SPIRITUAL FORMATION FOR ASSEMBLY SERVICE (3)
SPIRITUAL FORMATION FOR ASSEMBLY SERVICE (3)
JT The idea of combat in this chapter affords opportunity to speak of what occasions it. Satan invaded the garden of Eden and then Israel, for he specially attacked Israel in Jerusalem, and now he attacks the assembly. A wide sphere of enquiry therefore enters into this reading, as to the occasion of conflict, or combat. The word really involves physical war, but the spiritual thought is in mind, although it is not enlarged on as in Ephesians. We are told there that “our struggle is not against blood and flesh, but against principalities ... against spiritual power of wickedness in the heavenlies”. There is the suggestion of what is called “the expanse” in creation, as it was after the chaotic condition had arisen. To make it practical, we have to consider why Satan should find occasion to invade the assembly, for it is said that the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it (see Matthew 16: 18), and that is a comforting thought. At the same time the idea of the expanse, which God called Heavens in the first of Genesis, reminds us that Satan personally has made the attack and has found some success. It thus becomes a question of where the attack is made and why. In a general way the Creator resented the interference, and that is shown in the negative wording of the account of the second day. There is nothing said about its being good, although the general fact remains, according to the last verse of Genesis 1, that what was done was very good. But there is a reserve. The chapter now before us opens up much to instruct us as to the attack which is being made, and which occasions combat. The allusion would be to an arena, and that there is a danger of damage, because this chapter says, “I would have you know what combat I have for you”. We may thus locate the position, for it [p. 45] was in view of the protection of the gentiles, but particularly, as the apostle goes on to say, “as many as have not seen my face in flesh; to the end that their hearts may be encouraged, being united together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the full knowledge [p. 51] of the mystery of God; in which are hid all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge”. There is a suggestion of the need of hiding in view of a possible attack of an adversary, as the Lord Himself, in the gospel, says, “An enemy hath done this”, Matthew 13: 28. We have thus just to locate who the enemy is and where the attack is or has been made. Then it is a question of who is meeting it, or how it is to be met, because of the treasures in the mystery. It is to be kept in mind that the mystery involves that things are to be hidden and not displayed in any natural sort of way; indeed, the natural mind is not to be brought into it. Wherever the natural mind is active, we may be sure there will be an attack.
HWA Do you think Hezekiah had some sense of that when he saw that the enemy was minded to get to Jerusalem; he saw that Jerusalem was the objective?
JT Yes. Later, however, he neglected protection, comforting himself that there would be peace in his day, and he showed the princes of Babylon all his house, and that is just the point in question now.
AM Would the references to Laodicea in this epistle indicate the measure of success that the enemy had?
JT If we compare our remarks with the Lord’s words in dealing with the different assemblies, we might say that Satan had an opportunity in Laodicea; but, of course, the great opportunity was in Thyatira. Therefore, it is a question of whether we should now introduce the Lord’s words in His addresses which come down the line historically to the Romish system. Our chapter hardly leads to that, nor do I think that Laodicea in itself would suggest it. The seven assemblies were in the Lord’s mind and He was in the midst of them according to Revelation. He was there, however, in altered garb and with His affections shut up. That is how He is presented in the assemblies, according to the first chapter of Revelation. So John says, “I turned back to see the voice”, which is a striking thing, because it is a question of hearing really, although he turned back to see. It was a question of what was to be seen, and so it says, “I saw seven golden lamps, and in the midst of the seven lamps one like the Son of man, clothed with a garment reaching to the feet, and girt about at the breasts with a golden girdle: his head and hair white like white wool, as snow; and his eyes as a flame of fire; and his feet like fine brass, as burning in a furnace; and his voice as the voice of many waters”. That is to say the Lord is dealing in Revelation with a later period historically in the testimony and Laodicea is in mind with the other assemblies. There were seven and Laodicea is the last of them. It is not in mind as attacked, or in itself an object of attack, it has still the status of an assembly. We thus have to question where the attack began and that raises the whole question as to how Satan gets in and how he is to be viewed. The cause of the combat requires searching because it was primarily through Eve, the feminine side, and we might say, therefore, that the assembly herself, typically, occasioned the opportunity.
PL Would “persuasive speech”, verse 4, link on with Satan’s approach to Eve?
JT Yes. No doubt the allusion is to the Greek ability to speak, because speech is characteristically a feature of Greek. It suggests that part of humanity which is skilled in the sense of speech or language, and this itself ought to be in our minds. We are apt to make much of anything we have of that kind, whereas it affords an opportunity for the devil. No doubt the Greek ability to speak was in the apostle’s mind when he says, “That no one may delude you by persuasive speech”. Paul’s speech was said to be contemptible. It was something [p. 47] that the devil would attack reproachfully or derisively, and that is a thing to be avoided. If brethren are defective in their speech, or in their language, it is not a matter that should concern us very much. It is the delusive character, I think, of Greek oratory and its place in the history of humanity, that Paul speaks of as persuasive.
HFN Would you help us in regard to the distinctive features of the mystery as presented in Colossians? First that “in which are hid all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge” and then the thought of the mystery as “Christ in you the hope of glory”. Would the truth of the mystery be the great bulwark and preservative against all these satanic attacks?
JT Well, that is going too far, I would think, because we are dealing here with the negative side, and that which occasions the attack. It is a question of speech and what the enemy has found in delusive speech. It is not simply what is hidden; indeed, I would think the hiding was necessitated by the attack. The mystery is a matter that God has had in reserve so as to hide things. For instance, parabolical ministry is to hide the truth from certain conditions, that is, from those who would make much of speech and language.
Ques It is said of the apostles that they were unlettered men. Is that the character of person that the Lord Jesus would use?
JT Well, that is the reason why I referred to it. Our brother was bringing in the question of the mystery which, of course, is a prime matter here, but I would say the question of speech is the point of attack. Therefore, as has been alluded to, the apostles were not lettered men. They were not men characterised by learning, whereas the schools and colleges are all based on learning.
PHH Is that why presently, it says, “lead you away as a prey through philosophy and vain deceit, according to the teaching of men”? Does the speech tend to become teaching to lead man [p. 48] away?
JT Well, it tends to make teaching attractive. Hence people speak of oratory. They say, What oratory; What ability in speaking! Whereas, in truth, Paul is not characterised by that; he does not speak like that. If we are to take his opponents, they said that his speech was contemptible, but nevertheless, God used it for conversions. He used it to build up His people.
GCS They brought in the orator to attack Paul as to the resurrection.
WH Moses, himself, was one who was skilled in words and deeds of the Egyptians, but he had to learn to speak in a different way, had he not?
JT Quite so. He said to Jehovah he could not speak. That is something we all have to come to in regard of divine things, for we must not build ourselves up on any ability in regard of speech. Not indeed that speech is not to be employed, because God is the author of speech and the power of speech, as He said to Moses, “Who hath made man’s mouth?”. God made it. But then the question is whether that is meant in this reference to delusive speech. It is not simply a question of the faculty of speech in man, but the use of skilled oratory to build up the world.
WC It is said to Thyatira as to Jezebel that, “she who calls herself prophetess, and she teaches and leads astray my servants to commit fornication and eat of idol sacrifices”.
JT Well, just so. That system makes much of it. They leave nothing undone that is needed to build it up, and if speech is needed, they will make much of speech. Hence, in their system, learning is a great matter with them.
Ques When Paul speaks of his own entrance to the Corinthians, does he give speech according to God? “And I, when I came to you, brethren, came not in excellency of word, or wisdom, announcing to you the testimony of God”. Is that his own estimate of how he was among [p. 49] them?
JT Quite so.
Rem He also says in Corinthians, that five words with the understanding is better than many in an unknown tongue.
JT Well, of course, an unknown tongue is another thing to be avoided. There are those who pretend to that, whereas simplicity is the thought and the ability that God gives.
Ques Does the serpent being more crafty than any other animal link on with the delusive speech?
JT I would think so. It would be what he employed, and the wording of what he said to the woman is given.
Ques Does the first attack of the enemy in Acts 5 bear on this? It says of Ananias and Sapphira that they lied to the Holy Spirit. Would not that be the climax in a way of the “persuasive speech”?
JT Well, it is a question of whether lying is specially persuasive. Of course, it might be. Public speakers, however, in supporting some particular cause, use oratory, and skilful expressions; they say one thing, yet hide others by their words. They have to have recourse to this sort of thing, but such a course is to be refused among the Lord’s people. Simplicity is the thought; so that, although Paul was a simple person, he knew the truth.
Ques Is the origin of “persuasive speech” found in Satan in Eden?
JT That is just what has been remarked and that the actual wording is given. It should be noticed that he is never called Satan at the outset. Although it is what is attributed to him later, and Satan is known later, he has not such a name at the outset. It is Satan as among the Greeks and I would say, particularly among the Jews. The ability of speaking so as to deceive is in mind and what the Greek language is capable of. It brings in mere learning in religious things. Mary called the Lord “Rabboni”, and it is said that it was Hebrew,
[p. 50] though possibly it is not pure Hebrew but the current dialect. That is to say, she would be simple. The simple vernacular, I think, is the thing. The simple way in which the truth is learned and to be ministered is the point, for we are not assuming to be anything. If we are dependent in our words, God will give us the mouth and wisdom that is needed so that we find means of expressing the thing that we have in our hearts.
ECM Moses says, “I am not eloquent ... for I am slow of speech”, but Jehovah says, “I will be with thy mouth, and will teach thee what thou shalt say”.
JT Very good. The expression “with thy mouth” is very beautiful. How God can be with us, the most ordinary of people. It is a question of those whom He takes up, and dependence on Himself in them. It is a question of what God can do for us, for He can do wonders through anyone on the ground of their being dependent.
Rem “It shall be given to you in that hour”, Matthew 10: 19.
JT Just so, “in that hour”.
Rem At the third temptation, the Lord calls him Satan. He does not call him Satan before. I was thinking of what you said as to the name that is given to him when he discloses himself.
JT Just so. He is called “the tempter”, which is a characteristic and right word.
Now there is much more in the chapter than this negative thought, although, of course, the question of speech that may be used in the ministry is important, because that is what concerns us. Then the passage says, “For I would have you know what combat I have for you, and those in Laodicea, and as many as have not seen my face in flesh”; showing that he was at that disadvantage, as not having seen them in the flesh, “to the end that their hearts may be encouraged, being united together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the full knowledge of the mystery of God; in which are hid all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge”. We have to consider now these treasures, how they are hidden, and how we are to hold them; because when we speak of the assembly we must be practical and regard ourselves as of it. It is a question of whether we are using any methods or ways in our preaching or teaching that the enemy could use; methods that would not hide the mysteries of God which are spoken of here. It says, “in which are hid all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge”. That is to say, we are to be the custodians of the treasures, I mean the assembly is, because it is the assembly that is alluded to in the word mystery.
PHH Would the thought of stewardship come in here? Paul says, “servants of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God”, and then, “it is sought in stewards, that a man be found faithful”, 1 Corinthians 4: 1, 2. Would faithfulness there include the thought of knowing how to hide and not bring out a thing in a way to be attacked?
JT Yes. It bears, of course, on those who form the assembly, because the assembly has no existence without us. It is a question of persons, and we, that is, Christians, are the persons. It therefore becomes especially a question of ourselves and those who minister, whether they minister in the gospel or minister the truth of the assembly, or the truth generally. It if a question of how we do it and whether we are in any danger of using delusive speech or anything that would make the truth popular. The Lord, in introducing the great thought of the assembly in Matthew 16, makes a special reference to what was said. “Then he enjoined on his disciples that they should say to no man that he was the Christ”. That is, He enjoined a hiding principle and it was for the disciples to pay attention to that.
JM Would what Paul says in 2 Corinthians 1: 12 bear on this matter of speaking? “For our boasting is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and sincerity before God, (not in fleshly wisdom but in God’s grace,) we have had our conversation in the world, and more abundantly towards you”. And then in the end of chapter 2, “For we do not, as the many, make a trade of the word of God; but as of sincerity, but as of God, before God, we speak in Christ”.
JT Very good. That was in one’s mind indeed, because Paul enlarges there on this very point. Of course, it bears on all of us because, after all, he is the model for us under Christ. The Lord has taken him on to use him in that sense, as representative of Himself, as he says, “Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ”, 1 Corinthians 11: 1.
EEP Would you say that Paul came under the influence of this proper speech when Ananias addressed him as “Saul, brother”?
JT The point is that he was a brother.
HFN Would Paul’s culminating speech be in Ephesians 5, “I speak as to Christ, and as to the assembly”?
JT Well, it was to bring authority in. What was in his mind was Christ and the assembly, because Adam and Eve had been alluded to, and they really spoke of Christ and the assembly. This shows how typical speech may be used, but the point is to make it clear that it is typical for the real thing is in what is spiritual. The antitype must be in spiritual language.
WC Would Delilah’s persistency with Samson, vexing him so that he should tell her that in which his strength lay, remind us of the peril of the system and the feminine side of deception?
JT Just so, Satan using the feminine to deceive.
EuR Would you say a word as to the contrast between “the full knowledge of the mystery” in verse 2 and then “in which are hid all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge”, in verse 3. We get “full knowledge” and “knowledge”. What is implied in full knowledge?
JT Well, the word involves completeness. So that we have, in Ephesians 4: 11, an allusion to ministry,
where it says, “he has given some apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists, and some shepherds and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints; with a view to the work of the ministry, with a view to the edifying of the body of Christ; until we all arrive at the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, at the full-grown man”. The word ‘full knowledge’ here in verse 2 of our chapter would, of course, have that in mind; “unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the full knowledge of the mystery of God”. The apostle was about to say that all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge were hidden in it and it was important that not only should they have that knowledge but have it in a full way. That, of course, is a great point now with us, for we are to be accurate and have things in their fulness and completeness, as the Scripture teaches them. We are not to be bringing out things that are not in Scripture, for we can only meet any evil or error by the truth.
AHG You have spoken of the Father’s activities, but here it is “the mystery of God”. What would be involved in that expression?
JT It is called “the mystery of Christ” elsewhere. It is to bring out the full thought, I would think, particularly in view of what we have been saying as to the object of the attack, the means of it and where the thing happens. God, I believe, is the fullest thought to be applied. If we are dealing with the mystery it is a question of God, for we are led back to the beginning of things. The Colossians were in need of all these things, because they were exposed to vain deceit. That is to say, the allusion would doubtless first be to Greek philosophy, and then as we go on in the chapter, to religious features. These two became the means of the attack, so that it would be Greek philosophy and Judaism that the chapter aims at.
E J. “Through wisdom is a house built, and by understanding it is established; and by knowledge are [p. 54] the chambers filled with all precious and pleasant substance”, Proverbs 24: 4.
JT That is a very good reference as to how a house is built.
Ques Would you think that what Paul says, “that their hearts may be encouraged, being united together in love”, is a necessary condition before these things are entered upon?
JT Well, I think so. You have in mind that love is the point?
Ques And “being united together” in it. I wondered whether we needed the brethren to enter upon these things?
JT Just so. I think the Lord is helping the brethren in these matters. I have been greatly struck by the way that sympathy for one another among the brethren is called forth in all parts of the earth. It is a notable evidence, I believe, of the work of God and I believe sympathy should, and normally does, precede active love. Sufferings and the like are in mind and they draw out the sympathies of the saints, and then love becomes in evidence, and the building up in love, for love always edifies.
PHH Are there certain limitations mentioned here in the word ‘not’? For instance, “according to the elements of the world, and not according to Christ”, (verse 8). And then later, “not holding fast the head”; (verse 19). Then in the next chapter, “not on the things that are on the earth”; (verse 2). Are our minds helped into positive things by the limitations of the word ‘not’?
JT Quite so. I have often thought of that as agreeing with the division of the land of Canaan, because Colossians is working up to the idea of the division of the land, though they were coming short of it. The word ‘not’ would mean the shutting out of the world, so that our boundaries are limited to ourselves. It is a question of the brethren and their being united together [p. 55] in love.
PHH In relation to that, would you say something about the fulness of the Godhead dwelling in Christ? I do not know if I follow your thought, but I was wondering whether the positiveness and fulness of what is in Christ bodily and our holding the Head are the great preservatives against the attacks.
JT Well, going back to the idea of boundaries, and limitations, and companionships and associations, the idea of not (not on things below) is of great importance. Even in regard to the distance between a man’s house or himself and the meeting which he should attend. These boundaries in themselves are not hallowed; it is only a question of what relates to the brethren, to ourselves, that things become hallowed, and so here “you” — “your hearts”; that is, yourselves “being united together in love”. Thus the sphere that belongs to us and in which we are to operate and to live is the circle of the brethren. Perhaps you will enlarge on what you had in mind as to headship, linking it on with what I have attempted to say as to ourselves, and our being united together in love.
PHH I was thinking of the word fulness; the “fulness of the Godhead” being mentioned as in Him bodily, and then “ye are complete [or filled full] in him”. Would that mean, that in regard to limitations which the refusing of persuasive speech, delusion and so on would impose we have full supply in Christ of what is needed and we need go outside of Him for nothing?
JT Well, I think what should precede that in our minds is this question of ourselves. We are together; that is, ourselves and then the Lord Himself having come into bodily form is in relation to us, to ourselves. In chapter 1, you have the fulness in verse 19: “in him all the fulness was pleased to dwell” without mentioning bodily. In chapter 2 persons are in mind, and Christ is spoken of in a personal way as in bodily form. It carries with it the idea of substantiality, I would say, what is substantial. We have in each one of us what is substantial [p. 56] or else there is nothing. If it is merely a question of what we know, that is not anything; it is a question of what we are personally, what each one is personally. The assembly is made up of persons, Christ being the Head of it. Other things, of course, have to be added to express the full truth, but it is a question of persons, not simply what we know, or even the associations we are in and that, but persons, and persons that are attractive to each other. There is thus a real unity, and I believe the personality of the Lord as in a bodily form enters into it; “in him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily”. The word bodily implies substantiality. We cannot apply exactly the idea of substantiality to God, although there is substance, but we cannot go so far as to speak of a body; we can, however, in Christ, for He has become Man. In the first chapter the word bodily is not mentioned but that all the fulness was there. That is to say, the Deity or Godhead is there in itself, which we cannot compass. But when we come to chapter 2 the word bodily involves what Christ is to the saints. It means Christ, and it is a real Person here, and a Person who is a Centre and an Object. So I think all that must underlie what we have been speaking of and our being “united together”. It is a question of persons, how much we are to one another, and the idea excludes all else as to what is in this world, where Satan is operating.
PL So that, after the allusions in the beginning of John 1 to the Deity we have in verse 14 “And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we have contemplated his glory, a glory as of an only-begotten with a father), full of grace and truth”. We have no us or we introduced until that point. Is that the company?
JT Just so. “We have contemplated his glory”. It is the glory of the Person in Manhood.
Ques Does it help to notice the difference between the tenses in chapters 1 and 2 of Colossians? In chapter 1, it is “For in him all the fulness ... was pleased to dwell”. I suppose that involved the Lord’s humanity here, but [p. 57] the verse we are looking at now in chapter 2 says, “For in him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily; and ye are complete in him”. Is one the reference to the past and the other a reference to the Lord as He is and bringing ourselves in?
JT Just so. The saints are brought in, for it is said, “and ye are complete in him, who is the head of all principality and authority”, and so on. We have Christ thus in a substantial way before us and the brethren, not simply according to what we know. While we cannot perhaps name the thing as to which we are complete in Him, yet we can name the persons; we can name Christ. It is a substantial idea in relation to persons. Peter says, “Look on us”. That is persons, not simply what we know or what we may be in that sense, but the persons. So in this chapter the thought of circumcision comes in immediately and then the raising of Christ from the dead; that is to say, the working of God. He is raised from the dead by the power or working of God. It is a question of what is going on through persons being affected and used, or handled in a sense, in view of something being formed. That is what would shut out all this material for the enemy which occasions the combat, because it is a question of the “increase of God”, and that is in the assembly. We make increase in that sense, in the persons, and hence we have to consider who the persons are and what they are and how they behave. Is there anything to admire, because that is what this chapter has in mind? It shuts out all the material the enemy is working on in the whole world, because “the whole world”, John says, “lies in the wicked one”, 1 John 5: 19. It is what is going on currently in the world, and we are to keep clear of it entirely. This chapter is to that end, so philosophy in the Greek system and Judaism in the Jewish system is kept out.
HFN Have you not said that the bringing in of that thought of bodily and the introduction of the Lord’s headship was really to bring about in the saints [p. 58] a correspondence with Christ; first positionally, and then morally in the quickening?
JT Well, it is. The chapter is really to clear the ground for the assembly, where the increase of God is. The apostle had in his mind that they were growing together in unity, and all these things in verses 4 to 19 are subservient, to bring about the unity and to clear the ground for it. Hence you have the idea of nailing things to the cross. The death of Christ is brought in, in circumcision and then in the cross itself, but then we have the working of God and that is where faith enters into this chapter.
FCH Is the working of God a present thing and not confined to what is stated afterwards in regard to the resurrection?
JT It is a question of the working. It is active power so that it is not simply something done, but being done. The chapter contemplates what is being done, what God is doing, His working, and so faith comes into it, as it says, “through faith of the working of God who raised him from among the dead”. It is therefore a question of going into Canaan, I would say, and how in assembly formation and service there is something that enables us to keep ourselves so that we should be with God in Canaan, having entered in through circumcision and the power of God through the Jordan. The small portion of the earth called the land of Canaan is thus typical as a principle. It typifies our proximity in dwelling together spiritually, and nearness where love is, with an ascending character to it. That would lead us into Ephesians, of course, but Colossians is the crucial matter, because it is the working of God. It is not what is finished but what is being done, and the power that keeps us. It is the power that enables us to be in assembly so as to be for God in it.
Ques Does “the increase of God”, involving substance, stand in contrast to being “puffed up by his fleshly mind” which involves inflation and recalls what the enemy says in Genesis 3, “ye shall be as gods”, and then there is the reference to “a tree to be desired to make one wise”?
JT Yes. I believe the Lord is helping us at this very moment as to assembly formation and what interferes with it. How easily we may become the instruments of the interference; hence the strong language used; but that is a current matter. It is a current operation of God, which would apply to the assembly, not what will lead us into heaven literally, but assembly service.
LH Is that seen in Joshua when the ark remained in the bed of the Jordan while all the people passed over? Is that connected with “the working of God”?
JT Quite so. The ark was there so that they could pass over, and they did pass over; but then they had the circumcision there and the old corn of the land there. It is a question of appropriation, as to what is going on now, not when we are in heaven, but what we have now in assembly in view of the power of the Spirit. “The working of God” applies to the power of the Spirit in the saints.
PHH You have referred to what is feminine; would Rahab, being in the land, be an example of what God is doing in providing for this in an abstract way in the midst of what is hostile?
JT Quite so. She is already there and she has the characteristics; she had the flax, and then the power in the cord. It is all a question of what God can use. It is His power but then it requires faith in us. Unless we bring in the element of faith then the working of God is not effective in us now. It is a question of what He will do in resurrection literally, but what He is doing now has all these features. If we take Rahab, she is in the land and she has flax. That is, there is a means of purity there and she has a means of letting the spies down and instructing them. She is in the thing for she knows what God has done. It was a question of what God had done [p. 60] and what they had done, but now it is a question of what she is doing or what anyone like her is doing. God is operating and I believe the point in this chapter is the working of God in order to bring in conditions for assembly service at the present time, leading us to heavenly places in a spiritual sense.
Ques So that “rejoicing and seeing your order” is what is taking place now?
JT That is right. That is what he observed in spirit. He was not there, but it shows what is current and that there is such a thing as knowing things without being there physically, for the spiritual thing is here.
LES Is not the footnote you quoted really the important matter, because it is a link with the last verse of chapter 1? The footnote to the word working in verse 12 says active internal power and then in the last verse of chapter 1 we have “according to his working, which works in me in power”.
JT Very good. Chapter 1: 24 - 29, is what Paul was doing, but chapter 2 is what God is doing and that is what we have to keep in our minds if we are to have actual assembly service. That is to say, the spiritual matter; because the only power for it is the working of God and that involves the Spirit of God down here in the saints.
EuR Would the word to Philadelphia: “thou hast a little power” be the working of it now?
JT I think so. I think the Lord is accrediting the saints in our times with that very thing. There is a little power and that little power must come into the assembly. It is not simply what is in our houses, it is what is in the assembly when we are sitting down together, how we can move on from the Lord’s supper into heavenly places. It is a question of the power of God that is at work, but that must be in the Spirit.
WC Would the woman’s experience in Mark 5 bear on it? She touched the hem of the Lord’s garment [p. 61] and it says she knew what had taken place in her. She has the experience of that coming into the soul.
JT Just so. Then when the Lord Himself came into the house of Jairus, it was a question of what He would do. They had the flute-players there, but such was the condition that they derided Him, and that may be the condition at any time in our localities. The Lord put them all out, and that makes way for what we are talking about, that is to say, the working of God. So He says, “Damsel, I say to thee, Arise”. The idea of persons coming into life is what we want and how God does that in view of their having part in the assembly. Therefore it says, “he desired that something should be given her to eat”. That was a matter for the parents to do.
Ques Would you just say a word on the expression, “in whom also ye have been circumcised” (verse 11)? It seems a very strong expression and seems to link up with the presentation of Christ as the One in whom all the fulness of the Godhead dwells bodily.
JT It says, “In whom also ye have been circumcised with circumcision not done by hand, in the putting off of the body of the flesh, in the circumcision of the Christ; buried with him in baptism, in which ye have been also raised”. The word whom is stronger than the word which and is in relation to circumcision, that is the actual death of Christ. It is a question of how far we come into that, but then baptism is linked on with it, and “in which” is used there. Baptism is a figure, but it is a figure not only of death but of resurrection. This chapter brings in the added thought that baptism carries with it the idea of resurrection. It does not carry it in Romans. There it is simply that we are dead with Christ, but here there is a figure of resurrection in baptism. We can therefore apply the idea to our children being baptised. If the power of God is there, they really have a place in resurrection in the sense in which the assembly is available to them. This chapter goes the whole length of the truth, in order to make [p. 62] assembly service possible. We can take the ground of being risen with Christ, as it says, “Wherein also ye are risen”; but then in Ephesians it is said that He “has raised us up together, and has made us sit down together in the heavenlies”, and we can go that far too. It is a question of the power we have, if we can speak intelligently as to the power we have, for assembly service; that we go beyond the Lord’s supper and as having power, we can go into heavenly places. The power is the Spirit, so it is not a question of God as such, but of what is down here in the Spirit.
Ques Does the idea of faith here suggest a certain objective line of things? Although the working of God is, in itself, subjective, would through the faith of it involve our being maintained in the light that has reached us of God’s thoughts?
JT Well, just to guard the idea of the thing being all literal, it is a question of faith, for it is a faith system we are in. We shall not be in a faith system when we are in heaven, but now it is a question of how much we have. It is “through faith of the working of God”; and therefore it becomes a question of measure.
HFN In regard to this thought of the working of God in relation to the resurrection sphere and in relation to the assembly service, what place does the ascension have?
JT That would be Ephesians, of course, and it is a question of how far we can go. In Ephesians there is quickening, which is making alive. Then we have to go to Ephesians for the formal thought of resurrection and ascension, and there we are said to have been raised up together and made to sit down together in the heavenlies; that would be an anticipative thought, and in assembly service we can anticipate things.
Ques In the actual working out of assembly service, do we come together on the resurrection platform and are we led on to the plane of [p. 63] ascension?
JT I do not think there is a resurrection platform for the assembly. If there is a platform it would be an anticipative platform. We are entitled to anticipate things, and the Spirit of God supports us in our minds and affections to that end. Ephesians is an anticipative position; the platform is anticipative, that we are raised up together and made to sit down together in the heavenlies in Christ. So that I do not care about the idea of a resurrection platform. I know how much it is used, but I think we do well to keep to the full thought, if we are going to deal with faith and what belongs to faith, which is the present time. We are entitled to go to the full thought but it is a question of the power we have for it. Then that power should not only affect our minds but our affections, so that it extends to one another, it extends to the saints who are present.
PL In John 12, the distinguished persons there are each the fruit of divine and resurrection power and seen in relation to one another.
JT Lazarus was in mind. It says they came to see Lazarus also, which is just what I am trying to show. It is a question of real persons and substantiality and what we think of them, what they are to us in assembly.
Ques Would you say a word as to verse 6, “As therefore ye have received the Christ, Jesus the Lord”. What do these titles involve in our affections?
JT The thought is, “As therefore ye have received the Christ”, and then the other words are additional or just to support this point. They received Christ, and He is “Jesus the Lord”. Then they are to “walk in him, rooted and built up in him, and assured in the faith, even as ye have been taught, abounding in it with thanksgiving”. The point is faith here. Of course, faith is light too, and we have instruction, but as I said before, it is a question of substantiality. The brethren will pardon me for repeating that word, but we are dealing with persons. The Lord Jesus is brought in here as a Person in a substantial sense as we have been saying;
[p. 64] this is involved in the word bodily. Christianity is thus a real thing, in which Christ is known to be “everything, and in all”. We have real Christianity, but it is in the faith sphere. On the principle of faith everything is ours.
AAl Do we get that reference to substantiality in John 1, “the law was given by Moses: grace and truth subsists through Jesus Christ”?
JT I would say that.