THE ASSEMBLY AND CHRIST'S RELATION TO IT
THE ASSEMBLY AND CHRIST’S RELATION TO IT
Revelation 22: 17; Acts 9: 1 - 16
JT It is of importance to call attention to the fact that the assembly is the nearest of the families of God, to divine Persons. The verse in Revelation points to this, because she is seen joined with the Holy Spirit in saying, “Come”. It is a peculiar and important matter that she is so near to divine Persons as to join with One of Them in saying “Come” to Another of the three Persons in the Deity, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. The passage read from Acts 9 points to the Lord having to say to the assembly and to the persons forming it. The general fact of His position now is that He has gone into heaven and that, as Mark tells us, He has sat at the right hand of God, which is a position of dignity the Father has conferred on Him. This links with the word in Acts 2: 33, “being by the right hand of God exalted ... he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear”. At the same time, however, He is seen in the Acts and in 1 Corinthians 15 as appearing to Paul. Paul refers to himself in the words “last of all ... he appeared to me also”; the appearing alluding to what we read in Acts 9. Then there are other appearings to him, such as at Corinth and also at Jerusalem. It is therefore thought that we shall get help in looking into these scriptures and seeking to understand how great the assembly’s place is. Then how the Lord was active with it, or the members of it, in different ways, but particularly in the corporeal sense, for He actually came to earth in person in relation to Paul and in relation to others too, as we have remarked, but particularly in relation to Paul.
PHH Would the servant with Rebecca at the end of Genesis 24 give a type of the Spirit and the bride together?
JT [p. 196] He is seen there typically, and yet it is clear, that it is intended to be as real in its meaning as what we have in the antitype. Rebecca is seen as riding on camels, which points to the power by which the assembly is carried to Christ. Then further we see how the Lord, as typified by Isaac, was occupied, for Isaac was coming from the well called Lahai-roi. Coming from it points to his being active in that sense. Typically he is a man of leisure and free to be occupied with his bride when she comes into view. The first allusion, however, is to the power by which she is carried. Then later he is seen as at liberty and in restfulness and dallying with her. All this has a meaning at the present time as showing how the Lord would take advantage of the first day of the week. He has peculiar liberty among the saints on that day. It is named in Scripture as “the Lord’s day”. It is the Lord’s day, and John says, “I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day”. The allusions by the Spirit, in that setting, to the assembly particularly, in Revelation 22: 16 point to the Lord’s activities, as in referring to Himself He says, “I am the root and offspring of David, the bright and morning star”. He says that, and says it in order to affect the assembly, so that immediately we have the answer; “the Spirit and the bride say, Come”. It is quite intelligent and intelligible that we should so regard the first day of the week as affording such an opportunity, the bride being mentioned. Earlier in the book of Revelation she is mentioned as the wife, which would refer to her in her occupation with His interests down here. In this particular verse in Revelation 22, she is occupied along with the Spirit, one of the divine Persons, with another divine Person. They are occupied with the coming of the Lord; that surely is something which should command our affections at this present time.
Ques So that when this moment actually arrives, will it not signalise the close of this dispensation? Have you in mind that what will be fully consummated then may be in our hearts [p. 197] now?
JT I am sure that is right. The word in 1 Corinthians 11: 26 is, “As often as ye shall eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye announce the death of the Lord, until he come”. That is the proper occupation entering into the Lord’s supper.
Ques Has the invitation “Come”, the rapture or the appearing in view?
JT I would say the appearing. It is a question of what He is coming into. She is occupied, as a wife ought to be, with what He is coming into and not only what He is to her. So we have Paul speaking of those who “love his appearing”.
NKM “Until he come”. Is that the rapture or the appearing?
JT I think the appearing is meant, because it is a question of what the Lord is coming into. The assembly in her wifely character is not only thinking of what she comes into herself, but of what He comes into; the full consummation of the divine thoughts.
Ques Does the fact that she understands and appreciates the expression, “the root and offspring of David”, suggest the greatest measure of intelligence as to His Person?
JT They are, of course, the Lord’s own words. His being the root of David refers to Deity, and the offspring, to His humanity. She understands that, and He knows that she is capable of understanding it.
Ques Is it specially through the understanding of Paul’s ministry that we come to this thought of our nearness and intimacy with divine Persons?
JT I think the Lord is working at that constantly. The real feminine representative of the assembly in John would be Mary Magdalene, and she calls the Lord “Rabboni”, meaning that He was her teacher. I believe the importance of teaching runs through John’s gospel. The instruction that he affords to us is stressed, in view of the importance of the brethren [p. 198] being taught.
JPH The appearing being in mind in 1 Corinthians 11, what will occur between the rapture and the appearing? It says, “Until he come” in connection with the Supper.
JT The interval would have to be worked out in prophecy. We would have to work out the three years and a half which we find in the book of Revelation and in Daniel, and we have to be like Daniel, and understand by books. Perhaps we do not set ourselves to understand enough by books. The words “Come” and “until he come” refer to the general position of the testimony until He comes into His rights. His creative rights are alluded to in Revelation 10: 2 - 3 in which we are told that “he set his right foot on the sea, and the left upon the earth, and cried with a loud voice as a lion roars”. He will thus assert His authority creatively and, I believe, that is included in the coming of the Lord.
FCH Would not the reference to the “morning star” confirm the thought that it refers to His appearing? It is in view of another day.
JT I think that is good. It is “the bright and morning star”. Peter says “until the day dawn and the morning star arise in your hearts”, 2 Peter 1: 19.
WC Is there any idea of something in the nature of the Supper being continued by the remnant on the line of Matthew and Mark?
JT I do not understand that, although I have heard of it before. Of course, you might say, the expression “until he come” would imply it, but I do not think the Lord’s supper belongs to any other family. The Lord says, “This is my body, which is for you”.
Ques The expression “until he come” is hardly a reference to time chronologically, but rather in view of His rights being owned. In the assembly, during the whole time of His absence they should be owned, until He comes personally to take them [p. 199] up?
JT That is right, and that is how I understand the place of the woman of worth in the book of Proverbs. “Her husband” it says, “is known in the gates”. That is to say He is known through what she is doing and now the Lord is known through what we are doing. It is a poor thing if He is not.
PHH Is it your thought that the close connection between the Spirit and the bride would help to put everything that the assembly has to do with on a very high level?
JT That is just the point that is in mind.
PHH Does that mean that the Lord’s supper, in itself in its inwardness, is also being elevated in our minds?
JT I think it is. The Lord has been stressing the truth of His Supper for well nigh thirty years, and the true thought of it has been coming to light constantly. You might say, almost every Lord’s day we get something. Then the truth of the assembly is bound up with it, because the apostle says in 1 Corinthians 11, “When ye come together in assembly”. The Lord’s supper is thus bound up with the assembly, and to make the Supper the portion of any other family is, I think, confusing.
WC I think what you say is clear from the setting of it, that it is the assembly’s privilege.
Ques Do the Lord’s words in John 14: 3 “I go to prepare you a place ... that where I am ye also may be” show the peculiar place of intimacy that the assembly will have to the divine Persons as over against other families named in heaven and earth?
JT I think so. Beginning with verse 15 of John 14 and running right to the end, the Lord has in mind those who form the assembly. So that He says in that passage, “I am coming to you”, which enters into the chapter we read.
Ques Do you regard the Supper as special? You have spoken of Christ being in heaven as the general [p. 200] position in Christianity, but at the Supper have we liberty to think of Him as near?
JT I think it is intended to be that. So the apostle says, “Have ye not then houses for eating and drinking? or do ye despise the assembly of God?” These are words that point to the greatness and glory of the Lord’s supper, involving the assembly and no other family.
PL You distinguish between His coming, as, in the end of Luke, in relation to localities, when He stood in their midst, and asks them whether they have anything here to eat, from the occasion in John 20 when it says, that He came and stood in the midst? Would the latter view His coming in as from heaven as the ascending Man and bear on the general position, and the upward trend of the service of God. The first in Luke rather bears upon His identification with us in the sojourning character of the assembly in its sorrows and exercises?
JT Very good. I would say that, because Luke writes to an individual, Theophilus; he does not write to a company, but in coming to his last chapter he gives an account of the Lord’s visit to Emmaus, showing that He was concerned about two of them, which would suggest the assembly and its members. Mark says that they were going to the country, and that is not a suggestion for the assembly, for the country does not promote much as to the assembly. Cities, as such, do not either, but still cities are more concentrated positions in which God is pleased to set His assembly locally. So the first mention of it in Corinthians is, “the assembly of God which is in Corinth”. It is thus a local matter, and, I believe, Luke bears out the local matter, for we have the reference by him to the breaking of bread, being in the house, a local position. It was not in the assembly then, although Corinthians would show that it should be in the assembly today, but it was never in the temple. Other things are recognised in what Luke records as in the temple. It is linked up with the work of God at the [p. 201] outset and continues on long after the Holy Spirit had come down, yet it is never said, or implied that the Lord’s supper was in the temple. They broke bread in the house, meaning that it might be in a brother’s house. It is never alluded to as in the temple at Jerusalem. I believe Luke 24 is to show that it is the local position that he is dealing with, and so the Lord was constrained by the two, whoever they were, to go in with them into their house. They had a meal there and evidently the Lord waited. It is wonderful to think of Him waiting there, whatever the preparation may have been, until it was completed, and then He gave thanks. Then it says, “he disappeared from them”. That is to show that the mysterious idea enters into the assembly, even into its local position. This would teach us that the service of God should not be brought down to the level of the ordinary mind. So it says that the two, into whose house He went, returned to Jerusalem. It must have taken them a good while to get back, probably two hours, but they went and they found the eleven gathered together. It was a broken state of things, as Matthew records, but they found them. It shows that they were characteristically real assembly people and they found those that belonged to the assembly. Those that belonged to it, as gathered together, were saying, “The Lord is indeed risen and has appeared to Simon”. That means that the Lord took account of what Simon had done, but He would set him at ease as to that, so that whatever there was in the way of assembly service might proceed. Then the two from Emmaus added to what had been said, by referring to what the Lord had done there, and then, while all that was proceeding, “he himself stood in their midst”. That bears out what has just been said as to the local position, whereas in John 20: 19 it is the general position. It is not “their midst” in John 20, but “the midst”, which would be the general idea. If the Lord comes to us from heaven, it may be in relation to ministry or other occasions which call for [p. 202] His presence, the bearing of this as also the ministry, is universal. This is going on constantly.
GWB Do you think that the Lord’s words, “I am coming to you” are fulfilled at the Supper or on other occasions also?
JT I think it might be on an occasion like this. Why should it not be? It is a question of His love. The idea is that He came to where the disciples were, not exactly into the hall, but where they were. Then the reference to the doors being shut means that there was a danger of intrusion, and the saints ought to take care of that.
WSS Paul writes to Timothy about “all them also that love his appearing”. Would that have a present bearing?
JT I think so. I think it ought to have with us now (as seen in the following verse of a hymn);
‘We look for Thine appearing,
Thy presence here to bless;
We greet the day that’s nearing,
When all this woe shall cease’. (200:4)
How comforting that is!
WSS I was thinking how the ministry in relation to Christ and the assembly quickens our affections, so that we would love His appearing, and not merely hold things doctrinally.
PHH Would the experience of these two coming back from Emmaus result in something wealthy added to the company? Would it correspond a little to adjustment and enrichment which we might get by way of teaching relative to the Supper?
JT They were not just right, and we have to own, humbly, that perhaps we are not always right, yet, even if we are not, the Lord may come to us. The Lord came to those who had gone fishing in John 21. They had caught nothing all night and He said to them, “Children, have ye anything to eat?” In Luke 24 it is, “Have ye anything here to eat?” Did they have anything? Well,
[p. 203] they did; they had a broiled fish and a honeycomb, but they did not have any in John 21. Nevertheless, the Lord did not upbraid them for not having something, nor did He upbraid them for going fishing, and that is to bring out how gracious He can be with us when the assembly is in our hearts, and when He knows it is there. Although it may be damaged by something, if He knows it is there, He may reserve His reproof about it. He will bring it out some time or another, because it is a question of ministry, but, in the meantime, we find “a fire of coals there, and fish laid on it, and bread”, and the Lord saying to them, “Come and dine”. That is the sort of thing we might expect.
Ques Do you think Luke 24 would show that, as the Lord is present, He pledges Himself to serve according to the conditions that may require His service?
JT That is good.
Ques He says, “behold my hands and my feet”, and then, “having said this, he showed them his hands and his feet”. Do you think we are learning to count on the present service of the love of Christ in our localities that we may be set free for what is universal?
JT Just so. Hence the week, I believe, comes under proper consideration in relation to the Lord. The first day of it usually takes care of itself, but all the other days have to be provided for, and the brethren have been providing for them and especially in the prophetic ministry.
JMcK Would the reference in Acts 1: 3 to the Lord “being seen by them during forty days” confirm this? It is not a fixed matter, for the first day of the week only, but varying according to their state or need. “Being seen by them during forty days”.
JT Quite so. He was not always with them. As we were remarking, the two undertook the journey from Emmaus and came to Jerusalem and found the eleven. They found them. The Lord was not there but they [p. 204] were speaking about Him, showing that He was in their hearts. They needed adjustment, but still the general thought was that He was in their hearts, and that they knew what had happened so far. It was a known and an accepted fact that He was risen and that He had appeared to Simon. The two then added what they could, referring to what had happened in Emmaus, and then it is said, “as they were saying these things, he himself stood in their midst”. They were not just ready for the appearing, but He did not leave. He remained, and the journey He was on led to Bethany, for it says, “he led them out as far as Bethany”. The season of His being with them went on, and we are told a good deal of what entered into it. The local position went on in the sense of instruction, and then He leads them out as far as to Bethany and goes up from Bethany. What is in mind is to call attention to the fact of a local position, and that the Lord is ever ready to make it right if it is not right. It is for the persons who are local, those who are resident in the town or place, to see that things are right.
PL Would “his hands and his feet” in Luke speak of the adaptability of Christ’s love to current conditions; whereas, “his hands and his side” in John speak of His complacent love for His own in relation to another scene?
JT I think the allusion to the side in John would be to Genesis 2, to Eve as coming from the side of Adam. The Lord is to be apprehended, and the fact that the wife, the assembly, has come out of Him. I do not suppose that in the eternal condition of things there will be anything indicating a wound in His side. I do not think there is.
Ques We are not told much in Scripture about the transition between the millennium and the eternal state. Is there not a tendency with us to carry a good many things over into eternity that will really cease with the [p. 205] millennium?
JT I think so. Much will happen that is not recorded, in fulfilment of what is required by the word in 1 Corinthians 15: 50, “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God”. We have to accept that.
Ques Is it noteworthy, that following Bethany in John 12, we have all the heavenly instruction that is so useful to us in relation to the service of God in the assembly and the knowledge of the Father? Is it your thought that, as being adjusted locally and filling our part there, we are then free to move on to the great universal spiritual sphere?
JT I would say that fully, especially when we come to chapter 17, where the Lord lifts up His eyes to heaven and prays. There is some conclusion reached there. Matthew has many conclusions but the Lord’s prayer in John 17 is a peculiar kind of finish to something.
FCH Is it not of great importance to learn to listen to the Lord in assembly? In Luke 24: 35 it says, “how he was made known to them in the breaking of bread”. Would not that include the way in which He blessed and gave thanks? It does not just say that He was known to them in the breaking of bread, but how He was known.
JT It is like the allusion in John 6: 23 to “the place where they ate bread after the Lord had given thanks”. That is a beautiful touch for us and implies how He gave thanks.
PHH You would not think that the expression in Zechariah 13: 6, “What are those wounds in thy hands?” would warrant our supposing that any thought of suffering is carried into the eternal conditions, or into the assembly service which relates to what is eternal?
JT No. I do not think so. There is much that must be considered, in a prior sense, to instruct us, but the idea of teaching continuing eternally, I am sure, is not right. Things are to be settled here and we shall reach a finish. It says, “Then cometh the end”, which indicates that things are finished.
Ques Is it like the difference between the destination and the journey to arrive there? Much may occur on the way, but when the end is reached, the journey may not be referred to or reported, but the persons are there in all the value of what has happened.
JT Quite so. You would not expect a finish in a letter like the first letter to Corinth. It is a teaching and a corrective letter, but all in view of a finish. We have to wait for Ephesians to get the finish of things.
Ques In connection with the thought of sufferings, what would you say regarding the reference to the “Lamb ... as slain” in Revelation 5: 6?
JT That is in view of certain things being accomplished in the earth, among men; it is the opening of the book and the breaking of its seals. John wept about that, and whatever John does, as a rule, is to be noted. In Revelation 1 it says he fell down at the Lord’s feet as dead and the Lord did not reprove him for it, but He laid His right hand on him. Then, in the chapter quoted he wept much “because no one had been found worthy to open the book nor to regard it”. But one of the elders says to him, “Do not weep. Behold, the lion which is of the tribe of Juda, the root of David, has overcome so as to open the book, and its seven seals”, Revelation 5: 4, 5. Following that the seals were loosed and the book opened. There were seven seals, and each one carries some instruction for us. When we are dealing with that which gives instruction, we are to note the form and appearance in which the truth is presented to us.
EuR In Revelation 21: 2 we have not the Lamb mentioned but the assembly “coming down out of the heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband”. Is that the eternal thought?
JT I would think so. Things are new; and although the name “Jerusalem” is retained, it would be,
[p. 207] I suppose, to identify, who is the bride adorned; meaning the assembly.
Ques Is it instructive that when Paul writes to the Philippians, where we have the practical working out of the truth, he gets as far as speaking of the Lord’s body of glory? It is as though there is nothing more to come after that.
JT We will be like that. John confirms that in saying “when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is”. It is not as He was, but we shall see Him as He is in glory, in His body of glory.
JSE Is not the understanding of the truth of the bride, perhaps our biggest test? It says in Revelation 21, “I will show thee the bride”, and then at the close the Spirit and the bride say, “Come”. I wondered if it suggested the need amongst us of greater consciousness of our true place in relationship to Christ.
JT We are to learn too where the bride comes into the service of God. It must be worked out through the Lord’s supper, and there can be no doubt that the instruction needed for that is very great. We were remarking that the Lord had selected Mary Magdalene for a purpose, for she represents the exercises needed to arrive at the truth in the assembly viewed femininely. So she says to the Lord, “Rabboni”. We have often had that before us, for the word is a strong one, meaning my teacher, and it is also used in Mark 10: 51. John is particularly full of the idea of teaching. In the first chapter the Lord is called “Teacher”. The two disciples of John, who followed Jesus, said to Him, “Rabbi (which, being interpreted, signifies Teacher), where abidest thou?” They do not say “Rabboni”. That is a thought that runs through John’s gospel, and it culminates, I believe, in Mary’s remark and in the place she gets in the Lord’s mind. It is unique, and she is used as a messenger to the Lord’s brethren, for they are viewed as His [p. 208] brethren.
EB Do you see order in the instruction that has come to us of recent years, first of all in regard to the Lord’s Person, and now in regard to the assembly, and the great service of teaching which has been extended to us?
JT I think there is. There is the sonship of Christ and all that hinges on that, and then there is the truth of the assembly.
Ques Would that be conveyed in an initial way to Paul when the Lord said, “Why persecutest thou me?”
JT That passage was read in order to show that the Lord’s manifesting Himself to us, in view of having part in our circumstances, sufferings and feelings, is not in any corporeal sense, as it will be when He comes for us. When the Lord refers to Himself as Me He is speaking really of the saints. The sufferings, or whatever they may be, are literally experienced by the brethren, and the Lord is having part in them in spirit.
PL “In all their affliction he was afflicted”, Isaiah 63: 9.
JT I think that helps. I would stress that, because it avoids our assuming that the Lord now comes in in a corporeal sense into our circumstances. I do not think He does. I have never heard anybody, or seen anybody, that has seen Him thus. I think it is a question of what He participates in spiritually.
JCT Would chapter 2 of the Song of Songs help at all? It says, “The voice of my beloved! Behold, he cometh”. Then the Lord typically immediately says, “Rise up, my love, my fair one, and come away”.
JT Well, the Song of Songs is a peculiar book in the Old Testament in that sense. The book does not contain the name of God, except in the expression “Flames of Jah”, and that is only once. It confirms what has been said about the Lord’s supper being entirely for the Lord, it is not the Father’s supper; it is the Lord’[p. 209] s supper.
PHH I think we are getting clear as to this matter of sufferings and about the Lord having regard for our circumstances of suffering; that the atoning sufferings are not in view in this connection, but would you say a word as to any thought of suffering involved in His love entering into death. I am thinking, for instance, of the frequent mention of the “myrrh” in the Canticles. Then the Lord says through Paul in relation to the Supper, “this do in remembrance of me”; that is, for the calling me to mind. Would you in the service of that be free to make any mention of sufferings as connected with the Lord’s love in going into death?
JT Well, the symbols before us, the bread and the cup, imply His death; that is to say, they imply that He was in a different state from that in which He is now, for He is now risen and ascended. What we have said about the Lord coming to us implies that He manifests Himself in a spiritual way, so that He takes part with us in spirit in what we are passing through, as in Luke 24. We cannot say that He took part with us, in any sense, in His atoning sufferings; we were not there, those sufferings were entirely His own. It is noticeable that only Matthew and Mark mention the fact of the atoning sufferings of Christ, but they do not mention the memorial of Christ continuing through the Lord’s supper. That does not minimise the importance of Luke or John, but shows that certain things are left out by the Spirit in ministry as required for a certain purpose. It is not that they should be left out entirely from every side of the truth, for we have Matthew and Mark speaking of the atoning sufferings of Christ, in the forsaking by God. That is clearly not to be left out in the teaching and our learning; it is only a question of where it fits, and this too has to be learned. In the Lord’s supper the assembly is in view, and the atoning sufferings were over before the assembly had its existence.
[p. 210] Ques Would you distinguish between sufferings as the proof of love and what we speak of as atoning sufferings? I was thinking of the reference in Genesis 2: 21, “Jehovah Elohim caused a deep sleep to fall upon Man”, but then it adds “and he slept”. Is there some mysterious reference to Adam’s part in that?
JT I do not think God intended that the thought of sufferings should enter into that great type, nor do I think the word sleep implies suffering. It is a question of Christ and the assembly as they are now abstractly. That is to say, it is a sinless condition, the assembly having a sinless history. The assembly has to be apprehended thus, and I believe the record of Adam and Eve implies that, because sin had not yet come in. If the facts there in Genesis 2 were mentioned in chapter 3 then it would be different, but they are not. It is a question of the man and the woman, and it contemplates a sinless history of the assembly. It will appear eternally that her history is sinless. It is not that she is atoned for, as having been in sin, but she is sinless. She is suitable to be the bride of Christ in that sense. She is of Him.
WC What about the Lord’s words, “Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into his glory?”
JT Well, that refers to what was necessary for the bringing out of the truth as to the state of mankind. But God is entitled to treat things abstractly, and He does so. The assembly is an eternal thought with Him, and it has had a sinless condition.
JPH Are sufferings involved, or implied, in 1 Corinthians 11: 23 where Paul speaks of “the night in which he was delivered up”? Is there suffering there in love in sacrificing Himself?
JT Yes. I would not object to that, but, of course, the night in which He was delivered up does not refer to His actual death, but to the conditions of treachery and betrayal before that, [p. 211] when He was apprehended.
JPH His betrayal at the hands of man?
JT Quite so. It would be at the hand of Judas.
PL Does it help to see, in regard of Thomas, that the going over of His sufferings as is suggested in the words, “Bring thy finger here and see my hands” and so on, related to one who had been unbelieving, and not to the assembly in her intelligent setting?
JT It is good to bring that up because we have to divide up John 20 to get the truth. Verse 19 properly treats of the matter of Christ coming into the midst, and saying, “Peace be to you”, having sent a message to them as His brethren. Then He speaks about their mission, as the Father had sent Him so He was sending them, and He breathes into them and says, “Receive the Holy Spirit”. Then it goes on to say “whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted to them; whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained”. And then eight days after we have Thomas coming in. That is another thing; it is really typically the Jew coming in. There are three appearings in the end of John. The first to Mary Magdalene, the second to Thomas, and the third to Peter, and the other six disciples in chapter 21. We have to treat of those three characters in the chapters to get the truth of it. The one that relates to Mary Magdalene and the brethren, I believe, is just what we are talking about now; it is the sinless history of what the assembly is as united to Christ. She is fit to be united to Christ as having no sinful history.
Ques Is the “deep sleep” typical of death?
JT That is just what it is; but, as far as I see, sleep in itself is not typical of sufferings, nor had the time for sufferings come.
ADT Does Acts 1: 3 help, it says, “He presented himself living, after he had suffered”?
JT Yes; after He had suffered. There is no idea of undervaluing the sufferings of Christ, Peter speaks of them, and says, “the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow”, but we are dealing now with [p. 212] the type of Adam and Eve, and that is not a suffering type. There are no sufferings implied in it.
EuR Suffering and glory are rightly brought in in Luke as connected with the actual partaking of the Supper, but the sinless condition belongs to John 20. The hands and the side relate to that.
JT I would think that, the sinless condition belongs to that part of John 20.
Ques The sinless condition, as you speak of it, the man and the woman, is the end arrived at. Is the Lord’s supper rather the journey to it? Although we are in the light of God’s eternal thoughts, there is considerable disparity between what we are actually and what we shall be. I wondered whether things worked out from the local setting in the Supper, and now through God working in us we are able to take up what is properly ours. Have you that in mind?
JT Yes, I have that in mind. There is thus liberty to take up, in the service of God, that we belong to a sinless condition as united to Christ. That is the eternal condition and relation in which the assembly stands to Christ.
ECM Is not that the point in John 20 where the Lord Jesus calls Mary “Woman”? He then adds, “Why dost thou weep?” as though the truth of union could be entered upon.
JT The message implies it too. The Lord says, “Go to my brethren”. It is not simply the disciples, it is my brethren, and say to them, “I ascend to my Father and your Father”.
FCH Luke says, “Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into his glory?”. Would “these things” refer to the particular sufferings that are presented in Luke?
JT Well, may be. There is no doubt, that neither Luke nor John record the atoning sufferings, that is, the forsaking of Christ by God. We have to respect that, as to what it means. There must be some way of [p. 213] looking at the truth and leaving out, at the time, the atoning sufferings of Christ.
PL Does the Passover make that clear, as being distinguished from the Lord’s supper?
JT Quite so.
Ques Would you be free to say a word as to Ephesians 5: 25 “Christ also loved the assembly, and has delivered himself up for it”, as contrasted with Genesis 2?
JT The expression “delivered himself up for it” has to be paid attention to, but there is a difference. John and Luke do not record the forsaking of God, whereas, on the other hand, Matthew and Mark definitely record it and all the sufferings that attended it and were in keeping with it.
WC Does not “delivered himself up” imply His death?
JT Quite so. But then, if we come to the idea of leaving certain things out, that helps us and enables us to leave things, and not to insist on them. We can just leave them as the Spirit of God leaves them, and see why it is that He does so, and why it is that God furnishes us with a type that does not imply sin either in Adam or in Eve.