CHAPTER 17

CHAPTER 17

FER There is a difference between Matthew and Peter. In Matthew the subject is Christ, in Peter it is Christian privilege. In Matthew Christ is the builder. It is His assembly. He says, “On this rock I will build my assembly”. You want to get a sense not of what the stones are, but of what the assembly is. The great point in Peter is that the saints had in a spiritual way what Israel had had in a material way. Those to whom Peter wrote had lost everything in a material way but had gained everything in a spiritual way; but I think it is very much more interesting to see the place which the Lord takes consequent upon His withdrawal from Israel and all connected with Israel. You see (Matthew 16) that there was a nucleus, the disciples were the bread and the Lord makes known to them all that was coming in consequent upon His withdrawal from Israel. He withdraws from Israel for the time being but there was a nucleus. They began to question about the bread, but what the Lord virtually says is, “You are the bread”. His fear was lest they should be leavened, they were to be an unleavened company, kept clear from the leaven of formalism — the Pharisee — and scepticism — the Sadducee; if you are not clear from these things you will not get much ^[p. 114] light about divine things. There are three things in the end of chapter 16: (1) He is the builder; (2) He is the administrator in the kingdom, and then (3) He comes again in glory. He is rejected here, but He comes again and sets up the kingdom in glory. It is wonderful to see the place the Lord takes. The kingdom of which He spoke to Peter is going on now. The Lord brings before them His sufferings, but the sufferings were to prepare for the kingdom in glory. The transfiguration is what Peter refers to in his second epistle. “We have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eye witnesses of his majesty”. The great point of the building is this, that it was the way by which Christ was going to secure that He would have a place here upon earth. That was the mystery to be solved, how He would have a place here upon earth, and that is solved by the assembly.

Ques Do you think that takes the place of Israel?

FER I think it takes the place of Urim and Thummim. It is a most wonderful thing to conceive that the Lord should secure that He should have a place here upon earth where He could make known His mind. The point here is how it was to be brought about. I think that if we had the idea that there is actually a spot here upon earth where His mind is declared, our thoughts about things down here would be materially changed. I do not think we should care much about anything else. I do not think “my assembly”, as far as I understand it, refers expressly to heaven, the expression “gates of hades” not prevailing, is a pretty good proof that it refers to something here upon earth. There is no chance of the “gates of hades” prevailing against anything in heaven.

Ques Then the idea is a spiritual idea?

FER The whole thing hangs upon the divine nature; it rests on the apprehension of what Christ ^[p. 115] is according to the divine nature, if one might use the expression, the divine generation. That is the rock and then you see Peter is of the rock, he is a fragment of the rock, he is of the same nature as the rock. We are formed in the divine nature by the Spirit. It is the divine nature which appreciates the presence of Christ, people think it is by the Spirit but I think that, if we are not in the divine nature we are not in touch with Christ. The gates of hades cannot prevail against that, whatever is formed in the divine nature cannot go. Faith and hope (1 Corinthians 13) will end, but love will abide. I think 1 Corinthians 13 greatly helps. Nothing but the divine nature can resist the power of evil. Peter’s great point in his first epistle was to show the Jews who had believed in Christ that they had lost nothing. The word for stone in Peter is not the same as that employed here, the idea of the stone here is that it is a part of the rock, a chip of the rock. The Lord recognises Peter as being of that nature. The word in Peter’s epistle might refer in a certain way to the same thing, but it is not the same idea. In Peter’s epistle the point is a building, here it is the foundation. Peter personally was according to the foundation. The thought here is that Christ will build that which will give Him a place here in spite of breaking with Israel.

Ques Supposing that a person has got in his mind some sort of ecclesiastical organisation? Rome has built up an ecclesiastical organisation upon this scripture.

FER An ecclesiastical organisation is not in the divine nature. There is not much of the divine nature about Rome.

Ques Is this what Christ gets for what He has lost?

FER Yes, I think it is. When He breaks with Israel there is, “I and the children which God hath given me”, and to them He makes known the steps ^[p. 116] He would take. I think it is a great thing in the present moment to be in the secret of the Lord. You could not have a greater privilege.

Rem The force of calling Peter by that name was to show that he was a chip of the rock.

FER People think that they are going to realise the Lord’s presence by the Spirit, but it is in the divine nature that the Spirit works, it is affection that is the point; you are formed in it by the Spirit, and if you are not formed in it by the Spirit you will not realise the Lord’s presence.

Ques Then the idea of the assembly is the plurality of persons being together in this way?

FER Yes, perfectly in touch with Himself in nature, and such would secure His presence. What has made it plain to me is 1 Corinthians 13. There the whole subject of the assembly is brought out; chapters 12 - 14. The apostle breaks the thread of the subject to bring in the divine nature, you might have gift and prophecy and knowledge, but without love you are nothing, and certainly one cannot be less than nothing. The first thing that the Spirit will do for a man is to bring him into the light. He will not work until He has brought him into the light, and although I would not say that divine affections are only found with us, yet I say divine affections are in the light. A person whose eyes were opened would be bowed down with the sense of the state of things, he would not be disposed to think much of himself or his company, he would be far from attempting to set anything up. It is a wonderful thing to have your eyes opened. The Lord is then your resource; that which Christ builds is not touched, that which is connected with divine affection is lasting. I think the Lord gives a pretty good indication of what the assembly is, the assembly is where He is, and we must answer to Him. It is not because you are identified with a particular company that therefore you ^[p. 117] are there.

Ques Are we justified in looking for the assembly now?

FER Yes; for the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. The great thing is to see that Christ has not changed. We must be on a right line, and the right line is the recognition of what Christ is in the divine nature, not as the Son of Mary, nor the Son of Abraham and David, but the Son of the living God. He does not gather to Himself after the flesh at all, and it is only the divine nature that can touch Him; it is really the teaching of 1 Corinthians 13 that in the assembly, love is everything. What a wonderful thing it is to think of a company here in touch with Christ, and His presence really known by them. Peter had no function in regard to the assembly, he is simply a pattern; as to the kingdom, the Lord gives Peter a place, but not as to the assembly.

Rem I think we ought to learn from Peter.

FER I think we ought to learn from the Father. I cannot describe it to anyone, but there is a moment when the Father speaks to the soul. A man believes the gospel and receives the Holy Spirit, but there is some moment in his history when the Father teaches him this.

Ques That is, that he apprehends something about the Person of Christ?

FER Yes. You can only know God in the divine nature, “He that loveth not knoweth not God”. Peter was really a converted man before the Father gave him this revelation, you do not speak of this as conversion. It would produce the greatest moral effect upon us. There is nothing here for God now but what is in the Spirit. We have to leave the camp, the established order of things here was the camp. The necessity is leaving the camp. There are thousands who are converted who do not know this, they have not left the camp. We do well to apply it to ourselves.

Ques What about all those saints who lived through ^[p. 118] the long centuries up to about seventy or eighty years ago?

FER They knew nothing about the church.

Ques Did the Father touch them?

FER It is hard to say what the Father did, but it is certain they knew nothing about the church. They were real Christians and had the Holy Spirit, they surrendered their lives for Christ, gave up everything for Him; but they knew nothing about the church, as far as we can gather.

Ques They belong to the assembly?

FER They will come out in the completeness of the assembly, I do not doubt at all, but the point is the assembly here.

Rem Is it not to create a difficulty to look upon what is in a ruined state and argue from that, rather than go back to the architect’s plan?

FER When things are in ruins you are compelled to look at truths in an abstract way.

Rem And you have to judge what is contrary.

FER Yes, that is the first step.

Rem I am glad you say you believe these Christians will come out in the completeness of the assembly, there is a strong party who say they do not belong to the assembly and will not come out in the assembly by-and-by.

FER That is just where I should disagree with them, “For by one Spirit are we all baptised into one body”. That must cover every saint, but then it is not merely being indwelt by the Holy Spirit; but being in the divine nature, you are a “Petros”, and that comes about through the divine touch, the Father’s revelation. To my mind Peter’s confession is an expression of affection, it is affection’s recognition of Christ. The Lord only speaks of these things to the disciples, they were the nucleus, He does not speak of them to the people. The disciples were the bread, and He warns them that they must be clear of formalism ^[p. 119] and scepticism. These communications are made to a people separated from the Jews. He draws the confession from them, He asks first what the people thought of Him, and then what they thought of Him; and then Peter’s confession comes to light, and the Lord says it is the Father’s revelation to him. This is apprehended individually. Peter gets the revelation, I cannot say why, my impression is that he is here as a pattern. The confession involves the recognition of Christ entirely apart from the flesh. In the assembly He is the Head, in the kingdom He is the Lord. He does not give to Peter a place of administration in the church, but in the kingdom. Peter was to carry out the administration in the power of the Lord, in spiritual power; that is the meaning of the keys, it was administration committed to Peter in connection with the kingdom. I do not think that the keys have been given to anyone else but Peter. Peter used them in opening the door to Jews and Gentiles. It is when we come together that we realise the assembly. The first point then is to be in touch with the Lord, and with one another in the divine nature.

Rem All are not in the truth of this who are on this ground.

FER Can you tell me of any meeting you know of in which everybody realises the holiest, yet I would not have one single person away from that meeting? They all get the benefit of what perhaps only two or three are in the truth of. I have no doubt that there are a good many who look upon the two or three who take part as virtually the priests; but priestly privilege belongs to all, both brothers and sisters.

Rem We exercise priestly functions in the holiest.

FER You cannot have Israel’s place, yet that is the place you must get when an established order has come to pass, then you are neither in the holiest nor outside the camp. The third great thing that comes out in the passage is the sufferings of Christ,

^[p. 120] but it is only paving the way for the Lord coming in glory and power in the kingdom. He is supreme for He gives the keys of the kingdom to Peter, but then afterwards He comes out in His power and glory. What has been a great thought to me — not that it is new, but it is important — is, that when Christ was here He was here in testimony, when He comes again He comes in glory and not in testimony.

Rem And we are connected now with the testimony part.

FER Yes, and all the testimony is comprised in one word — “Christ”. There is no testimony but Christ.

Rem That which is the burden of testimony will be brought out in glory.

Ques What is your thought of the kingdom of heaven now? How does it go on now?

FER Well, the Lord is in heaven, and if I look to Him for direction in the things that He administers — not the things of the world, mind, but in the things that He administers — then, at any rate, the kingdom of heaven is good for me. The kingdom applies individually, not corporately. In the kingdom of the Son of man the Son of man is the centre of all the glory, His own, the Father’s, and the holy angels’.