW Does the priest then come in and the saints advance as in Hebrews 8, where it says, “We have such a one high priest”.
JT That is the next thing. All that we have said really leads up to that, to what “we have”. It is a characteristic phrase in Hebrews — what we [p. 180] have as enriching us as over against what others have not. We have an altar, we have this great Priest, we have boldness. It is an exclusive thought, and refers to what others have not got. This is the principle, the bearing of the remarks as over against judaism, which existed at the time the epistle was written.
PL “We have an altar of which they have no right to eat who serve the tabernacle” (Hebrews 13: 10).
WHW That would work out as support for us when we come together.
JT People say, ‘you are too exclusive’. What we have been speaking of emphasises the principle of exclusiveness; it is a word that belongs to the divine vocabulary, not in a narrow sense, but should be treasured as shutting out man, not shutting out anything of God, but what is of man. The epistle shows how wonderfully furnished we are. The writer says here, “a summary of the things of which we are speaking is, We have such a one high priest who has sat down on the right hand of the throne of the greatness in the heavens; minister of the holy places and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord has pitched, and not man” (Hebrews 8: 1, 2). It is not here what God has, but what the saints have. It is in view of the service; the saints are essential to the service.
CHH Does the greatness of the Minister of the sanctuary imply there will be no possible breakdown in the service Godward?
JT Quite so. A great Person is presented at the outset, as you will observe; “who being the effulgence of his glory and the expression of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power” (Hebrews 1: 3). Such a One as that is a sure guarantee for the maintenance of the service. There is no breakdown possible in it; and how wonderful it is that we can appropriate Christ in this way as [p. 181] coming in amongst us and making Himself known in our midst! We can appropriate Him and clothe Him and ourselves with all this that is opened up in Hebrews. Approach to God through Christ, He leading in it, is equal to the revelation of God which He has made.
CHH Does that imply that the need of God’s heart would be met?
JT Quite so. The Lord is great enough to know what is needed divinely, what the Father seeks, and leads us accordingly.
TB Will you tell us a little more about “Let my son go, that he may serve me”? Does not worship enter into that, and all you have been speaking of lead on to worship of the Father? If service implies worship, when does that take place? Is it specially after the breaking of bread the Lord leads us?
JT Well, I think it is well to get at the concrete thing. Scriptural instruction is usually extended and general, but it is well to come to the concrete thought. In Acts 20: 7 Luke says, “we being assembled to break bread”. The idea was there, and Paul was present, and a number of brothers present too from different parts of the world, who represented Paul’s ministry, and who would be guards of it so that nothing contrary should be there; especially the Berean, who would compare everything with Scripture, to see whether it were so. We are told that Paul discoursed till midnight, though we are not told what he said. What is meant is that we must listen to him first if we are to understand this great matter, for he is heaven’s representative in the sense of his having received the ministry of the assembly as well as of the gospel. As the minister of the assembly, he must be heard before we can proceed. I believe that is what is meant, so that in coming together to break bread, we are obliged to take up his thought, as well as the record of the gospels, as to what the Lord [p. 182] said and did at the institution of the supper. Paul’s ministry is the last word from heaven, it is from the Lord directly through him, and the stress is on the “remembrance of me”. Paul’s account is to be before us, and we must see that there is an act of mind implied. The word “remembrance” here is used only in 1 Corinthians 11: 24, Luke 22: 19, and Hebrews 10: 3. The minds of the saints based on Romans would be renewed minds, so that they have power to call Christ in, to bring Him in, that is, to make a way in the action of their minds, so He has room to come in. He would seize that opportunity and come in. It would be in the breaking of bread, meaning that He would show Himself in that sense as referring to the will of God, and our being a body for that use. So that the obvious impression is that we are to be for the will of God now — “by which will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (Hebrews 10: 10). And now we are available to Him, as amongst us. Colossians lays it down as a great general thought amongst the gentiles: “Christ in you the hope of glory”. In any circumstances in which that is a concrete fact you may look for glory. Glory is in mind. Though there are things to be dealt with and the Lord will deal with them, yet if conditions are right He will proceed to what He has in mind as the Minister of the sanctuary, and lead on to the service of God. That I think is how the matter stands.
TB Are priests the same as sons?
JT “That they may serve me as priests”, is what God says. Conditions require that the priestly element should be prominent, but the primary thought in God’s mind is “sons”, that we should be before Him according to Ephesians, “holy and without blame before him in love”.
JCS Would Paul’s ministry develop that, as beyond that [p. 183] of the twelve?
JT Quite so. His is the heavenly side of the truth. He has the last word from the Lord in this matter. We have to listen to Paul. Corinthians is procedure. We go there for it. Here the point is that seeing he speaks so long, there is much to learn from him before you can break bread.
PL “Think of what I say, for the Lord will give thee understanding in all things” (2 Timothy 2: 7).
JT Eutychus did not do that. He is a warning. We must listen to Paul.
EBMcC So we have in 1 Corinthians 10 and 11 the lordship and headship of Christ which would help us to proceed.
JT In so far as you can put headship into Corinthians. It is the headship over the woman, hardly to the assembly, also Christ as Head over every man. That is the reason why one is slow to say He comes in as Head. He comes in, and thus will deal with what is there. If conditions for headship are not there, He has to help, and He will do what He can for us. We may as well be practical.
JCS I am glad you stressed that. It is a point upon which we want help. There has been an effort to tie the Lord down to coming in in a certain way.
JT We are all struggling in this matter. What I observe now is that there is a tendency to leave out hymns. We have a good collection of hymns. The Lord has helped in providing them, and I observe there is a great tendency to use them very little. The Lord loves to hear our voices speaking to Him, but I think He likes music. I know He does, and for music you must have poetry, and for His service you must have spiritual poetry, and God has provided us with it to a very great extent. What the Lord says in Hebrews 2: 12, as quoted from Psalm 22 on the cross, ought, I think, to touch our hearts, “in the midst of the assembly will I sing thy praises”, not ‘speak’ but “sing”.
JC [p. 184] As the sweet Psalmist of Israel He would love music.
JT The number of the psalms is remarkable, and in itself educational. There are five books containing one hundred and fifty psalms carefully divided, in which David must have had the leading part.
EBMcC Would you say that some of these beautiful hymns to the Lord would come in after the breaking of bread?
JT I have no doubt the Lord would help us to tarry there. We should not be too strict in dividing the service up into compartments, but make room for the Lord to come in and show Himself, and see what He may do. We must be attentive, He being there.
PL Would the Songs of Degrees suggest that the music would stimulate ascent?
JT I think so. Spiritual singing is most glorious to me, not that the speakings to the Lord are not to be desired, “Let me hear thy voice; For sweet is thy voice, and thy countenance is comely” (Song of Songs 2: 14); but the general thought of the service of God is song. The Lord indicates this on the cross.
CAI In Matthew after they had sung a hymn they went out. We have thought the hymn after the breaking of bread should be to God.
JT No doubt it has reference there to a covenant hymn; possibly Psalm 113 or 114.
CAI Would it be going back to have a hymn to God after the supper and then to the Lord?
JT If purely a covenant hymn there is nothing incongruous in speaking to the Mediator after addressing the God of the covenant; but in the family and heavenly position if we get on to that altitude we should stay there, and the Lord is ready to take us there.
PL Paul’s prayers are to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. He preserves [p. 185] the altitude.
JT Yes, and that is what the Minister of the sanctuary would do. He is exalted, He has gone to the highest point. The previous chapter says He has gone beyond all the heavens, so we may leave it with Him; He will go high enough.
EGH It is frequently noticed that a brother will give out a hymn, immediately after the breaking of bread, addressed to the Father, and afterwards we step down.
JT Tarrying around the covenant is of great importance. It tends to liberate us and gives the Lord scope as to what He may do. It is just as well not to attempt to go beyond this if there seems no power, but the Lord is great enough to touch us when we least expect it and lead into the family side of things.
Ques As Minister of the sanctuary does He take us beyond the covenant?
JT The sanctuary is a great general thought in Hebrews. Although not called priests, the suggestion is of the sons being brought to glory. I think the sanctuary is a great general thought, having reference to that in which God is approached and worshipped.
CFI Does it cover headship too?
JT It would in the fulness of its working. Headship means that the Lord has a body. He is Head of His body, and that implies that the saints are in liberty holding each other in that setting, so that the Lord can proceed with us. As Head, all movement is from Him.
PL So the expression in Hebrews, “holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling” would be a body expression.
JT I think so.