DIVINE PERSONS AND OUR RELATIONSHIPS WITH THEM (1)
[p. 202] DIVINE PERSONS AND OUR RELATIONSHIPS WITH THEM (1)
Romans 8:14 - 17; John 20: 16 - 18
JT What is in mind is the names by which divine Persons are known and the relationships with Them in which we are set. The Father is the first in mind, as we should expect. Then we might consider children of God, children of Christ, sons of God and brethren of Christ. In speaking of the Father first we thought of touching on Romans — for that is the apostolic epistle peculiarly — to see how the Father is presented in that epistle. In looking into the subject of the fatherhood of God we learn that we are to call Him Father, the Spirit leading us to do so; and it is thought the gospel of Matthew should be under consideration as to the use of this name of Father, the idea of heaven or heavenliness preceding it in that gospel. The brethren will all remember what is called ‘The Lord’s prayer’, commencing, “Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done” Matthew 6:9,10, and so forth; and how in Luke, referring to the same incident undoubtedly, the writer uses just the word “Father”. When we come to the apostolic epistles, Romans particularly, we have the word doubled: “Abba, Father”, the spirit of adoption entering into that, bringing in Christianity and the fulness of it. We might have pursued the subject in Ephesians but the thought is to keep to Romans, that being the authoritative epistle; and Matthew being authoritative in the truth leading up to the assembly itself and what introduces into the assembly, with the distinction between the “heavenly Father” and “our Father which art in heaven”. We might seek to understand why it should be so in Matthew. In the so-called systems around us this form of address is used much, but the question is how intelligently it [p. 203] is used. It seems as if Matthew in chapters 5 and 6, especially chapter 5, is much in the sense of authoritative teaching, which is introduced by the Lord undoubtedly, to precede the introduction of christianity, what belonged to the old dispensation being fully carried down in the teaching so that not one jot or tittle of the law should be passed over. It is to be cherished and kept in its fulness.
AR What you say about the law is very important, for Matthew 5:18 says, “Verily I say unto you, Until the heaven and the earth pass away, one iota or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all come to pass”. That is going back to Exodus, is it not?
JT Quite so, as if the whole area of Scripture is in mind, what God has said and how it has taken the form of Scripture; written by Moses, of course, but still Scripture. Genesis asserts the activities of the Spirit at the very outset as if the Spirit was waiting and ready to speak, to say things, to name things; and Matthew would suggest to us that in taking on Genesis we shall find that the assembly is contained there for us. So the Lord in Matthew 16:13 says to the disciples, “Who do men say that I the Son of man am?” and Peter brings out the Father’s revelation, that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. We have indications therefore of what was in mind in Matthew leading up to the truth of christianity, as the Lord says, “On this rock I will build my assembly, and hades’ gates shall not prevail against it” Matthew 16:18. So there is something here that is invulnerable for the truth to be developed in, and Peter himself is brought into it: “Thou art Peter”, the Lord says, “and on this rock I will build my assembly, and hades’ gates shall not prevail against it” Matthew 16:18.
RWS Does not the word in Matthew 5:48, “Be ye therefore perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect”, really involve [p. 204] christianity?
JT It is the passage that lends its full character to what we have been saying, and the disciples were to have the idea of the Father and the Father’s character as at the end of that chapter; for it is a great legislative chapter and things are to be understood on the principle of legislation. The truth is laid down on that principle, and so it says, “Be ye therefore perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect” Matthew 5:48. So the saints at the beginning were to learn perfection on the earthly side, “as your heavenly Father is perfect”. It is a question of the character of God as the Father, the heavenly Father, not yet ‘in heaven’, but ‘heavenly’.
ANW The Lord saying, “My Father and your Father” in John 20:17 elevates the matter to the highest level.
JT I think that is good. The Lord is saying to Mary (selecting a sister to communicate these things to the brethren, and I think the fact that she is selected would touch the sisters here), “Go to my brethren and say to them, I ascend to my Father and your Father” John 20:17. But then He had already said to her, “I have not yet ascended to my Father” John 20:17, as though she should learn how and where to touch Him. So He says, “Touch me not, for I have not yet ascended to my Father; but go to my brethren and say to them, I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God” John 20:17.
JoshuaP. You spoke of the heavenly legislation in Matthew 5. Is the understanding of that to help us in relation to the Father so that we may not need much of the world’s legislation?
JT I think so; and we are to learn things from the lips of the Lord’s own messenger. So Mary is selected, and the preliminary thought as to it is, “I have not yet ascended to my Father” John 20:17. That is in John. But Matthew would say we do not need to wait for that, it is a question of what is earthly first.
God began with that: “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep” Genesis 1:1,2. God began with that; He said, “Let there be light. And there was light” Genesis 1:3. That is to say things began to exist by the actual speaking of God.
PL In Matthew 5:2 it says: “having opened his mouth, he taught them, saying …” Is that what is immediately brought near?
JT He went up to the mountain to do it; in Luke it is from the level of the plain.
FW Is not the standard a very high one? “Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven”? Matthew 6:10. The heavenly kingdom would appear to be subject.
JT Just so. It is the earth brought into it, whereas when we come to Ephesians everything is in the heavenlies and therefore we have words suitable to the assembly of God. But we have to begin with Matthew. We learn from the Lord how He names things; He went up to do so, but it is in relation to things down here, whereas in Ephesians it is not that, it is in relation to what is up there.
LK Does the apostle embrace both thoughts in Ephesians 3:14,15, “The Father … of whom every family in the heavens and on earth is named”?
JT Yes; but the first of Genesis implies not only persons but things; so that the Spirit of God in brooding over the face of the waters was there to do things and to say them, not only as to men, but as to things that God has made.
ASB It says in Matthew 5:16, “Let your light thus shine before men, so that they may see your upright works, and glorify your Father who is in the heavens”.
JT That is what the Lord had in mind. So He went up to say things, and they went up to Him. It was to say things from that point; the Lord was referring to the earth because that is what God began [p. 206] with. Even what is said about heaven has regard to persons and things on the earth; it is a question of what is on the earth, what God had made. He made man in His image, after His likeness, and said as to them, “Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea” Genesis 1:26. The dominion was on the earth. Then there is the making of the sun and the moon and the heavenly bodies, but all in relation to the earth.
ABP You linked the creation with the speaking of God. Is the assembly connected with the idea of speaking also?
JT I think so; it is seen in what Moses made; he built the tabernacle and the idea of the tabernacle was a place for speaking. “The tabernacle of God is with men” Revelation 21:3. So what the Holy Spirit had in mind was a place of speaking, but speaking as to order and such matters down here.
SJH As to the legislation you speak of in regard to the earth and the name Father, would that imply family feelings, God always having families in mind?
JT God did not begin with the name Father. It was Elohim and then Jehovah Elohim, a combination phrase meaning God in relation to men. It is not a question of man just yet, but of God in relation to him. I mean to say, in these names that you get in Genesis you do not get the Father, and not even Jehovah in the first chapter, not until the second chapter, for it is a question of God in relation to men in Adam and Eve. But when we come to Matthew we have to name things in view of the assembly. Everything now must take on that idea from the start and work up from the beginning, so that as we proceed we may know what to say and how to name things.
JS In Exodus the Holy Spirit brings in the thought of the [p. 207] tabernacle.
JT What Jehovah wanted particularly to do was to say things; and so in Numbers Moses would speak to Him but Jehovah spoke to him; He intervened and spoke to Moses instead of letting Moses speak to Him. So from that time onward it is what the Lord commanded Moses. It is a question of authority.
JH Are they beginning at this point in Acts 4:24? “Thou art the God who made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and all that is in them; who hast said by the mouth of thy servant David”. Would that come into this?
JT It would; however, it is David, not Moses. It is what David would say. God makes a selection as to His ancient servants and educates them, having in mind what was before them and how they should come up to the truth. And now it is a question of our coming up to the truth, knowing what to say and how to say it when necessary.
AR So the Lord in incorporating Moses’ remarks intended that we should incorporate them too, did He not? Matthew 5:19 says, “Whosoever then shall do away with one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of the heavens; but whosoever shall practise and teach them, he shall he called great in the kingdom of the heavens”. Does not that go back to Exodus?
JT It refers to ancient things, for God was before all things. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” Genesis 1:1. He is before everything. He gives names to things, but then He gives names through persons who know what they are saying; so that Moses and David come into that. And now in Matthew we have the great genealogy, forty-two generations, and God has such people in mind. They have a great place with Him; they are not ordinary people; they belong to the generations of Jesus [p. 208] Christ which is the point in Matthew, and that makes way for the gospels; and then the epistles make way for the Spirit.
ABP Do we come into things through speaking, first of all confessing our sins, then confessing Jesus as Lord, and then as we have it in our chapter, crying, “Abba, Father”?
JT We get to know how to name things. How did Paul think of writing down, “Abba, Father”? The Lord had used that expression. So that in result we begin with divine Persons, whether it be the Father, the Son, or the Spirit. We learn from Them, so that things are carried on from that source.
AHB Is that why Paul in speaking to the Corinthians says, “There are those called gods … yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom all things”? 1 Corinthians 8:5,6.
JT That is right, “one God, the Father … and one Lord, Jesus Christ”. It does not mention the Spirit, but the Spirit is in mind too. That is, all the divine Persons are in mind. So the Corinthians were put right, for they needed to be put right authoritatively. It was not so much the Spirit who was brought forward, although He comes in too later; but that particular chapter deals with the Father and the Son — one Lord, Jesus Christ. That would help us as to learning, or being educated in Scripture. “If any one think he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know” 1 Corinthians 8:2, that comes in there. It is a question of what you know, and whether you know it rightly and can speak of it rightly to others.
RWS While the very attractive name of Father comes in in Matthew, there is power to enforce things; so it is a rather arduous matter to go up the mountain and come to the Lord, balancing with the attractiveness of [p. 209] fatherhood.
JT So we have at the very outset in Matthew 5:1, “But seeing the crowds, he went up into the mountain, and having sat down” — it is deliberation — “his disciples came to him”. He did not ask them to come, which indicates that they are moved by His influence. And then the Lord goes on to “Blessed are the poor in spirit”, Matthew 5:3 and nine Blesseds, showing the blessedness of this new system of things that is inaugurated, all with a view to the assembly coming into it and being formed accordingly. It goes on later, “Ye are the salt of the earth; but if the salt have become insipid, wherewith shall it be salted? It is no longer fit for anything but to be cast out and to be trodden under foot by men. Ye are the light of the world: a city situated on the top of a mountain cannot be hid. Nor do men light a lamp and put it under the bushel, but upon the lamp-stand, and it shines for all who are in the house. Let your light thus shine before men, so that they may see your upright works, and glorify your Father who is in the heavens” Matthew 5:13 - 16. So the Father is in mind here, and the end of the chapter says, “Be ye therefore perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect” Matthew 5:48. That is to say, the Lord is beginning at the very bottom of things in relation to the Father. So the idea of perfection flows out from what the Father is and the disciples are to take on that perfection.
JTJr Would you connect the expanse in Genesis 1 with these thoughts in Matthew?
JT I think the word “expanse” would indicate that it is the breadth of things, so there is plenty of latitude. Then if we are to do with the face of the earth, we are to see what is there; we have vegetation and the like. We are to see what scope God has in the expanse because it is a question of His working out His thoughts and having those who can [p. 210] convey them.
JTJr As to the lights set in the expanse, Christ is here on the mountain and the city is also referred to in the section you read. Is that like the two great lights?
JT So “God said, Let there be light. And there was light” Genesis 1:3. That is to say, God saw to it that there was light. Then subsequently, as you say, “God made the two great lights” Genesis 1:16. Whenever a thing is said by God, what He speaks of is there.
JKP “As many as are led by the Spirit of God” Romans 8:14. Is there a suggestion in that of the subservient place the Spirit has taken to develop the thought of fatherhood from the apostolic side?
JT I think so. Some have made much of it that the apostolic epistles do not say anything of the Spirit being spoken to, but rather of the Spirit speaking: but then, the Old Testament indicates that the Spirit is spoken to. The Holy Spirit is here to bring us into God’s thoughts. He was there in almost the first verse of Scripture, brooding over the face of the waters, ready to act, ready to speak. And then we come to Romans and we find men are led by Him. The Old Testament makes provision for the Holy Spirit to be spoken to; He was ready to speak in Genesis 1, but then He is also ready to be spoken to. Rebecca speaks to the servant (whom we know represents the Spirit), and others speak to Him. That opens a wide door to us and the Lord is opening our understanding that we might be able to speak of the Spirit in that sense, and speak rightly of Him. So the word here in Romans 8:14 is, “as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are the sons of God”. The sons of God are seen as being led by the Spirit.
PL So in Numbers 21, from which point onwards the leading of the Spirit is evident, the addressing of the Spirit in song is alluded [p. 211] to.
JT Very beautiful. It is touching, such a matter being introduced so early. Typically, they sang to the Spirit, but then Moses had to do with it. It is at the word of the lawgiver.
AR So as Rebecca has to do with the servant she says, “Drink, my lord!” Genesis 24:18 That verse has been linked up with 2 Corinthians 3:17, has it not? “The Lord is the Spirit, but where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty”. Rebecca typically recognised the Spirit as an object. I wonder if our difficulties do not lie in our needing to recognise the Spirit here objectively as well as subjectively?
ANW That word “sing” involves that He had already expressed Himself and now there is an up-springing response to Him. The note gives ‘respond’ as a synonym.
JT That passage in Numbers 21 has to be studied as to what the Spirit was saying, and particularly now that He is saying, “Sing ye unto it”. “Spring up, O well”; that is the Spirit Himself typically. What we are saying about the word of the lawgiver comes into Matthew, for that is the great difficulty with us, that we are not subject to law. So Paul says, “If any one thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him recognise the things that I write to you, that it is the Lord’s commandment”, 1 Corinthians 14:37. It is a question of what you know, and whether you know it rightly and can convey it rightly.
JTJr In relation to conditions where a brother might be angry with another and need to be reconciled, I suppose we need to name that word too: it is, “Be reconciled” (Matthew 5:24).
JT There is a solemn word too in Matthew 5:22, “But I say unto you, that every one that is lightly angry with his brother shall be subject to the judgment; but whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca”, — meaning ‘stupid’ or ‘worthless’; this would [p. 212] show we must have respect for the brethren even though they are young ones — “shall be subject to be called before the sanhedrim; but whosoever shall say. Fool, shall be subject to the penalty of the hell of fire”. The judgment of God, how imminent it is — and how terrible according to Revelation!
PL Would this attempt to discredit the brethren interfere with their dignity assemblywise as “two of you”?
JT You may be sure the assembly will be discredited if the persons who form it are discredited. So the woman of Samaria said, “Sir” to the Lord, and others do too.
PL Would an example of that be the great name of dignity He gives to Peter?
JT Quite so, “Thou art Peter” Matthew 16:18; that is to say he is a man that could be relied upon, a steady person.
ASB Is it not solemn that if such a thing as disrespect of the brethren is allowed by us the service of God is hindered?
JT If the brethren are not respected the service of God will be sure to be hindered, for they are the ones that are to serve Him according to the divine order, and we come and sit down together with a view to it. The Lord’s day has pre-eminently in mind the divine service. The Lord is said to have been raised by the glory of the Father, and that was on the first day of the week.
ASB We should be very sensitive as to our relations with one another so that we should not hinder the service of God.
JT As we think of the so-called service of God around us, think of the hideous things that are being done, professedly in the celebration of the Lord’s supper. Hence the importance of knowing what to say and how to name things that would lower the level of the Lord’s supper.
ABP In regard to creation, “He spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast” Psalm 33:9. We have the stress laid on the authoritative ministry in order that things might be held fast.
JT Very good, so that they are not movable. There are things that are movable but there are things that are not movable. For instance, in Solomon’s reign things were stable, they were set up in Zion — Zion being a fixed position, while formerly the tabernacle was in the wilderness. So we can see that we are transferred in our thoughts from what is movable to what is immovable.
PL So the authoritative ministry is suggested in the scripture that “The words of the wise are as goads, and the collections of them as nails fastened in: they are given from one shepherd”, Ecclesiastes 12:11.
ANW The finish of this address on the mount says, “When Jesus had finished these words, the crowds were astonished at his doctrine, for he taught them as having authority, and not as their scribes”, Matthew 7: 28,29.
JT So that mount Zion cannot be moved. The Psalms make allowance for that and we learn things from them in that sense. They are carefully divided into five books corresponding with the five books of Moses Would you say the thought of the Father in Matthew 5 gives you a great sense of the family and a right attitude toward it? I was struck by the word “Raca”, meaning ‘contempt’, as though we might not have the proper sense of the Father’s feelings in regard to the family.
JT Just so; we are to be respectful to the brethren.
JTJr If we respected this important law in this chapter it would keep us from going to the care meeting with things that should be settled before [p. 214] going.
JT There is a good deal in that. But things that are supposedly settled are sometimes very questionable; sometimes things brought to the assembly and supposed to be settled need to be done twice over. If things are fixed they are fixed.
AR You mean if things are settled in the assembly I should have an assembly judgment about them, not a personal judgment.
JT The assembly is for settlement. It has the last word. The care meeting, as we call it, is more modern, although the word ‘care’ is not modern “how shall he take care of the assembly of God?” it says in 1 Timothy 3:5. The assembly has to be taken care of so that it might function of itself, and it will do so as under God. “Hades’ gates shall not prevail against it” Matthew 16:18, the Lord says.
AR If a brother is forgiven in assembly every one should be clear about that, should he not, and prepared to accept that judgment?
JT If he is forgiven, he is forgiven. If God casts his sins behind His back, they should be left there.
AHP Romans 8:15 says, “Ye have not received a spirit of bondage again for fear, but ye have received a spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father”. I was wondering if the spirit of adoption not only sets us right with the Father but also with one another?
JT You can see that if the Father is spoken to as “Abba, Father”, and someone has liberty to do so, that someone has a great place in heaven. The Lord did that and it is transferred to us, and anyone who does that has a great place in heaven and we cannot at all discredit him. We are at liberty to call God “Abba, Father”. Now in John 20:16,17 Jesus says, “Mary. She, turning round, says to him in Hebrew, Rabboni, which means Teacher. Jesus says to her, Touch me not, for I have not yet ascended to my Father; but go to my brethren” — that is to [p. 215] say, the Lord had the brethren in mind and He is sending her to them — “go to my brethren and say to them, I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God”. Then it says further, “Mary of Magdala comes bringing word to the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had said these things to her” John 20:18. Then we are told, “When therefore it was evening on that day, which was the first day of the week, and the doors shut where the disciples were, through fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst, and says to them, Peace be to you” John 20:19. “Peace be to you”, that is the position. It is the position of the Father but the Lord is acting to bring us into it.
JS Is this the place of divine speaking?
JT Exactly, and where the influence of the Father and the Son is prevalent.
ABP Is “Abba, Father” necessarily confined to assembly service? Is it an experience we reach individually and then are possibly more free to use it as together?
JT The Lord used it Himself, but it is contemplated as used collectively in the epistle to the Romans; “we cry, Abba, Father”. Whether that means urgency is a question, I think it does.
PL “We cry”, would that be like the one tongue you referred to?
JT Just so. The one tongue says, “Come”, “the Spirit and the bride say, Come” Revelation 22:17. It induces unity, I think.
ANW It says, “Ye have received a spirit of adoption” Romans 8:15; but it is, as you say, “we cry”, not ‘ye cry’. We and the writer himself are in it.
JT So it all tends to unity, liberty and enjoyment. It is a poor thing if christianity affords us no enjoyment. That is what one is concerned about, that we might enjoy the things that are so freely given us of God.
GAS Is that cry, “Abba, Father”, in relation the earthly setting in Romans 8?
JT I would say it is assembly phraseology, only it is in Romans. The apostle Paul is leading up to the assembly for he is going to speak of the assembly presently. You will see how he is leading up to it if you will look at Romans 16:25 - 27: “Now to him that is able to establish you, according to my glad tidings and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, as to which silence has been kept in the times of the ages, but which has now been made manifest, and by prophetic scriptures, according to commandment of the eternal God, made known for obedience of faith to all the nations — the only wise God, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory for ever. Amen”. That is the end of Romans. Paul is saying this from the depths of his heart that the brethren might come into the assembly. The Ephesian saints had come into it, but he wants the Roman saints to come into it.