GOD'S PRESENT AND ETERNAL RELATIONS WITH MEN
GOD’S PRESENT AND ETERNAL RELATIONS WITH MEN
JT The apostle’s mind is affected in writing this, as to the necessity for supplications, prayers, intercessions, thanksgivings, and that they are to be for all men. It is likely that the race is in his mind; the idea of man, or men. I say this because of the word in verse 5, “For God is one, and the mediator of God and men one, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all, the testimony to be rendered in its own times”. I was thinking of the expression all men and what was in the apostle’s mind as priority. He says “first of all ... for all men”; then “for kings and all that are in dignity”. Possibly that is to help us in view of the modern tendency to bring all down to one level and to be disregardful of God’s rights in according rank to different persons, different titles and services. It is no doubt to bring out the idea of man as a being, worked out in the feminine as well as in the masculine, but here, first of all, we get the rights of God in promoting certain ones for wise purposes, and that these gradations of men are to be kept and maintained, so that God should have His way in them.
PL He Himself being “the King of the ages” as Paul says in verse 17 of the previous chapter?
JT Just so.
Ques Do you mean there is such a thing as delegated authority, finding its origin in God, but coming down in public matters amongst men, that must be recognised?
JT Just so. It should be known that the wisdom of God is in keeping with His love, and that whatever provision He would make for men, through kings and those that are in dignity, is really intended to help men.
Ques Why does it say, “I exhort therefore”? Is there a reference in that to what has [p. 235] preceded?
JT I would think so. It is a sequential thought. “The King of the ages” in chapter 1 is a very fine thought, and what comes into one’s mind is the expression ‘Father of the age’ (see footnote to Isaiah 9: 6) and that the Lord Jesus has a place as Father. It does not speak of the general thought of God as Father, but to the paternal care exercised by the Lord Jesus, as indicated in the prophets. The ‘Father of the age’ would bring out what God is in Christ. It shows what Christ will do among men just as they are today, only Satan will be bound and thus limited, and the Spirit of God will have a measure of latitude, for God is going to pour out His Spirit on all flesh:- Clearly it will afford a wonderful time in that sense, even to men as such.
Ques Are you referring to Isaiah 9?
JT Yes. And in chapter 8: 18 it is said, “I and the children that Jehovah hath given me”. The Lord refers in John’s gospel, to the disciples as children and it works out, I would say, in the Lord’s supper too, in what He had as instituting His supper. It was in a family setting, but it had to be worked out later. It has to be worked out according to the wisdom given to Paul, in the letters to Corinth. Then it is to be worked out in the service of God, involving the Father Himself as such and the Spirit too. But first there is the idea of the house that the Lord had, His own house.
PHH In referring to the disciples as children, did the Lord take the place of the father of the house, the house-father? Is that what you are referring to in speaking of the Lord’s supper as a family thought?
JT Just so. He told the disciples to go into the city and that they would be met by a man with a pitcher of water. The Lord then says, “Follow him into the house where he goes in; and ye shall say to the master of the house, The teacher says to thee, Where is the guest-chamber where I may eat the passover with my disciples?” Luke 22: 10, 11. The household thought had arisen undoubtedly from what was current in Israel,
and the Lord’s supper developed from that. It would therefore be a question of Christ’s house in that sense, as He was here on earth.
HBd In Mark He says, “my guest-chamber”.
JT I was thinking of that. Instead of “the guest chamber”, it is “my guest-chamber”, showing that what I was remarking is emphasised. It is a question of the household and how the truth is going to work out. The Lord would bring it out in due time in relation to His supper. It was a household matter in that sense; not in the sense of God being Father there, but Christ being Father. That is to say, He would act in that capacity.
Ques Do you mean that the Supper was really the provision of His care for His own?
JT Quite so. But, as has just been remarked, the Lord says “my disciples”, the idea of the Passover entering into that. And so I would say it was worked out from Exodus 12. Israel’s children would be brought up with that understanding, as they developed into boyhood and manhood. The Lord Himself is called “the boy Jesus”, in Luke 2: 43, and in due time He made it clear that His Father’s claim was paramount with Him. At first it was said “take ... the little child and its mother”, Matthew 2: 20. He was a child, and in Matthew that is the way it is put; it is “the little child and its mother”. The mother would be there because of the little child, and the care that was needed at that time. Luke and Matthew would therefore help us on those lines and show how the truth of Christianity in its public aspect works out here on earth in the Lord’s supper, and eventually in the assembly; in its full sense in the assembly.
PHH Does that mean that alongside of the lordly or dominical thought, there is the liberty and simple affection which is linked with the family in the house?
JT That is what I was thinking, and whether the brethren have been led on in any way into what has been drawn attention to in the first chapter. The apostle refers to himself, and says, “For this reason” (that is, because he did things ignorantly in unbelief) “mercy was shown me, that in me, the first, Jesus Christ might display the whole longsuffering, for a delineation of those about to believe on him to life eternal”. And then, “Now to the King of the ages, the incorruptible, invisible, only God, honour and glory to the ages of ages. Amen”. Then he goes on, “This charge, my child Timotheus”, (here we have the same thought, the parental thought), “I commit to thee, according to the prophecies as to thee preceding, in order that thou mightest war by them the good warfare, maintaining faith and a good conscience; which last some, having put away, have made shipwreck as to faith; of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have delivered to Satan, that they may be taught by discipline not to blaspheme”.
JSE Is the allusion to “the King of the ages” intended to register in our minds the sense of the supremacy of God, and does the opening of this chapter suggest that all delegated authority is under God’s hand for the preservation and liberation of the saints in relation to His matters?
JT I would say that, and especially the element of discipline. We have two persons here who made shipwreck and were delivered to Satan, “that they may be taught by discipline not to blaspheme”. We may count on that in God’s government, now, in regard of our young, and how they are to be taught by discipline.
AB Would this thought as to God being “the King of the ages” run into eternity or would it be limited to the millennial age?
JT Well, it is more the latter. Of course, we have a term that is rather like that in Ephesians 3: 14, where it says, “For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom every family in the heavens and on earth is named, in order that he may give you according to the riches of his glory, to be [p. 238] strengthened with power by his Spirit in the inner man; that the Christ may dwell, through faith, in your hearts, being rooted and founded in love, in order that ye may be fully able to apprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and depth and height; and to know the love of the Christ which surpasses knowledge; that ye may be filled even to all the fulness of God. But to him that is able to do far exceedingly above all which we ask or think, according to the power which works in us, to him be glory in the assembly in Christ Jesus unto all generations of the age of ages”. That, I think, leads us on into eternal conditions, which I would not connect exactly with “King of the ages” for that is another line of thought. Ephesians 3, I think, brings out what was in the apostle’s mind, first as to what he knew as to the mystery, and then how every family in the heavens and on the earth was named of the Father. It is every family, but then the one family that is in mind is the assembly, “the assembly in Christ Jesus”.
PL Do the two expressions fit into the two epistles? Where the house of God is introduced in its provisional aspect, we have the reference in Timothy to “the King of the ages”, while the “habitation of God in the Spirit”, in Ephesians, brings it into its eternal setting, and hence the reference to “the age of ages”.
JT I think the ages in Ephesians 3: 21, must be a suggestion of what is eternal to fit into our minds so as to enable us to compass what is in view for us as to the assembly. If the word ages were set by itself, or the word ages, then it would be more limited, and probably, it would allude to the millennial period, but the millennial period, in itself, must work out in some way into eternal conditions. It is not clearly laid down for us, but 1 Corinthians 15 says that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God”. We have to understand what that means.
Ques Do the words, “Then cometh the end” (1 Corinthians 15: 24), suggest that what is worked out in [p. 239] various ages will find a certain culmination in the millennium; whereas the passage in Ephesians 3 says the “generations of the age of ages”? Do you think that makes a distinction?
JT I think so, though I am not so sure as to be dogmatic. For a good many years, perhaps since the time of the Bristol meetings in 1931, the thought that this passage involves eternity has been developed. I think it does.
Ques Do I understand the expression “now to the King of the ages” has in mind all the past ages that have been referred to in the earlier part of Ephesians 3; what has been written from the ages or throughout the ages? Does not that find a certain culmination in the millennium and will it not be demonstrated at that time?
JT I think that is good. So if we use the term ‘the Father of the age’; it says “The everlasting Father” in the Authorised Version, but literally it is ‘the Father of the age’, undoubtedly it is the age called the millennial age that is in mind. He is to be a Father, not in the sense of a father to his family, or to his son, but rather in the sense of care, which flows from wisdom and experience. Christ will exercise authority in that sense. It was well used in America many years ago; Washington was said to be the father of his country. God says, that Eliakim “shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah”, Isaiah 22: 21. The youth are to be brought up among us, and the brethren have great advantage in that they have this light from God as regards their children, starting from the very outset; the Holy Spirit being here in this particular age that we speak of as Christianity. The children of believing parents are even said to be holy, they have that advantage. All the instructions to the children of believing parents ought to be based on that light, taking advantage of what there is, what God is pleased to give us to use. What a word He gives us in saying, that our children are holy! The Lord Jesus was a Child. Speaking reverently, He was a Babe [p. 240] and before He was born He is called “that holy thing”. It says in Luke “that holy thing”, but that is a substantial thought. That could not be said of the children of believing parents; such are only relatively holy. God is pleased to give us that privilege so that we are able to view our children according to that word. But then it is a question of how we bring them up and what instruction we are able to give them, and what example we are able to show them.
PHH Does the term in Timothy, “our Saviour God”, fit in with these thoughts of the King? In Titus also the term Saviour is used many times, whereas in Ephesians, which you have been speaking of, it is more God as the Father. Would the Saviour have to do more with the external side of things, where prayer is so much needed?
JT There is a reference in chapter 6 that might be touched on in regard of that. It says in verse 12, “Strive earnestly in the good conflict of faith. Lay hold of eternal life, to which thou hast been called, and hast confessed the good confession before many witnesses. I enjoin thee before God who preserves all things in life, and Christ Jesus who witnessed before Pontius Pilate the good confession, that thou keep the commandment spotless, irreproachable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ; which in its own time the blessed and only Ruler shall show, the King of those that reign, and Lord of those that exercise lordship; who only has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light; whom no man has seen, nor is able to see; to whom be honour and eternal might. Amen”. That passage, I think, ought to be considered in connection with the first chapter. The “blessed and only Ruler”, in chapter 6, is God Himself in His eternal relations.
PHH It gives us the impression of the greatness of the One who is our Saviour God. Is that thought to be before us in our prayers? It says, “this is good and acceptable before our Saviour God”.
JT All these references that we have now touched on enter into this first epistle to Timothy, and they work out in the idea of man, and then absolute rule in God. First there is a King and then the “blessed and only Ruler”. He is the One who is to show, as it says, “which in its own time the blessed and only Ruler shall show, the King of those that reign, and Lord of those that exercise lordship; who only has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light; whom no man has seen, nor is able to see; to whom be honour and eternal might. Amen”. So that in the “Amen” here we have reached, I would think, a fulness and a definiteness in the subject we are dealing with. It is all working out in God Himself.
Rem So that His eternal glory and majesty are not, in any sense, diminished by the approach He has made in grace and mercy as a Saviour. They remain unimpaired and will do so eternally.
JT Quite so.
JSE Do you make the expression “eternal might” in chapter 6 more extensive than the “King of the ages” in chapter 1?
JT Well, I think “eternal might” is one of the strongest expressions you can get, bearing on this subject. The king of the ages is not quite as strong, I would say, as eternal might. Some of these expressions occur in the first hymn in our book, but it calls, for adjustment, so that the thoughts may be clearly distinguished. What the first verse of the hymn speaks of is attributed in Scripture to God as such, whereas what is said in verses 2 and 3 refers to the Lord Jesus as in manhood. Generally, however, the hymn seems to be sung as though all referred directly to the Lord Jesus.
PHH In the light of what you have said, perhaps we should have to reconsider the term “Father of Eternity”?
JT It really is the ‘Father of the age’, I believe, and would allude to Christ’s care for that world, His fatherly care, not in the sense of God’s care, but as [p. 242] the Messiah and the place He will have in the coming world.
Ques Does not that verse (Isaiah 9:6) refer to Christ in manhood throughout, “Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder”? It refers to the place the Lord has as Man in the millennium.
JT The whole passage depicts the Lord in manhood, the title “the Father of Eternity” included.
PL Filling out the great patriarchal thought in the fulness of His Person?
JT That is right. But as Man here, and as proper to the Messiah.
Rem The whole passage reads, “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder; and his name is called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity [or Father of the Age], Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with judgment and with righteousness, from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of Jehovah of hosts will perform this”, Isaiah 9: 6, 7.
JT That shows that it is Christ as Man that is in mind and yet these wonderful terms are attributable to Him.
WC Is the expression something like what Joseph says, in Genesis 45: 8 “God ... has made me a father to Pharaoh”.
JT The very same thought.
WC That means that God had appointed him father on behalf of Pharaoh, so that he is over all his affairs and people.
JT Joseph’s moral greatness suggested to Pharaoh that he should give him the supreme place in the kingdom.
[p. 243] Ques With regard to your remarks as to the first hymn, is your thought that the kingdom of God continues to eternity?
JT I suppose so. We would have to analyse the words, but 1 Corinthians 15 states that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God”. We have to work out what that really means and what a process the saved inhabitants of the coming age, what is called the millennium, will have to go through so as to bring them up to the level of eternal conditions.
Ques Would you say that the assembly reaches her eternal conditions before the millennium?
JT Quite so. As soon as we are raised and glorified, we reach eternal conditions. The eternal conditions imply Christ glorified, not simply Christ as He was in the forty days here on earth, but Christ glorified, in the condition called “his body of glory”, Philippians 3: 21.
Ques Even Christ in the forty days was not in flesh and blood conditions, was He? He says, “Flesh and bones”, Luke 24: 39. Is there not that distinction?
JT There is. What could be said as to Him showing His hands and His side? The question is whether these conditions are retained eternally, or whether they are not just used to bring out certain things at the beginning, so that our minds should be formed accordingly. We are dealing with things that are very great, and one would be very careful, lest one should, in any way, mislead the brethren; but I think these things are worthy of thought.
AB Would you distinguish between the earthly side of the millennial period and the heavenly side and the part the assembly will have in the millennial day?
JT Quite so. John says in Revelation 21: 1, “I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea exists no more”. We have there something that is after the millennial conditions, therefore we are entitled to think of the assembly coming down, for John also says, “I saw [p. 244] the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of the heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband”. Then he goes on, “And I heard a loud voice out of the heaven, saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he shall tabernacle with them”. The tabernacle of God thus may be rightly identified as the assembly in this passage. When we are raised with Christ, not according to Colossians 2, but according to 1 Thessalonians 4, when the Lord descends from heaven with a shout, and the dead in Christ rise first, and those that are alive and remain are changed and caught up to meet the Lord in the air, to be forever with Him, that is the final condition into which the assembly is coming, that is the heavenly side of things. So that we are entitled to regard ourselves, that is as those who are of the assembly, as the first family in God’s mind. The assembly comes into these conditions first, and then other families come in doubtless in the millennial day.
PHH Does the testimony of all that have some influence upon us now? I am thinking of the remaining verses in Revelation 21, which do not seem to be quite on the same level as the two verses you have read. Would you say they bring in the testimony of an eternal state of things bearing upon the present? The eternal state of things is then to be powerfully before our minds at the present time.
JT That is the meaning, I would say, of all testimony, for if it is presented to us, it is to form us. Therefore if we are to be formed for eternity, now is the forming time, and it is through our minds and affections.
PHH Is it not right to say that the truth, some years ago, bore largely upon the world to come; but are we being helped now a step further into the influence of eternal conditions?
JT I think that is right. I think the Lord is helping us in dealing with the truth in dependence on [p. 245] the Spirit. The truth thus gradually takes form in the minds of the brethren generally.
Ques Does the promise, “I will give to him that thirsts of the fountain of the water of life freely”, imply that the Spirit in His service would bring us up to that point, to eternity?
JT The whole passage, I think, would be in that line. Then verse 9 is to bring us back to millennial conditions, but in the heavenly side of them. The first eight verses of chapter 21 are to bring out what we are coming into presently. “He that overcomes shall inherit these things, and I will be to him God, and he shall be to me son”. Verse 9 shows the place that the assembly has in the millennium; it is the assembly above; it is not on earth.
Ques Would things work out that way in principle now? If we touch the heavenly side of the truth, as associated with Christ and as answering to His heart, then as we turn to the sphere of administration, we do so as conscious of the place that we have in heaven?
JT Yes. The idea of administration is more emphasised in these verses beginning at verse 9 than anywhere else in Scripture. They are connected with the assembly in its bearing towards the millennial world.
AB Would that have a present bearing today on our position in the house of God?
JT It does. All testimony is intended to affect us, the Spirit of God bearing witness to the truth.
AB In verse 3 of chapter 1, Paul says to Timothy, “I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus”. Does that have a bearing on the epistle, Timothy really being an Ephesian?
JT Very good. Ephesus was in the apostle’s mind in writing the epistle to Timothy.
PL The saints, as together in love in the light of divine purpose, furnish a congenial atmosphere for the development of the truth of the assembly in its provisional setting [p. 246] here.
JT Quite so. You thus have statements as to the napkins taken from the apostle’s body and what they could effect. These statements belong to that period and show the superior quality of things then and what could be said of that period.
Ques Seeing that Ephesus is in view, with all the privilege that belongs to the light that shines there, is it important that, in the maintenance of things here, the good conscience is mentioned twice? In verse 5 of chapter 1, “But the end of what is enjoined, is love out of a pure heart and a good conscience and unfeigned faith”. Then in verse 18, Paul says, “This charge, my child Timotheus, I commit to thee, according to the prophecies as to thee preceding, in order that thou mightest war by them the good warfare, maintaining faith and a good conscience; which last some, having put away, have made shipwreck as to faith”. Is this a reference to the moral state that is to accompany the heavenly light that is shining?
JT Just so. Even if we are not formed up to it fully, yet if we have the light with purpose and honesty of heart, God will own that. He will own the light that we have and He will credit us with it. So that light in itself becomes power at the very outset. The formation that will be needed for eternity will come about in due time, but light comes in first.
FPS Would you say what you had in mind in referring to the napkins taken from Paul’s body, and how it affects us today?
JT Well, it only affects us as reverting back to it. That is to say, we are reminded of the superior power of the testimony at that time. It helps you to think of it.
PL So that you cherish the truth set out in its grandeur in pristine days, as in 1 Timothy, and stand by it in the evil days of 2 Timothy.
JT Yes. Then our minds are to be prepared for the eternal conditions, because we are coming [p. 247] into these anyway. Even although we are now in a day of small things, we are coming into them, because God can do things quickly. He has His own mind and pattern to complete, and He can do things in the twinkling of an eye. What He has thus in His mind will surely come about. Therefore the importance of having these things in our minds and being able to think of them, and speak of them, even although we may not come up to them fully in our affections and understanding.
PHH Would you mind saying a word about “For God is one, and the mediator of God and men one”?
JT It is clearly better and more correct to say that “God is one”, than to say “there is one God”. To say that there is one God is, of course, the truth, but God being one implies the three Persons in infinite unity.
PHH Does the further statement, “and the mediator of God and men one, the man Christ Jesus”, mean that the “man Christ Jesus” is in perfect unity with God?
JT Quite. What we were saying at the beginning, I think, is true, that man, as a being, is in mind in this chapter, and all is worked out in Christ being the Mediator between God and men. Humanity in Christ, the Man Christ Jesus, is the thing to have in mind. If we are to understand humanity at all according to God it must be apprehended in Christ.
PL Could we have a word on manhood and womanhood in relation to the approach to God by men and the setting forth of God in the deportment and dress, the modesty and discretion of women?
JT The word man here in verse 8 is man in contrast to woman, and not simply man as a race. Hence woman has her place and may be compared with him, and so the holiness according to God may be worked out in this, even to the birth of children. Clearly the idea of holiness is in mind. We might just run over the passage from verse 8, “I will therefore that the men pray in every place” (meaning men and not women), “lifting up pious hands, without wrath or reasoning. In like manner also that the women in decent deportment and dress adorn themselves with modesty and discretion, not with plaited hair and gold, or pearls, or costly clothing, but what becomes women making profession of the fear of God, by good works. Let a woman learn in quietness in all subjection; but I do not suffer a woman to teach nor to exercise authority over man” (again the same word is used for man in contrast to woman), “but to be in quietness; for Adam was formed first” (that is an important matter), “Adam was formed first, then Eve: and Adam was not deceived; but the woman, having been deceived, was in transgression”. All this is brought in to develop what is comely in both sides, but especially in woman.
PL If women are to be silent in the assembly, are they, as in modesty of attire, peculiarly privileged to speak to God silently?
JT That is bordering on 1 Corinthians 11, where we have the headship of God brought down to Christ, and then to man, and then to woman. That is a very important matter as leading up to the truth of the assembly in that epistle. This epistle evidently is more from the standpoint of Ephesus, that is what was in mind in this first letter. Timothy, as the first chapter tells us, was left at Ephesus for a purpose; it was that the truth of God should be worked out there. It was to be the great assembly of the truth, setting out the primal thoughts of the truth, as seen in the seven assemblies in Asia. The truth of the assembly was to be worked out in Ephesus.
Ques What was in your mind when you emphasised that “Adam was formed first, then Eve”?
JT It was just to bring out, that although woman failed, for she was the first in transgression, yet the man is brought into it. He did not transgress of himself, he [p. 249] was brought into it. But then he is able to name Eve. That is, her title henceforth is not to be Woman, but Eve, “because”, it says, “she is the mother of all living”, Genesis 3: 20. It is a very important thing that the idea of “the mother of all living” should be in our minds, and that Eve should have that place. It would mean that there must be a process gone through to bring out what is in accord with eternity, the mind of God having eternity in view. That would mean that the idea of man and woman, in the ordinary sense, gives way to Christ and the assembly, and that all below, that is such as the earthly side, must go through a process which would mean that they are in accord, in some sense, with the heavenly side, because “flesh and blood”, it says, “cannot inherit the kingdom of God”.
AM It elevates the present time of working things out in relation to the ways of God and our part in it.
JT It does. We are living in a great period, and we are soon to be conformed to Christ’s body of glory. We will have bodies like His, so as to come up to the level of the divine mind. The Lord is working on those lines to bring us in intelligent affection up to the very highest level of the mind of God. When the time comes for it, God will operate so that everything is in accord with His own mind. It may happen in an instant because God is God.
PL The persons are being formed now, suited to be clothed with that body of glory.
JT Quite so. We are to be inwardly and outwardly in complete accord with the divine mind. Paul says, “We have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens”, 2 Corinthians 5: 1.
Ques In the meantime, has not God’s ordering in creation to be observed? In spite of equality on the spiritual side, and what God has in His mind, we cannot, in the meantime, go beyond, say, a scripture like this.
[p. 250] JT While keeping that in mind, we are also keeping in mind the light that God is furnishing. He has His own mind about everything and there will be nothing out of accord with it. Not one will be missing, and not only the persons, but the state will be according to the mind of God. I am certain that there will be no discrepancy whatever.
WC Does the expression in Hebrews “the consummation of the ages” (Hebrews 9: 26) describe this present period, in which God is working out now all the objectives He has had in mind from the beginning?
JT Quite so. The passage in 1 Corinthians 10: 11, “upon whom the ends of the ages are come”, brings us into this.
GWB John says, in his first epistle, “the darkness is passing and the true light already shines”. Has that any bearing on it?
JT Quite so. “The darkness is passing”. It is not viewed as having passed, but what we are speaking of means that it will pass. When we have a new heavens and a new earth, it will have passed, and Revelation 21 contemplates that the full result will be brought out and will shine in the administrative side. God will have an administration in the millennial day in keeping with His mind, and the persons who will be in the administration will be such as ourselves, those who form the assembly, because the reference is to ourselves. The measurement of the administrative side is really the measurement of the assembly; it is a cube or solid measurement. It refers not to mere profession, but to what is solid and in holiness.
PHH In 2 Corinthians 5 where the apostle says, “We have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens”, he also says, “Now he that has wrought us for this very thing is God”. A statement like that would help to bring us into line, in our minds, with God’s eternal [p. 251] end.
JT Quite so. It says at the end of that chapter, “We henceforth know no one according to flesh”. The question is, How are you going to arrive at that? Then it goes on, “But if even we have known Christ according to flesh, yet now we know him thus no longer”. We must understand what that means.
PHH Do we take the ground that “the old things have passed away; behold all things have become new: and all things are of the God who has reconciled us”.
JT That is the abstract thought of it. It says, “if any one be in Christ, there is a new creation”. It is not exactly that he is that, but there is such a thing as that, and that is all abstract.
Rem That enters into our calculations as we view one another.
JT We have to learn to think as Scripture does. Literally, you cannot say that we do not know anyone after the flesh. Paul could say that, as being governed by the truth in the abstract.
Ques To Philadelphia the Lord speaks of “the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem”. Does that refer to eternal conditions?
JT That is to bring those things into the actual state of things contemplated in Philadelphia.