Pages 1 - 133 -- "Spiritual Instincts in Service". Readings and Addresses, 1928 (Volume 94).

SPIRITUAL INSTINCTS IN SERVICE

Luke 3:1 - 21; Luke 4:1 - 14

J.T. Luke deals with things from the outset. I thought it would be well to consider the application of this principle to those who serve. We have the details here of John the baptist, and of his infancy, and also of our Lord's. I thought particularly of John, the first of whom it is said he was filled with the Holy Spirit from his infancy. It is important to have right spiritual instincts. Instead of what would stimulate the natural, we have the Spirit in the Baptist from the very outset; He would produce right feelings and instincts. "The child grew and was strengthened in spirit", it says, "and he was in the deserts until the day of his shewing to Israel". If the principle is brought out as to ministry, on the one hand spiritual instincts are developed from the beginning, and on the other, what is natural is kept in check and worn down by desert experience. John was not only in one desert, but in deserts; and then the word of God comes to him in the desert.

D.L.H. Do you make any distinction between wilderness and desert?

J.T. We have the word 'deserts' in the end of the first chapter, and 'wilderness' here in the beginning of the third. It is the same word in the original. What had you in mind?

D.L.H. I had heard some attempt to make a difference. I do not know of any.

J.T. The suggestion is that the Spirit, being there from the outset, would produce right instincts. John's was an extraordinary case, pointing to the importance of right instincts underlying service, not only intelligence

and understanding, but instincts and feelings. There would be an enormous advantage in the Spirit being there from the beginning of his history, and then, too, there was something further in the desert experience and the kind of garments he wore and the food he ate. I think it all conforms with divine requirements.

F.F-t. Is it significant that the word of God comes upon John? Is it to such that the word of God comes?

J.T. It would so appear. Scripture gives us the setting -- the governmental circumstances. The word of. God comes to such an one as this amid these circumstances. He was not among the governments of the day. John appears as another development outside of them altogether; in the midst of all these dignitaries, to such an one has the word of God come. Here was one having a secret history, a history known to God; in the midst of all these political and religious circumstances there was one who was spiritually matured as under divine care. It is not mere history. It is to bring out the divine requirements in service.

P.L. Do you get that in Timothy? He is a typical man of God in those circumstances. Do his tears suggest instincts suitable?

J.T. Tears are a sign of deeply wrought feelings. Timothy came in where he was needed.

D.L.H. Tears would come in in relation to the ruined state of things. I do not know that it speaks of John the baptist weeping.

J.T. With John we have brought out what God requires, and whatever we may think that stands. There are no short cuts to the service of God.

F.F-t. Do you refer to the sensibilities that are begotten spiritually in private life?

J.T. Exactly -- known to God. Paul spoke to Timothy of the prophecies regarding him preceding --

the mind of God indicated beforehand. You could hardly expect the presbytery to lay on their hands until there was something there they could note, but God noted everything beforehand. Even the movement of John before he was born is noticed. Anything that responds to Christ in whatever little measure, God notices that.

F.F-n. Would the tears begin in private?

J.T. No doubt. You would begin to feel things.

F.F-n. The prophet says, "My soul shall weep in secret", (Jeremiah 13:17).

J.T. John was marked off before he was born as one who should not drink wine or strong drink; he should be filled with the Holy Spirit from his mother's womb, and he should thus turn many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God, that is to say, he would be in the spirit and power of Elijah, who would turn the hearts of the fathers to the children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, and thus make way for the Lord. That was the prophecy preceding, but the realisation of all this depended upon training. He was born into a remarkable household. His father had just been under serious discipline, and in the naming of the child he shows that he had learned from the discipline, because instead of naming him Zacharias on the natural line, he wrote down that his name was John. That was an immense thing for John. The father's discipline under the hand of God (and the mother was in it as well) had John in view, showing how God takes care of His servants. So Zacharias gives his name John, and then his mouth is opened and he speaks, praising God.

F.F-n. Do you think that was the result of Zacharias' private discipline?

J.T. I think it was. He was not unbelieving now; he had been. Then it says that he prophesied, and his ministry had reference to Christ, not to John, that is to say, in that household Christ is brought in.

John is brought up in that atmosphere where the father begins to speak, not about him, but about Christ. God had raised up a horn in the house of David, not in the house of Aaron; but then Zacharias turns to the child and says, "Thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest". Thus we see the divine preparation in the household for this special vessel. Then the training was in keeping with all this; it says, "he was in the deserts until the day of his shewing to Israel". There was no effort in the training to produce anything in him that would appeal to man's flesh.

F.F-n. Are you speaking now of maturity in regard to service as relating to special servants, or for all to take it up?

J.T. Oh, for all! You do not want to show your child to the world. The showing of the child is to Israel, that is to say, the people of God. The training is in keeping with that. Training for the world is very different.

G.C. How do the deserts apply today?

J.T. That would be keeping the children from the things of the world. You have no other thought for them than that they should be shown to Israel, so to speak, in due course, and if they are to recognise what is spiritual, no worldly training or culture will help, but will hinder. On account of the way many children are brought up, when they are shown to Israel they are very defective; they need to have the reproach of Egypt rolled away. John never needed that. I think Timothy is an example of what can be done. Timothy's father, being a Greek, would hardly help, but the mother's faith must have been strong. The emphasis is on the mother and grandmother. Faith dwelt in them.

F.F-n. Would the father being a Greek furnish an indication of the conditions in which the child was brought up?

J.T. Faith is not said to have been in the father, but in the mother and grandmother. The preponderating influence was evidently with the mother. Both Zacharias and Elisabeth were believers, and they were greatly helped by discipline. The best kind of faith, the most enduring, is brought out of the furnace. Here is a child whose parents' faith had been nourished in discipline. Zacharias had asked for something but he did not believe he would get it. God says, I will give it to you anyway, and then I will bring you to it, and that was by discipline. Then, as we have seen, John was in the deserts until the time of his showing to Israel. The Lord is brought in in the next chapter; but I thought that first in John we might see how perfect the result was, that in the midst of these dignitaries in the world -- all under the government of God in their places here -- was a man He could take up. His secret history qualifies him for the word of God to come to him.

Then it says, "he came into all the district round the Jordan". He selects his area of service, all in keeping with his training. He does not go to the places of religious repute to serve. He could easily have attracted attention in Jerusalem, but instead of that it was the district of the Jordan, with all the spiritual memories and teaching that centre around that river. As instructed in the way of the Lord, the minister who should finish up the old dispensation would be learned in the Old Testament. He would know the significance of Jordan, for the truth centring in Jordan abounds in the Old Testament. That is the next thing that would come out in a vessel -- he would know "the way of God", compare Acts 18:26.

C.F. Does the Lord begin at Jordan, too?

J.T. Quite. He comes to John there.

C.F. Is that why Jordan (baptism) comes before the genealogy in Luke? In Matthew it is after.

J.T. I think so -- to bring out the order of man.

In Matthew it is royalty, but in Luke you get the genealogy identifying the Lord -- that kind of man -- with our race right through Adam to God. It is to bring out what the Lord was. After all had been baptised He was baptised; He was the last apparently. He did not put Himself forward; He claimed no distinction, and as baptised He is praying. There was full maturity there; the order of man was fully come to light, and heaven owns it; and now He is identified with our race. Marvellous grace!

G.C. Does He have in view in His service to bring man into accord?

J.T. That is it. What you get in John is that he is instructed in the way of the Lord, and his ministry is governed by the light of it. Isaiah is quoted. In the next chapter Isaiah is again quoted, or read, by the Lord -- the passage that governs His ministry. Here we get a passage that governs John's ministry, so evidently we need to be governed by the light governing the position, that is to say, by what the dispensation of God is. If we are governed by that light, we are acting with God. Paul emphasises that the Corinthians were not so governed. Then the next thing is that John sees the people -- the crowds, it says -- coming to him, and he makes no distinction; he calls them a generation of vipers. That was a very strong word to use in preaching, but the point to see is that he touches their consciences. He knows what to say.

F.F-n. This was making straight the way of the Lord. I was thinking that the Lord begins in a very different kind of way.

J.T. Oh, very different! It is on the line of grace, but John is on the line of reformation.

H.McM. What does the Jordan stand for?

J.T. It generally means death; it is a leading subject in the Old Testament, with which John was no doubt conversant, so that he begins there.

H.McM. Is it death and resurrection -- the two together?

J.T. Yes. It stands for death, but death as overthrown by the power of God. But in using this expression, "offspring of vipers", he makes no difference. In Matthew he referred to certain ones, but here he touches the consciences of all, so that they begin to ask what they should do. The ministry was effective. That is the important thing!

J.M. Would you say that the way the servant gets at consciences marks his own individuality?

J.T. I think each has his own way of getting at people.

D.L.H. This would be somewhat on the prophetic line, would it not?

J.T. It would. One has often noticed in Acts 2:11 that those upon whom the Spirit came were speaking of "the great things of God", but there were no convictions; when Peter spoke a little later there were three thousand converted. He had his own divinely given way of getting at them and of applying the truth.

J.M. It is always the truth.

J.T. It is, but you must know how to apply it.

P.L. The Lord was a "polished shaft", (Isaiah 49:2).

Ques. Would you say there is room for such a word at the present moment -- generation of vipers?

J.T. Whatever word you use you need to get at people's consciences, so that they begin to ask questions.

H.McM. Would this be our warrant for open-air preaching?

J.T. Surely, but I do not know whether we should use the word 'open-air'. It is preaching, whether indoors or out of doors. Preach wherever you can.

F.F-n. And not always to crowds.

F.F-t. The preacher must have his conviction of sin very deeply to be able to apply it.

J.T. You may be sure the Holy Spirit had taught John how to repent, how to judge the meanness of his own heart.

F.F-t. And Peter, to whom you referred, knew it very deeply.

F.F-n. I wondered whether the tears would come in there, that is, in the matter of learning what you are yourself. Peter had to weep bitterly.

J.T. Quite so. No doubt he was effective as having gone through that.

D.L.H. John seems to be still on the responsible line, so in answering these questions he points to certain practices which would prove where they were.

J.T. Yes. It is not christianity, but you have general principles noted. He is preaching according to the dispensation under which he is working. It was preparation for the Lord, according to the ministry John had received. He puts them to the test, that is, the question of equalisation, levelling up and levelling down, making straight ways. The different classes come to him, the tax-gatherers and the soldiers, and he has a word for all of them. But we are not reformers; reformation does not belong to this dispensation.

F.F-t. Here it is a people to whom Christ could come.

J.T. Clearly. Then you will notice that a ministry of this kind does not end in outward triumph, it involves suffering -- in John's case imprisonment and death. The passage would also lay stress on the wickedness of Herod -- of that kind of man. He added this to all his wickedness that he put John in prison.

E.H. Referring to the thought of preaching, what does the apostle Paul mean when he says, "I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest ... when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway", (1 Corinthians 9:27).

J.T. It means just what we are saying. In John

we see one who kept his body under. It is an athletic figure. In service you keep your body under, that is, you do not allow the natural to come up. You are not satisfying your own ambitions; you do not want to shine as a preacher; you are judging yourself all the time. Many do not do it. They preach, but they become castaways. In no way does it mean that Paul could be lost, but in what he is doing he is seeing to it that he should not be. He is a model for us in this respect.

J.M. The vessel would be done with as to usefulness otherwise.

J.T. Just so. He would be a castaway. The man who does not keep his body under is not saved characteristically at all, yet he may be a preacher. The first epistle to the Corinthians emphasises how far a man may go without being converted.

Now I thought we might just note here the Lord as setting forth the order of man that pleases God. He is baptised, but comes in after the others, and He is praying, showing that He is dependent upon God, and heaven owns Him. Then we have His identification with our race, and then in the next chapter, He being "full of the Holy Spirit returned from the Jordan, and was led by the Spirit in the wilderness forty days, tempted of the devil".

G.C. Following your thought as to conviction, John produces conviction. Does that make room for bringing in Christ?

J.T. Quite. Repentance opens the way for the presentation of Christ, but then you see the perfection of maturity in the Lord. John is filled with the Spirit, but the Lord is led of the Spirit. That is to introduce the dispensation in which we are, the dispensation of the Holy Spirit, and the Lord has His place as one who was subject. He was led of the Spirit to where the flesh would not go -- into the wilderness -- and it is to be tempted of the devil; not

that there was anything in the Lord, but as a model for us. I think the suggestion is that the Lord would not go in the devil's way otherwise, nor should any of us.

P.L. Does it suggest that every servant has to be tested as to the motives that govern him in his service?

J.T. Yes. The first thing in the desert is: Can you live on the word of God? When it is a question of the Lord's service, one is sure to be tried in his temporal circumstances, and unless he goes through this experience and triumphs in it by dependence upon God, he is sure to fall under the influence of men, of money. It is set down as a model for us.

H.McM. Is it important that He returns from the Jordan?

J.T. It is important. You begin from where death is overcome. Then the next thing in Luke is the glory of this world. You may overcome on the line of dependence upon God for your daily bread, but you may get on in the world and make money, so the second temptation is in regard to the kingdoms of this world. It comes third in Matthew, but second here.

F.F-t. Would living by the word of God be like a secret spring? I was wondering as to the force of the word of God here in Luke. It is different in Matthew, is it not? There it is "every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God", (Matthew 4:4).

J.T. Here it is "every word of God". It would not be the word of God in a general way, but in detail.

F.F-t. Yes, I wondered if it would mean for us the living expression of God.

J.T. Yes -- His mind, and that in detail. All is essential. As in Matthew, there is a freshness in the words that proceed out of the mouth of God.

F.F-t. The word of God is a feature in Luke. Later we get, "The seed is the word of God", (Luke 8:11).

F.F-n. Would this answer to the manna -- every word of God?

J.T. Yes, quite. The manna was of course the Lord Himself -- what He was here for us, but the word of God brings us what is His mind; that is the food for the wilderness. We need every word of God, we must not miss anything.

P.L. What God is saying at the moment is the most powerful weapon against the enemy.

F.F-t. So Luke speaks of attendance on the word. That would be the same line, would it not?

J.T. Yes. So Mary is a model. She sat and listened to what the Lord was saying; she missed nothing. So with Anna. She departed not from the temple, which was the place of communications. She would not miss anything, and sure enough she came in at "the same hour" when wonderful things were happening. Simeon was just speaking the mind of God as to the Babe and she did not miss that.

H.W.E. All this is on the line of preparation for service.

J.T. That is what I was thinking. In Matthew it is what proceeds from the mouth of God; that is, it is original. It is direct. There is such a thing today -- that which comes from the mouth of God.

P.L. So that "the Spirit speaks expressly" in the house, (1 Timothy 4:1).

C.F. It would be in connection with the written word.

J.T. Yes; but you must remember that for many years after the death and resurrection of Christ there were only the Old Testament scriptures, but the word of God was being ministered all the time. That is the spoken word; it is living and operative.

Now I was thinking of the second temptation here, how particularly appropriate it is to young brothers, because the world has a terrible force. Of the young men it is said that, although strong and that the

word of God abides in them, they are still in danger of the world. Luke has the gentile more in view, because the gentile is more attracted by the world, in a political sense, and exposed to it than the Jew. With the Jew it would be more the temple, the religious feature, which is the third temptation here.

F.F-t. These things come up in new forms, do they not?

P.L. And the enemy tries every temptation.

J.T. Just so. It says the devil "having completed every temptation". He omitted nothing. That is a terrible thing to think of, that he would not leave a stone unturned to divert one from the path. But he is defeated, and Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit to Galilee. He is now entering on His service. He is doing it. It is not now the Spirit's doing, although the Spirit is available.

Ques. Why does it refer to the power of the Spirit?

J.T. To show that as a perfect Man here He did everything by the Spirit. "If I by the Spirit of God cast out demons, then indeed the kingdom of God is come upon you", (Matthew 12:28). The first lesson is the greatest, to be led by the Spirit.

Ques. I notice it says that the devil led Him. Has that any force today?

J.T. I suppose to bring out, as God permits, the power the enemy has, but he had nothing in Christ. I always feel it is not what the devil can do; it is what God may permit him to do -- a solemn thing. So that in 2 Samuel it is said that God moved David to number the people. In 1 Chronicles it says that Satan moved David, showing the solemn thing that God allowed all this.

P.L. Satan had to get permission as to Job.

P.T. Is not the subtlety of the enemy seen in introducing the element of doubt -- the word 'if'?

J.T. Indeed. His skill lies in deception. He is the deceiver.

F.F-t. "Led of the Spirit". In the teaching of the gospel are we brought to Romans 8? Would that be where the education lies for us?

J.T. Quite so. We are marked off as sons of God as led by the Spirit. It is in that way that the kingdom of God is developed -- "not eating and drinking, but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit", (Romans 14:17).

F.F-t. So that in passing through the training you would refuse the flesh and allow the Spirit full sway.

NUMBER TWELVE

John 3:35; Revelation 7:1 - 4; Revelation 21:9 - 16

I have in mind to say a word about administration. Now, in order that there should be an administrative agency here for God, there must be trustworthiness in those who form it, for what is to be administered is precious. It is of God; it has cost Him much and so He withholds committing it until there are those who are to be trusted. Now the ministry of John the evangelist is to bring out this very feature. He tells us that the Father loves the Son. It will be observed that this statement appears after the Lord's ministry had begun. John does not wait for the imprisonment of John the baptist to begin his record of the ministry of Jesus. Indeed, he tells us expressly that "John was not yet cast into prison", (John 3:24) and yet the Lord had been gathering certain ones to Him and working signs among the people. The synoptic gospels relate that John was cast into prison before our Lord began His ministry, whereas John tells us expressly that he was not cast into prison; he does not tell us at all about the imprisonment of John the baptist, and mentions nothing of his want of faith as the others do. He enlarges on his very words to bring out the glory of the Son of God.

The Spirit of God loves to use our words if they are sufficient to convey His mind, hence the voluminous quotations that you get in Scripture from believers. Indeed, in the beginning of Hebrews, where the Holy Spirit enlarges on the glory of Christ, the quotations are nearly all from the book of Psalms. The Holy Spirit could speak directly. He could use His own words to unfold to us the glories of Christ. He does indeed do that in the opening of the first chapter of Hebrews; but then he brings in a list of speakers

from amongst the saints, as if he would honour the saints by quoting their very words to depict for us the varied glories of the Son of God. And so the Baptist's words are quoted in this gospel for this very reason. He is quoted at length in the first chapter to show how small his estimate of himself was, and how great his estimate of Jesus. He is quoted as saying that "he who sent me to baptise with water, he said to me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending and abiding on him, he it is who baptises with the Holy Spirit". And then he adds from himself, "And I have seen and borne witness that this is the Son of God", (verses 33,34).

And so the narrative goes on to the end of this chapter, where one says to John that Jesus baptised. The Baptist answers, "A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven" (verse 27); he sweeps away, as it were, in a sentence the whole fabric of sacerdotal and hierarchical christianity. It is not from above. Nothing is of any value in his mind save what is from above, and so, "He who comes from above is above all", (verse 31). You see how the Holy Spirit uses the words of the Baptist; He reserves him, as it seems to me, for this very purpose, that he might join in the great chorus of loving voices who depict the glory of Jesus. This is the time for learning to do that, beloved brethren. This is the time for learning how, as proving the Lord, as loving Him, to speak well of Him. And so John the baptist is a model for us. He says, "He must increase, but I must decrease", (verse 30). He was a friend of the Bridegroom, and he rejoiced to hear the Bridegroom's voice; hearing it he says, "this my joy then is fulfilled", (verse 29). So that John the baptist does not disappear from the scene in this gospel in the prison, nor in unbelief, nor under a cloud in any way. He disappears like the setting sun, as its countless beams radiate round the western horizon. He goes down joyfully, and he

leaves Jesus in supremacy as the rising sun to dominate the day. The Baptist's words merge in the words of the evangelist. There seems no mark of distinction. It is as if God would honour his spirituality, although he belonged to a previous dispensation. In spirit he was in ours in his appreciation of Christ -- the great link between all the dispensations; for all are held together, every family of God named of the Father is held in relation to all the others, in love for Christ. He is the binding stone of the whole structure of God.

And so as John's speech finishes the Son of God stands out in His solitary greatness and dignity. It is said, "The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hands". However different it may appear at the present time, beloved friends, and however much power is in the hands of others ostensibly -- government, and so on -- all is delivered (not shall be delivered) into His hands. If He is not exercising it in a public way, it is because He is the perfect Administrator; it is because He would administrate what there is to administer in keeping with the mind of God. Hence in the next chapter we find Him wearied with His journey, "just as he was", (chapter 4:6) as we are told, sitting on the well. He is the Son and has all things in His hands; the government is upon His shoulder; all that God has to display publicly is in His hands, but for the moment He could be a lonely traveller through this world. It was due to God; it was in keeping with the divine way, and so as the solitary, needy soul from the city confronts Him, He administers, He unfolds what He was there for: "If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give, me to drink, thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water", (verse 10). He was in possession of this priceless treasure. You see it was given into His hands and He proposes to give it.

I only touch on that -- that the One into whose

hands all things are given is loved. Why is He loved? Because He is lovable. John makes a point of lovability. Some of us forget that. If I expect to be loved I seek to be lovable. If I seek love I shall remove in myself what would hinder it.

Jesus was loved before the foundation of the world, but that is not the point here. The point here is that He had been ministering, He had been moving about in this world for thirty years and had already begun to minister. He had already begun to speak about God to men. He had already begun to speak about the love of God, that "God so loved the world" (chapter 3:16); He had already begun to speak about new birth and about His own death -- that He would be lifted up ignominiously as the serpent was lifted up in the wilderness. All that had come out, as it were, voluntarily. It had to come out. It was there in volume, for He was "full of grace and truth", (chapter 1:14). John is not concerned with what preceded Christ, though the others are. It was the Son of God come into the world and He must act from Himself, and so the Father loved Him.

You say, How does that bear upon us? Well, it is that you begin to do something for God. From the very outset of your spiritual history there are instincts Godward, and these begin to act. They are bound to act. No doubt we may hinder them, but God takes note of every action flowing from His holy nature in us, and we become lovable to God. God can love before we are lovable; such is the love of God, and so it is with the christian, too. As he knows love as it is in God he can love, although there may be unloveliness in the object. The working of the divine nature in the christian is Christ reproduced. You thus become lovable; and you become trustworthy, for he that is faithful in little, however little, is faithful also in much; and "unto everyone that hath shall be given", (Matthew 25:29). However little it may be, if you have got something, you can get more; that is the divine way.

I now turn to Revelation. I want to speak about the number twelve, because it denotes this very thing. It is a number much used in Scripture. It stands out from the time it is introduced right on to the end of Scripture. And what I want to say about it immediately, so that you may understand what I have in mind, is that it is a number of great flexibility. The schoolchild understands how divisible it is. It is a number of great flexibility, and denotes what the saints are as formed in the divine nature, as in the hands of the Lord for administration.

Now if I am to be in that, you can see that I have got to strip myself of mere individuality and independency. I must be so in the hands of the Lord in relation to all others who are in His hands, that He can send me at His pleasure without any question on my part as regards the rightness of His actions. I am held in relation to all the others. I am held in a company that is perfectly divisible in His hands and can be disposed of by Him. As I advance I come to know the wisdom that is in Christ as Head, and I see that He must be free to dispose of His people for the good of all. I see that He knows, and so I surrender myself entirely, as that great vessel Saul of Tarsus did when he said, "Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?" (Acts 9:6) What had Saul already seen? He had seen Christ in His people. He had come up against them in his wilful way of persecution. But what were they? They were in the hands of the Lord. The Lord said to him, You are persecuting Me. His saints were Himself in the sense that they were His body. Is Saul to be of that? Yes, he is. He is to represent the love of Christ in its administrative service, but in order to have part in it he is led by the hand into the city. He has to learn to hear from others as well as from the Lord directly.

True enough he got his ministry direct from the Lord, but as to his instruction as a christian, he had

to learn from the brethren at Damascus. He had to go into the city and be taught, to be told what he must do. So his eyes are opened, as we have often remarked, on a brother, and that brother tells him what to do. He is to arise and be baptised. Saul is to disappear entirely. His sins are to be washed away, and he is to be filled with the Holy Spirit. He is merged, indeed, by the possession of the Spirit in the company, and then he goes in and out amongst them. He is with them in Damascus. He is known to be with them, he is one of them and is dependent upon them, if he is to escape the persecuting hand of the king. They let him down in a basket over the wall, through a window. You see thus how you come into the thing. You come in as dependent under God on those who were before you. You can never despise them after that. Your spiritual history begins with them. However much you may say, 'The Lord spoke to me', the saints spoke to you too and so you respect them. If I am ever to serve them I must respect them. Paul was ready to say of some, "who also were in Christ before me" (Romans 16:7); that was something. We can never forget experienced brethren, aged brethren, and that is ever a sober, wholesome sense to have. It saves us from being independent. It enables us to be in our places so as to represent the number twelve; that is, I can now serve with others, or in relation to them.

You will observe in this chapter in Revelation, everything is held up in the governmental ways of God in order that this administrative company might be marked off. I only refer to it for the principle. I am not speaking of it dispensationally. It refers to the future dispensationally. It is as if God were saying to this world, I have got an administrative company of My own; I am going to bring it forward. You shall see on earth, brought out from the twelve tribes, an administrative company. God notifies men

about this. We understand it; we wait for it; we know there will never be proper administrative government on the earth until what is thus presented becomes effective. It is not a question of the Lord's administrative ability, but the number of the saints. They are "the bondmen of our God"; they are to be entirely under Him, at His bidding; marked on their foreheads with the seal of the living God. Life is that we enter into this.

We have often had it before us, that this book of Revelation gives us the fruits of all the roots of Genesis; and the root of this passage goes back to Jacob. The number twelve begins at Jacob, I mean in the history of God's ways with men -- whatever there may be in the heavens according to His providence. It is a family thought. They were sons of one man, of one father, and from that root the teaching connected with administration in secret is connected. The enemy sought to break it up, as we see in the history of Joseph, but God carried it through. It seemed to have been broken up, but as the family thought in Judah shone in respect of his father and in respect of the "little one", (Genesis 44:20) Benjamin, Joseph could no longer restrain himself. The family thought reappears, and so it is in the history of the church. However much the enemy has sought to obliterate the family thought, God carries it through. The whole system around us to which I have referred denies the family thought, whereas it is that thought that underlies all that God is working out. I hope we cherish it. He has brought us back to the idea of the family, and, having the family, He has got the means of administration. In family love we are available to God. In all that arises of His gracious service we are perfectly flexible, as I said.

John's ministry is to bring that out, so that the work of God goes on without rivalry, without contention. It is a question of God and what God would

do, I myself being in His hands. You see here how this great administrative company is brought to light by the seal of the living God. They are to have part in this; the stamp of life is to be there, not inwardly only, but on the forehead where everybody can see it.

Now I want to point out how all the features of the twelve reappear. John goes on to show us the bride, the Lamb's wife, the holy city, Jerusalem. Her light is most precious, he says, like a jasper, and she has twelve gates. At the gates are twelve angels, and the names of the twelve tribes of Israel. The vessel is great enough to include in it all the governmental agencies of God. Every instrument of His government in the past is understood, and a place is made for it. Angels have a prominent place with us, and so Israel; and although our inferiors, their very names are cherished. Love for God will always lead us to value what He has used. Paul says, "Our whole twelve tribes", (Acts 26:7). How he loved them! And James writes to them. Faith never gives them up, and so they are there. It is a feature of the greatness, morally, of the city that she includes every agency of divine government.

The assembly thinks for God, and of those whom God respects. The identification of the governmental function of the assembly with that of angels and Israel is most interesting. The golden links of divine love are seen here. It is in the number twelve. And there are twelve foundations. Now we are coming nearer home. Who are these? On them are the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb; it is a question of the Lamb, they belong to Him. They belong to Jesus who suffered and died for us. We rejoice in them. It will be observed in the epistles that the foundation is connected with them; whether the twelve or Paul, the city is built upon the foundation of the apostles. The thing is given concretely. The Lord says, I will build, but it is by the apostles

and prophets. It is indisputable, there it is, the foundation of the apostles and prophets. It is no abstract idea. It is a question of what they did. How perfectly under the Lord's hand they were!

And now as to the precious stones -- they are all employed; they reflect light as we all know. In Ezekiel the king of Tyre had only nine, but there are more now, a greater variety for the reflection of the light of God. There are twelve, and a name is given to every one of them. You see how the flexibility of things works into the heavenly city. Every feature of administration appears there, and so that it might be clearly understood that it is not an abstract matter, the measurement is a cube. It is a solid, so to speak, a substance. It is not simply a square, it is a cube, so that the Spirit of God is not presenting us with theory, but with substance -- the thing is there. All that God had in His mind in the way of government is seen there. It is not a question here of our enjoyment exactly; the point is to disclose that there is a vessel in which to bring out concretely in the fullest sense every divine thought of administration. The city is thus the Lamb's wife. She is the vessel through whom. His government is administered on earth.

My object is that there may be some little answer to this number twelve, whether locally or generally. We are being set up as possessors of the love of God; it is in our hearts, so that we love one another; we are thus together without independency or will, perfectly flexible in the Lord's hands for whatever service He may require. It is an immense position and one covets to be in it, to be in that number, so to speak, so that one is at His disposal without a question.

ASSEMBLY MATERIAL

Luke 8:15; 1 Peter 1:23; 1 Peter 2:1 - 5

I was thinking of the assembly and the material that is requisite for it, all God's operations at the present time having it in view. Luke has his own way of dealing with this material and so has Matthew; indeed, all the New Testament writers deal with it directly or indirectly. Matthew makes the material the result of revelation; it was a matter of revelation, and revelation is not a moral process; whereas Luke has the moral process in view, and so he deals with "the word of God".

The word of God is not exactly a revelation, although involved in it; revelation is by a divine Person directly. We have it with Peter, and we have it with Paul; in Peter's case it was revelation 'to'; that is to say, the Father had revealed to Peter who the Person was that was before him; in Paul's case it was revelation 'in'. If we go by the record of the same incident in Luke and Mark, we should conclude that Peter's answer to the Lord's query was based on what he saw in Christ, but Matthew refers not to that but to revelation by the Father. No doubt, when the Lord propounded the question as to who He was, they reverted back in their minds to what they had seen and heard in Him. Were He to put such a question to us we should revert back to what had come under our notice in Him. So we may assume that all the disciples, including Peter, were concerned on those lines, but then the Father acted sovereignly in relation to Peter's case. But each of them would be concerned to answer, for the question was not put to Peter specifically; it was put to them all, "Whom say ye I am?" (Matthew 16:15). So that in their exercises (which I

may remark are those which would be wholesome and educative) the Father acts specifically in regard of Peter. He revealed to him that the Person before him was His Son, the Son of the living God. That He was the Christ Peter might have arrived at, as I said, otherwise; Nathanael arrived at it otherwise, and according to Luke and Mark doubtless Peter also, but it is quite another thing to have the truth by revelation. This Matthew presents.

We have to distinguish between revelation and declaration. In taking account of what had come under their notice in the Lord's words and works and ways, they had been occupied with declaration, and that is the sum of what John presents in saying, "the only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him". It was what was public and general. But in what the Father had revealed to Peter, and in the Lord's comments we learn that the material was the outcome not of the declaration, but of the revelation, that is to say, the material in result is something outside of man's ken; it comes directly from God; it is spiritual.

Now all that has to be borne in mind in connection with what I am going to say, and that is, that Luke deals with the word of God and this refers to the mind of God, not only as to who Christ is, but as to the mind of God spoken. It is a question of what is spoken, and so completely has it been spoken by Christ, that He is called definitely "the Word". He is called that both by Luke and John; (Luke 1:2; John 1:1).

Now the word of God, beloved brethren, coming in thus, involves a moral process in us, and I wish to show the bearing of this on assembly material. Luke in treating of the parable of the sower, regards the seed not as the word of the kingdom, but calls it "the word of God"; (Luke 8:11). Matthew calls it "the word of the kingdom", (Matthew 13:19) and Mark calls it simply "the word", (Mark 4:14,15)

but Luke calls it "the word of God". Hence it is a question of God's mind and involves a moral process in those who receive it. They are to be affected by it, it is to change their whole outlook; it is to change their taste and their feelings; in a word it is to produce in them a wholly new moral being, and that being is to be "of God". They are to be like God in understanding and intelligence. It is not exactly a question of His attributes, but of His mind. Think of being let into the mind of God; it is not even His commandments. Commandments are imperative; we may not understand them, but we have to obey; but the 'word' gives us understanding, so that we know the why and wherefore of things. Thus Luke in treating of this parable of the sower arrives at the good ground. In all the evangelists the other ground is valueless; the only ground which is of any value is that which produces fruit that remains, and so Luke goes to the root and says, "an honest and good heart".

Now it is well to face this, beloved brethren, especially young people, because God intends you for great things. He has great things for you, and He intends you to face them, and to have to say to them. One of the greatest things is that we have to do with Christ, I mean that we are to be Levites and priests. Luke brings that out in the early part of his gospel; he brings out one person who had to do with Him most intimately; that was Mary. It was not merely that she was blessed; she had to do with Christ in the most intimate way, and she was prepared for it.

And so you get Simeon in the temple; he was to have to do with Christ; I am not speaking now of what he would get through Christ, but I am referring to his having to handle Christ. The apostle John speaks about handling the Word of life. What holy hands they must be, what intelligent hands! And so Simeon stands out as a model for us. It is said that

the Holy Spirit was upon him; his early history is not given to us; he appears suddenly as qualified to handle that blessed Babe. He was to have to do with Him. What training he must have had with God, what experience with God! He was a man who was in communion with God; the Holy Spirit was upon him, and it was revealed to him by the Holy Spirit (the most intimate communication, not through an angel but by the Spirit) that he should not see death until he had seen the Lord's Christ. Subsequently to that he came by the Spirit into the temple, and being in the temple by the Spirit he received the Babe into his arms; he had to do with the Babe; he had to do with Christ. And as he takes the Babe in his arms he is qualified. The mind of God comes into his soul; he blessed God; he is a consecrated priest now; his arms are filled with Christ and he says to God, "now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word",. (Luke 2:29). Note what respect he had for the word; he would not wish to leave before the time, "for mine eyes have seen thy salvation", and then he proceeds to unfold the mind of God with regard to the Babe.

I refer to all this that you may see that we are called upon to have to do with Christ. I am not referring to what you receive from Him as the result of His death, but that we have to do with Him. How important therefore to be formed by the word of God, that is to say, the whole moral being formed by it, every part of the being. Hence the word here is that an honest and good heart receiving the word brings forth fruit with patience. It is not here the quantity of fruit as in Mark and Matthew; in Matthew we have a hundred, sixty and thirty-fold, that is to say, there is decline, but still there is fruit. In Mark it is the reverse, the hundred comes last but Luke is not concerned with the quantity of fruit, but the kind of fruit, the state of soul in which the

fruit is borne, that is in patience -- one of the scarcest qualities perhaps that we possess -- and I am speaking for myself.

Here we are confronted with all sorts of difficulties, "difficult times", as the scripture says (2 Timothy 3:1); they are here now, and patience is required, so that it is a question of the state of soul in which the fruit is borne. You can understand a farmer looking at his land, at the depth of the soil, at the quality of the soil; you say, 'You will have a fine crop here', but he is looking at the soil; it is a question of the soil. So Luke is occupied with the soil, not the quantity of fruit, but the kind of soil in which the fruit grows, the precious outcome of the word, in an honest and good heart. What patience God has had! The patience of God is one of the greatest of subjects. Think of God rising up early, as He says in the Old Testament, to send prophets, and that to "a disobedient and gainsaying people", (Romans 10:21). We have to be like God if we are to represent Him when we have to do with a disobedient and gainsaying people, and we have to bear fruit in these circumstances. We see this in Noah; he preached; we are told he was a preacher of righteousness. What patience was required as the fruit was so small -- the results so little!

Now I pass on to Peter's epistle, because I want to show you how he regards the new birth. In the epistle to the Hebrews you get something that throws light on the subject as showing how the word operates as received into the soul of the believer -- into "an honest and good heart"; it takes account of the component parts, as I may say, of a believer. There has to be inward adjustment, not only outward, and so we are told in that epistle that the word of God is living and operative, it is sharper than any two-edged sword, it divides asunder between soul and spirit; it is a question of its inward operation. There

is nothing in the whole universe like it. No surgeon, however clever, can attempt to do what the word of God does. Only God Himself understands man; man is fearfully and wonderfully made; there are inward influences and movements that are beyond the cleverest of men, but they are not beyond the word of God. The word of God knows how to divide between soul and spirit, but He divides it for me, not for Himself. In Philippians we read that the saints were to be joined in soul as well as in mind. We come together and enjoy the word of God and we go home, and our souls are perhaps not much in it, but it may be are in our families. In the beginning "the heart and soul ... of those that had believed were one" (Acts 4:32); all their goods were in the community. Now the word of God divides asunder between soul and spirit, joints and marrow, alluding to the body. There is spirit, soul and body. The word of God helps me in regard of these, so that there should be adjustment in me, that I may be intelligent as to myself. You say, 'That may mean introspection', but introspection is good; it is wholesome if it be a question of the word of God, for I know by it the principles that are operating in me and I am adjusted.

The result of all that is that there is a birth, as it says, "being born again". Now this is not the "born anew" of John 3. There are those who reduce the things of God as much as possible; they reduce them down to a minimum so as to avoid exercise, and to avoid study and contemplation, but "a workman that needeth not to be ashamed" (2 Timothy 2:15) must rightly divide the word of truth, and the word of truth enables me to discern a distinction between John 3 and 1 Peter 1. In John 3:6 there is nothing said about being born by the word. It is the initial thing, simply born of water and of the Spirit. The result is not a person, but "that which is born of the Spirit is spirit". We have to note these things, dear brethren, so as to be

intelligent. In John 3 it is that we should be born anew, and that refers to the whole person, for it is from the top throughout. There will thus be spiritual instincts, for these are the outcome of the birth in John 3. But in 1 Peter 1 it is by the word of God, and we get more than instincts, we get intelligent affections that recognise the brethren. I know whom to love, I know when to love, I know how to love; all these are the outcome of being born of the word of God, that is to say, I love with intelligence. It is a question of my mind; my mind is instructed, but then my whole intelligent being is affected because I have been born again by the word of God; "being born again ... by the living and abiding word of God". The result is you have a family of persons who are intelligent; they are of God. It is not exactly "born of God". You may say that I am making fine distinctions, but I am going by the scripture. In the epistle of John you have the expression "born of God"; that is the complete thought, as it brings God Himself in. But what I am speaking of is His word -- the effect of the word of God as bringing about this state in believers, that they may be said to be "born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the living and abiding word of God", all flesh being as grass. Family status, money and all that gives distinction according to man are left behind. "All flesh is as grass, and all its glory as the flower of grass". That is the way it should read, I think, not simply the glory of man, but the glory of flesh. Flesh has its own meaning in Scripture, and it has to be taken in its context; here it is flesh as the outcome of natural birth, and its glory; whatever it is that it may regard as glory is as grass. Do we accept such a judgment as that? "The grass has withered and its flower has fallen; but the word of the Lord abides for eternity", (verses 24,25).

Now I want you to see how all this bears on the

assembly, upon assembly material, and in order to make the thing clearer in its application to the assembly I shall point out in Acts 18, where the work at Corinth is recorded, that Paul was pressed in respect of the word, for that is how it reads in verse 5. He was grieved in his spirit on account of the idolatry that he saw at Athens, but in chapter 18 he is in Corinth; we are told he arrived at Corinth and found Priscilla and Aquila and abode with them, because they were of the same craft. He wrought with them six days of the week, as it appears, and on the sabbath he went into the synagogue and preached to the Jews; but when waiting for Timothy he was pressed in regard to the word. We should notice that, because it is so urgent that the word of God should have its full action among us. Paul was pressed as to that, not as to wickedness as at Athens, he was pressed on account of the word of God. So the Lord comes to him by night and says, "Fear not, but speak and be not silent; because I am with thee, and no one shall set upon thee to injure thee; because I have much people in this city" (verses 9,10), then we are told that he remained in the city for "a year and six months, teaching among them the word of God" (verse 11). Now in the next chapter, which deals with the work of God at Ephesus, it is "the word of the Lord", and you may wonder why. I believe the explanation is that in chapter 19 it is a military idea; it is a question of the inheritance, and the assembly in that relation and the conflict that arises in connection with taking possession; so we are exhorted to "be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might", (Ephesians 6:10). But in Acts 18 at Corinth it is a question of the action of the word of God with regard to the "much people", for these people were to be formed into an assembly at Corinth -- and how? By the action of the word of God, for God had come in and spoken; He had revealed His mind in the word and

the saints were to receive it and understand that they were the assembly of God in that city. And thus the word of God as allowed to act among us brings about local conditions in connection with which God can dwell. Tabernacle conditions are brought about by the action of the word of God.

In saying that I want to link it up with 1 Peter 2 and 3. You observe the exhortation is that they should lay aside "all malice and all guile and hypocrisies and envyings and all evil speakings". Need I comment on this? How applicable it is to persons who are born again by the word of God. In the light of that fact you lay aside these things: malice, guile, hypocrisies, envyings, and evil speakings. These are to be laid aside; they are unfit for people born by the word of God. And then he says, "as newborn babes". It is not that they were that, there is no reproach here attached to the word 'babes'; in Corinthians the word is used reproachfully; (1 Corinthians 3:1). Paul does not say newborn babes in Corinthians; Peter does here because he is dealing with taste for milk -- with unaffected, unadulterated taste. "Newborn babes"; we are to be like that; it is a question of what taste there is for "the pure mental milk of the word". You may say there is not enough for the young among the saints, not enough literature; we have to go outside to get books. Beware of that; there is no "pure mental milk" in any of those books that you get outside; you go to feed your mind, but you will feed it with something impure; it is not pure. We read in Proverbs 2 verses 12 and 16 of "the man that speaketh froward things" and of "the strange woman, the stranger who flattereth with her words"; the books of this world represent these things to us christians; they are froward; they are against God.

Now what we are enjoined here (and I speak for young christians) is to desire earnestly the pure mental

milk of the word, for the mind needs to be nourished, and the word of God is intended for that. The nourishment is the pure mental milk of the word, "that by it ye may grow up to salvation". It is one thing to be born again by it, but it is another thing to grow by it, that ye may grow thereby; the growth is to salvation, so that one is free from every other controlling influence.

We were speaking this afternoon of the unconquered virgin -- the virgin daughter of Zion and of Jerusalem. It means that you are in salvation, that you are uncontrolled by anything in this world. If you have come under the influence of anything in this world that leads you into bondage, you cannot be said to be unconquered by it. You grow up to salvation here by the pure mental milk of the word, "if indeed ye have tasted that the Lord is good". He is good; you see every day the instances of the goodness of the Lord.

Having arrived at that point, it only remains to show the connection with the assembly in Peter's way. Peter uses the word 'stones', the figure, no doubt, arising from the revelation to himself, and what he was as being a stone; he says, "To whom coming, a living stone". I hardly know any passage that tests us like this as to whether we are material for the assembly. To whom are you coming? To One who is good. You have tasted it; the word 'taste' refers back to the "newborn babes"; you have tasted that He is good. Now in coming to Him you recognise that He is rejected of men, cast away as worthless. Are you prepared for that? That is the test. He is held to be of no account at all by men; He was presented to them, they had every opportunity of proving Him; then they cast Him away. They were building, but they cast Him away as worthless. That is the One you come to; it is in that connection the passage lies. The members of the assembly come to

Christ knowing that He is rejected, and rejected in the most scornful way "as worthless"; that is the way men look at Him and, of course, I am reckoned worthless as identified with Him. But He is chosen of God and precious, so that in coming to such a One as that, we are owned of God. He says, 'You will do for Me; whatever they think of you, you will do for Me'; you are "being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ".

Well, that is the relation, as I understand it, of the word of God to assembly material, and God is looking for assembly material. He is not looking for quantity, it is not a question of show in the way of numbers, it is a question of suitable material; all the workings and the operations of God today have that in view, that He might have material for the assembly. May God help us to pay attention to the word, that it may have its action in us individually and in relation to the assembly.

THE TESTIMONY PASSED ON IN FRESHNESS

Deuteronomy 31:14 - 30; Deuteronomy 32:1 - 4,44

It is said in Ecclesiastes 1:4 that "One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever". I have in mind that there is that which is of God on the earth, and that it is to be maintained and passed on from the generation that is passing away to the one coming. I have selected this passage in Deuteronomy because to my mind it fits in with these thoughts exactly, that is, we have Moses as representing a generation -- one marked by extraordinary events. Moses may be taken, indeed, as representative of those who are faithful in the maintenance of what God intends to continue, and we see the continuance in freshness in him.

Earlier, we have in Jacob a generation in connection with which also there were extraordinary events. He, too, passes away in freshness and energy. He, like Moses, passes on unimpaired to the coming generation what he held and treasured. You will recall how he strengthened himself upon his bed and conveyed to his sons the mind of God; in a most striking manner he was able to pass on unimpaired what he had maintained and cherished to those who followed.

So in a later day we have David, another great servant, representing a generation in which there were great events in the unfolding of God's mind in testimony. According to Chronicles he passes away in vigour. It is true that in 1 Kings he is seen as weak and heatless, needing external warmth to keep him alive; but in 1 Chronicles we have a different David -- as if God would maintain this great principle -- for we read there that he stood up upon his feet.

Doubtless he had learned to do that early. Many of us do not begin thus. You will all recall how the man in Acts 3 who had been lame from his birth stood up; he had never experienced such a thing, he had never in his life stood up upon his feet. Peter takes him by his right hand -- for God would use every opportunity, every advantage, to help him -- and in the name of Jesus Christ the Nazaraean bids him rise up and walk, and immediately his feet and ankle bones were made strong. Without these being made strong he could never have stood on his feet; but as he leaped up, in the consciousness of power in himself which was to be realised in a fuller way later -- in the consciousness of that, he stood on his feet.

I would say, beloved young people, that apart from that experience, that is, the power of balance spiritually, you can never hope to be material for the assembly. Unless that is learned at the outset, that is, how to balance, in other words, the power to stand up, we shall never be material for the assembly, we shall be a public charge; we shall be leaning on others. We all know how infants need help in learning to stand and walk, but this man at the very outset of his spiritual experience stood. He was not to lean on others, he was to be an asset among the saints, and so he enters with the apostles into the temple, and he walked and leaped and praised God; and he held Peter and John; he held them, they did not need to hold or support him.

Now, obviously, in the passage referred to, David had acquired this power and carried it through; he had learned early to stand upon his own feet. You may be sure that he needed that ability, that balance in his conflict in his youth, when he met the lion and the bear. He had had, too, to stand up against the rebuffs of his elder brethren in the presence of Goliath's challenge. One who had not learned to stand upon his feet would have withered under such a rebuke

from his eldest brother -- one of Saul's army, but he says, "What have I now done? Is there not a cause?" (1 Samuel 17:29). There was a cause -- a great cause. The sequel shows what it was, and how fitted and equipped he was for it. What would he have been in the presence of Goliath had he not gone through this experience in his younger days? And so in his old age it is recorded in 1 Chronicles 28:2 -- as if the Holy Spirit would give us a picture of the vessel according to the mind of God -- that he stood up upon his feet and uttered most wonderful things. He spoke of headship -- something that we all need to learn and very few understand. But before David passes away, what was illustrated in his ministry in the ordering of the service of God, for he himself was head, he attributes to God: "Thou art exalted as head above all!" (1 Chronicles 29:11) he says to Jehovah. That is the end of spiritual development and growth; a blessed end! It was not with him as it was with Nebuchadnezzar, "Is not this great Babylon, that I have built?" (Daniel 4:30). He says, "all things come of thee, and of thine own have we given thee", "all this store that we have prepared to build thee an house for thine holy name cometh of thine hand, and is all thine own", (1 Chronicles 29:14,16). He stood upon his feet before he passed away to make one of the most remarkable utterances on record. The Holy Spirit tells us of it, and that his history, his acts first and last, were written by Samuel, by Nathan and by Gad, men of extraordinary spirituality and intelligence, as if to emphasise the principle of passing on what is of God.

Now Moses stands out strikingly amongst all these great vessels. He had arrived at the age of a hundred and twenty, or nearly so; but he is to die, as Simeon later was to die, according to the word of God; (Luke 2:26,29). It is a very great thing to live by the word of God, but to die by it, and that God should

mark the period of one's decease, is a great honour. And so here Jehovah Himself summons Moses and tells him that he is about to die, and that he and Joshua are to appear in the tabernacle of the congregation.

Now this is a most remarkable occurrence; it is full of instruction in regard to the epochs making up the history of the dispensation, in regard to the passing of active service and leadership from one set of hands into another. I wish to call attention to what took place in the tabernacle of the congregation in this connection, a connection that perhaps has not been much observed, but one of immense importance. As set up and anointed, the tabernacle is the great central figure in the history of God's people. In the book of Leviticus God calls out of it; this underlies the epistle to the Corinthians; it is a question of calling; the saints are "called saints" -- the divine call issuing forth from that which God has set up here and anointed, and so believers were gathered in.

In Numbers it is God speaking in the wilderness, that is to say, it is God taking account of us in our circumstances in a scene of adversity and trial. Let no one assume that God is at all indifferent to our position in the wilderness; it is Numbers that gives us the different encampments; they were written down by Moses by the commandment of the Lord (Numbers 33:2) to remind every christian that his particular wilderness circumstances are taken account of. God knows them and He is with you in them normally; so that Numbers is the speaking in the wilderness but out of the tabernacle; the emphasis is on the fact that we are in the wilderness, that God knows it, and that God speaks in it: "The Lord spake unto Moses in the wilderness of Sinai". Now that is Numbers; and so, in every movement of the people, God is there. In fact, in chapter 10 in their first movement from one camp to another, the ark left its own place and went before them -- a most

touching allusion to the service of the Lord at the present time. Normally He is entitled to the most honoured place amongst us, and every attention, but He leaves that and takes the most menial and arduous and exposed position in order to find a resting-place for us. Such is divine love in the wilderness! It is God in His love moving with us in all our movements, and taking up the most arduous tasks for us. We can reckon on that. There was not a word said about the ark doing that in the directions for the journeyings of the camp, but as the people moved the ark left its place in the very centre of the camp and went before -- exposed itself, so to speak, to find a resting-place.

But in Deuteronomy there is very little said about the tabernacle of witness or of the congregation, because it is a question of spiritual formation in this book. There can be no passing on of the testimony merely as a question of light. Deuteronomy is the period in which the Spirit is operating typically. He has come in; He comes in after the brazen serpent. It contemplates, therefore, development, spiritual development in the saints. Without this the testimony must die out, the light must disappear. We may have our Bibles, and there are creeds and catechisms, but the testimony is not in these; and precious as the holy Scriptures are, even they do not convey in themselves the full divine thought. Without spiritual activities, spiritual formation, spiritual growth, the testimony must die. So that Deuteronomy is not a question of light, of what is objective, that is to say, the tabernacle, but of the subjective work of the Spirit, and all this is fully expressed in the great mediator, in the great figure of Moses; so that it is the words of Moses. And then we are given the geographical position in which these words were uttered; (chapter 29:1). Wonderful words! In chapter after chapter he urges motives for the people to love God. In a most skilful manner he urges upon

them that they should love God; that God has loved them, and at the end he says, "Yea, he loved the people!" (Deuteronomy 33:3). God loved them, and that love was to be in the people's hearts. So there were two covenants in Deuteronomy. We have one made in Moab besides the covenant that was given earlier at Horeb. You can understand how these two covenants, the first and the second, were intended to enforce the love of God, to bring it home to the people so that it should be in their hearts. It is not simply the love of God objectively, wonderful as that is, but it is the love of God in our hearts, "shed abroad in our hearts", as it says in Romans 5:5, "by the Holy Spirit which has been given unto us".

Now in the light of these things Moses is to die; and God summons him and Joshua to the tabernacle. If leadership is to pass on from Moses to Joshua, it is to pass on under the most advantageous circumstances; it is God's doing and no transmission can be valid, or effective, or abiding save as it is done by God. Many may essay to be leader, as Adonijah said, "I will be king" (1 Kings 1:5), and many, like him, have taken things into their own hands, but it is God's disposition, and everything in the divine service and administration must be a question of divine disposition and that disposition is in the tabernacle; it is in relation to the whole system of things that God has set up in Christ; it is no local matter. The tabernacle does not denote what is local, it is universal, it represents the whole system that God has set up in Christ, and that stands, "The foundation of God" (2 Timothy 2:19) stands; nothing can touch it, and all His dispositions are in that relation; they are general, so that God summons Moses and Joshua to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. God does it.

Now the history of Joshua presents to us a most interesting subject, but I cannot dwell upon that now; but it ought to be studied by every young brother

and sister. He was known to Moses, he was Moses' minister; at times he was much behind his master, but his history in the main indicates spirituality. I do urge on young people the importance of spirituality -- the importance of light, to be sure. But if you take a man like John the baptist, he was filled with the Holy Spirit from his infancy, but the intent was that he was to be spiritual from the outset, and before he had light; his spirituality preceded his intelligence. Intelligence without spirituality is a dangerous instrument. He was filled with the Spirit, we are told, from his infancy; there was the development of spiritual instincts with him. And then he was in the deserts -- mark you, it is in the plural -- where there is nothing for the flesh. How he would learn to keep his body under lest when he had preached to others he himself should be a castaway! (1 Corinthians 9:27). It is a question of the ability to keep the body under, that is to say, its natural desires and propensities by the Spirit; by the Spirit we are to put to death the deeds of the body, otherwise we are sure to be cast aside. And so John was carefully guarded, first by the giving of the Holy Spirit in his infancy and throughout, and then he was in the deserts until the day of his showing unto Israel (Luke 1:80), that is to say, God saw to it that this great vessel should be spiritual. By constant self-judgment we are to make room for the Spirit. Above all things be spiritual, that is to say, make use of the Spirit by self-judgment; the intelligence will come; there must be intelligence, and the Lord gives understanding; but as we see in Timothy the instincts of faith were there, and intelligence followed; hence his service. And so with Joshua.

The first great exploit of Joshua is in the battle against the Amalekites. Now, this is all for young people -- it is a young people's battle particularly. Although God would unfurl the standard, and said

that He would carry on that conflict from generation to generation, yet it had to be begun then. The things written were to be rehearsed in the ears of Joshua that God would utterly blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under the heavens. Amalek is a question of the power of Satan in the flesh, that is the issue there, and Joshua, on the principle of prayer and dependence and intercession on high, overcame -- an immense beginning for a man who was to lead Israel into the land of Canaan. He began by overcoming, typically, Satan working in the flesh, and then he accompanied Moses on high, and when Israel went wrong he remained in the tabernacle. The tabernacle having been pitched outside the camp, the place of reproach, he was not ashamed of it and remained in it as a young man. We read that Joshua departed not out of the tabernacle. You see the education of the young man, what spiritual education he had. And yet, notwithstanding all this, in Numbers 27 when Moses is told he is going to die, he beseeches Jehovah to appoint a man over Israel who should lead them out and bring them in, that they should not be as sheep that have no shepherd; he does not mention Joshua. He does not venture to propose his successor; there is no such thing in Scripture as apostolic succession. The great prototype apostle, Moses, refrained from it. He asks Jehovah to appoint a man; and yet he knew that here was an eligible man whom he knew well, but he did not dare to appoint him until Jehovah spoke. It shuts out all personal predilections and preferences. It is God's doing and God's preference. You may say, I like this brother here and that brother there, but it is God's doing; it is God's province to dispose of His servants. "Separate me now", the Spirit says, "Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them". (Acts 13:2). It is a question of the Spirit. I might like this brother here, and that brother there, but

what about the Holy Spirit? Is He remiss, is He neglectful? Perish the thought! He is down here, another Comforter, to look after things here, and He is ever active.

And so Moses refrains, and appeals to Jehovah, and Jehovah says, "Take thee Joshua the son of Nun". And what is the commendation? "A man in whom is the Spirit", not a man who can answer the great questions of the moment. In the handling of the testimony of God the Spirit must have His place, and so now here in view of all this God summons the great servant that is about to die and the younger one who was about to take his place, and they are both to appear in the tabernacle of the congregation, the tent of meeting -- that is to say, where God is, where God meets with His people -- and then the glory, the pillar of cloud, comes down over the door of the tabernacle where God indicates His mind. The door is the place of decision, the place in which God indicates His mind.

Think of the glory coming down in connection with the passing of the testimony from the hands of one generation into that of another; out of the hands of one servant into the hands of another! It is a question of the tabernacle of the congregation and refers to the whole divine system; the whole divine system is as it were involved in this; it is no local matter. Think of how important these matters are, and of having to do with them! It refers to the divine, universal system. Think of God who made the heavens and the earth, and who upholds all things, being occupied with this matter -- the passing of the testimony from one servant to another, and when He came down the glory appeared at the door.

Well, Joshua is to receive a charge, but he and Moses are to serve together in a song. You say, You are making room for poets! That is not what is in view here. This song is more than poetry, it is more than rhymes -- much more. Rhyming is a

matter of words; poetry as ordinarily understood is a matter of skill in the placing of words, the substance may be a mere nothing; it may be a couch, or a house, a lake or a river, or even a tree. What spiritual substance is there in these things? Not any, but here we are dealing with substance in this song. Hundreds and hundreds of years later we read of "the song of Moses"; there is substance in it. But what I want to point out is this, that Joshua is allied in this peculiar service with Moses, to show how beautifully the old servant and the young one were merged in perfect harmony; there were no cross purposes. You cannot have cross purposes if you are going to write a spiritual song together; you must be one. Moses wrote the song, but Joshua had to do with it. It was attributed to Moses, to his freshness, to his spiritual faculties, to his intelligence, and it is attributed to Joshua that he was equal to join in this great service with Moses. He joined with Moses in speaking this song in the ears of the people. He will have something of his own, something distinctive from the Lord in time, but for the moment Moses is leading, and Joshua is joining with him, and you have a song, a standing testimony issuing forth at this juncture; it is something that will be retained in the heart and in the mind. We see thus how the testimony goes forward; it is what is in the saints in a spiritual sense issuing forth at this juncture, and it is to remain with them for ever.

I wonder what you understand by this, by the song issuing forth from Moses and Joshua as recorded here. It is put in the mouths of the people, to be retained in the heart, something to be remembered, something to remind us in a positive way of Moses, and on the other hand it is a song well worthy of close attention, a constant rebuke, as its terms plainly show, to the flesh in ourselves!

It begins, "Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will

speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth. My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew". It was not with Moses a question of his years. What a man he was! What freshness marked him! If you sat down by Moses, how much he could have told you, not of what happened in Pharaoh's house, for he would never tell you about that except to humble himself by it. There are those who live in the past and like to recite things that happened -- early reminiscences. These things may be interesting to some, but they do not feed the soul. What does Moses say at the age of a hundred and twenty? As we read, "Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak". He speaks of rain, dew, etc. What an old brother he was, as we speak! How refreshing! How he retained his freshness! These first four verses stand out as a tribute to Moses. How pious souls in Israel afterwards would cherish them and envy such a state in advanced old age! With what glory this great man departs! And then Joshua had part in it. He needed spiritual development and he was not now a youth, but a man of such experience as enabled him in a comely way to have part in this service with the great mediator, Moses, for he had part in the delivering of this song to Israel.

Now, beloved, that is what I had before me in referring to this song -- that there might be at this juncture the passing on of things in a positive way to the coming generation. We see them coming and Joshua is a great model here, so that the coming generation and the one passing away join together in a song, in presenting what is positive and what is to remain in the hearts and in the mouths of the people of God. The law, on the other hand, as written and completed, as we are told here, was to be placed at the side of the ark by the priests who carried the ark. There was a book, not simply ten words, and those who carried the ark actively were to deposit

it at the side of the ark, and there it is. That is the objective thing contained in the law in relation to the tabernacle, but the song was to be in everybody's mouth, to be kept in the hearts and in the mouths of the people of God.

THE PRISONER IN THE LORD

Ephesians 3:1; Ephesians 4:1; Genesis 40:1 - 23

J.T. I have been thinking of the idea of a prison as connected peculiarly with Joseph, and of the way in which the thought appears in the New Testament, especially connected with Paul -- the greatest light emanating from it. The idea peculiarly represents limitations -- sufferings, of course, but limitations; and in the two persons mentioned we have the acceptance of the limitations as from God. The apostle, as we may notice, regarded himself as the "prisoner of the Christ Jesus" in chapter 3, although outwardly in the hands of the Romans. In chapter 4 he is "the prisoner in the Lord", meaning that he is there in relation to the Lord, not simply that the Lord has made him a prisoner, but he is there in that relation. The emphasis laid in Genesis on the king's prison will be noted. In chapter 39:20 it says, "Joseph's lord took him and put him into the tower-house, the place where the king's prisoners were confined", and the others were imprisoned "into the place where Joseph was" -- that is the setting.

D.L.H. What are you gathering from the distinction between the king's prison and where Joseph was?

J.T. That they were placed where he was was the advantage for them; all was under God, but correspondence with Joseph's position involved light for them; it involved the solution of their exercises.

J.S. Do you mean that our own apostle addressing that letter of the greatest light from the prison would indicate that we should accept limitations in accord with where the voice comes from?

J.T. That is the point he makes in writing to Timotheus -- that he was not to be ashamed of the

testimony of our Lord nor of the apostle as His prisoner.

J.S. That would lead to the maintenance of the light; otherwise it might be lost or diminish.

J.T. There should be correspondence with the apostle's position. Timotheus, although not actually in prison, would be in correspondence with Paul's position; it is in that connection the light shines and the solution of all our exercises comes about.

D.L.H. Was not Timotheus himself in prison at one time? "Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty", (Hebrews 13:23).

J.T. He was indeed, though not when Paul's letter was written; the apostle emphasises his position in the prison in writing to him. He was bound, and it was in relation to the testimony of God, but the word of God was not bound; his imprisonment was not an accident or the outcome of any misdemeanour on his part. He suffered ostensibly as an evildoer, but it was on account of the testimony of the gospel; (2 Timothy 2:9).

P.L. Do you get that thought in regard of Joseph in the psalm, "They afflicted his feet with fetters his soul came into irons", but then it says, "the word of Jehovah tried him", (Psalm 105:18,19). Was the word of the Lord in that sense not bound?

J.T. Yes; his education was also in view, of course, "until the time when what he said came about"; that is, I suppose, the light he had from God, as recorded in Genesis 37. In that chapter he was seventeen years of age and he had light from God which alluded to himself, that he should become an object of reverence to his father and mother and to his eleven brethren, that is to say, he had light typically as to Christ's resurrection and His ascension. In the interval, until that came about, the word of the Lord tried him; he had his own needed education. What comes out in this chapter is that he is in the

place where the king's prisoners were kept, and those that needed interpretations are put into that prison; it was to their advantage. What I mean is that the mind of God is contingent on being in accord with the position of the vessel of the testimony, wherever the government of God has placed it. If it be in limitation we have to accept that, and our non-acceptance of it means our being deprived of the mind of God, whereas our acceptance of it implies that we shall have the mind of the Lord in that position. "Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding", (2 Timothy 2:7). 2 Timothy is a question of regulation (I mean that is involved in it); it is a question of where I am in relation to Paul. The government of God has affected Paul -- he is limited; the special vessel of the testimony is seen at Rome limited, and it is wisdom to accept that. The endeavour to ignore or break away from the limitation involves loss.

J.S. How do the limitations apply to us?

J.T. In the government of God, the vessel of the testimony is greatly limited and restricted.

Ques. Do you regard the vessel of the testimony today as answering to Paul's position in prison?

J.T. Yes.

Ques. In what way, other than general limitations?

J.T. Well, we are suffering under the government of God from several things. The Spirit of God is greatly hampered by the general breakdown of the public body, and He accepts it.

Ques. Is there any loss spiritually on account of this?

J.T. Well, there is; there is loss. We have not got what they had in early days; our meetings are nothing like what they had; all that can be said now is "thou hast a little power", (Revelation 3:8). The restriction, the limitation, is called attention to there, and that a door had been opened. "I have set before thee an opened door", not an open door, but an

opened one, that is one that had been shut. The Lord has moved and opened a door; that, I think, points to the limitations that had existed.

Ques. Do you suggest that there was gain to the prisoners through Joseph being in the king's prison?

J.T. Of course there was; it was to their great advantage that they were put there. That is how it is stated in chapter 39:20, "Joseph's lord took him and put him into the tower-house, the place where the king's prisoners were confined", and he was there in that prison and Jehovah was with Joseph there. Then it says in the next chapter that the other two prisoners were put "in custody into the house of the captain of the life-guard, into the tower-house, into the place where Joseph was imprisoned" (chapter 40:3); that was to their advantage.

Ques. Is that the setting the apostle has in view in Ephesians 3, where he tells them not to faint because of his tribulations, for it was their glory?

J.T. Just so. And he was the prisoner of the Christ Jesus for them, he says; that is no small matter; it was for the nations, so that those of the nations came into the gain of his position.

Ques. Do you suggest that to get the gain of Joseph's service we must not look at him as one of the king's prisoners?

J.T. But he was one of them; he was there, he was where the king's prisoners were kept. Paul was in a like position at Rome, and he received all who came to him; it was a question of coming to him. He was not free to carry on his apostolic service as he was wont to, but he received all who came to him.

P.L. "Onesiphorus ... was not ashamed of my chain but ... sought me out very diligently", (2 Timothy 1:16,17).

J.T. Quite. That was the gain of it. You may depend he got something that day; he did not go there for nothing, that seeking out was not for

nothing; the apostle would have told him something worth while.

Ques. Is Onesimus an example of a serviceable vessel born in prison?

J.T. I should say so. He is a contribution to the assembly begotten in the prison; he is sent back as a "brother beloved" -- one of the best contributions. You can hardly conceive of a better than that -- that a brother beloved should have been sent to any locality out of the prison where Paul was; and his own child; he says, "my child", Philemon 10.

P.H. "Whom I have begotten in my bonds". The brightest features of the truth have often come from prison, have they not?

J.T. Yes, the very brightest. Take Colossians, Ephesians, Philippians, Philemon and 2 Timothy, are they not all a witness to us of what issues forth when the limitations are accepted? I do not know that the apostle accepted the limitations fully on the ship, for we have no record of anything in the way of light coming from thence during the time of his voyage to Rome. It was in the definiteness of his acceptance of prison conditions that there was result.

P.H. Conditions from which in his case he was never released.

J.T. As far as we know.

P.L. Were the prophets, as vessels of light, very much on that line? Ezekiel accepts the conditions: "I was among the captives by the river Chebar", then he says, "the heavens were opened, and I saw visions of God", (Ezekiel 1:1).

J.T. That is very good indeed.

Ques. I suppose, whether actually or morally, the prison plays a great part in the history of God's testimony here, does it not?

J.T. The thing is to accept the conditions of limitation. In accepting them the light comes. It was well that Onesimus, as we have been hearing,

should come into contact with Paul in those circumstances. I suppose you could find nobody like him as a product, one that should be Philemon's for ever; for we have to live with the brethren, beloved, we do not want to part with them for ever.

Ques. Are you feeling that there is a hesitancy to accept the limitations?

J.T. I am sure there is.

P.R. It needs faith.

J.T. Well, yes, and it needs reduction, for there is reproach attached to a prisoner's chains -- to governmental limitations.

P.L. Do you see this in John, too? He is in the isle that is called Patmos in connection with the testimony of Jesus, and he gets the mind of Christ as to the whole situation in regard of the assembly.

J.T. Quite, he accepts the banishment. He was "in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ", (Revelation 19). But then, he not only accepted the position of limitation, but he had power in his soul to take up his privileges, he was in the Spirit on the Lord's day -- he had power in his soul. We see in the prison at Philippi a similar experience; the limitations were accepted, but there was power inwardly. At midnight, that is to say, when one would be weakest physically and seeking rest if possible, they prayed and sang praises to God; in the limitations there was power inwardly. Now what you get in Joseph is that he was not at all under the pressure of things. He was given to serve these two men, and he might have been perfunctory in the service because it was a menial sort of thing, and he was conscious of being there unrighteously; but he was sympathetic with them. It says, "Joseph ... looked on them, and behold, they were sad", and he said, "Why are your faces so sad today?" (Genesis 40:6,7). Being sympathetic with them, refers to the buoyancy, the inward power, that the spiritual man has, so that,

although he himself is in limitations, he is with God and able to help others. He had said, "Why are your faces so sad today?" He need not have said that; all he had to do was just the ordinary duties, but he was sympathetic with them. I have no doubt that any drooping saint turning into Paul's hired house would get set up. There is a certain sister well known to many of us, and it was told me that if any of the saints got down a bit and went to see her they got lifted up -- and she is in prison, having been bed-ridden for about fifty years! But there is power inwardly -- that is the idea.

M.W.B. Your word is of great encouragement to those who are limited, for so many are on sick-beds or in circumstances of great limitation, but what you are bringing before us may be an opportunity for the spread of the testimony.

J.T. It is an opportunity. One knows many who are limited outwardly, but not inwardly; they are enlarged inwardly.

Ques. Was the little maid in Syria a typical case?

J.T. Yes, indeed! She was a captive. I think of her as representative in a concrete way of the teaching of the previous chapter (2 Kings 4). There we have the whole truth from Romans to Ephesians brought out in a typical way, and I believe that she embodies this, because, although a captive, and in most menial circumstances, she is buoyant and full of spiritual feelings. "Oh, would that my lord were before the prophet that is in Samaria!" (chapter 5:3). She is full of the thing and she has no question about it; she knows the virtue that is with the prophet.

Ques. Would she eventually glory in the limitations?

J.T. She might well do so, if she knew that you and I would be talking about her here.

Ques. Was what we have been speaking of the result of Joseph cherishing the testimony in his heart?

J.T. Quite. "His word" was what he saw in his dreams and this regarded himself. He saw wonderful things as to himself -- his brethren bowing down, and the sun, moon and eleven stars making obeisance to him. He was buoyant as possessing such light, and the more the pressure on him, the more the light shone. I think it is very remarkable that he noticed the countenances of the two men; the one who has done no wrong becomes the servant of those who have. We should be sympathetic with people in need, instead of being down under the irksomeness of things and, it may be, complaining -- being buoyant in the light, the wonderful light there is that belongs to us, that has reference to ourselves -- the light of the calling of God -- and sympathetic also with the need, the suffering, that exists.

M.W.B. Sometimes we find that the prison is the fruit of failure in some way, not only with individuals but perhaps with meetings. A prison condition exists, great limitation, an evil report, it may be, in the district as to the gospel. Would you still apply the thought in such cases?

J.T. I should. I should say that under all circumstances there is gain in accepting whatever limitations there may be. If you accept the limitations, God will help you in them. I am sure you have found that.

M.W.B. It is a wonderful principle you are bringing out which applies to us, not only individually, and which is most essential, but which applies also to districts which are under the government of God, where it is obvious that prison conditions exist -- that there is hope in the acceptance of them.

J.T. That is the point. The acceptance of the condition brings God in; He never denies us when we accept them.

P.L. You spoke of buoyancy. When Jehovah turned the captivity of Zion, it says, "Then was our mouth filled with laughter, and our tongue with

rejoicing", (Psalm 126:2). There had been that inward buoyancy which now breaks out.

J.T. Quite, they had accepted the limitation. They refused to sing the songs of Zion in a strange land; that was intelligent; those songs belonged to certain settings.

Ques. When you speak of the 'king's prison' do you suggest that the Lord may designedly put us into certain positions that we may get the light that is there for us?

J.T. I think so; even though the enemy may have had a hand in it, as with Joseph, yet it is God. In David's case, in one record we read that Satan moved David to number the people, and in the other record, Jehovah moved him to number them. In either case it was God, He wished to bring about conditions through which He could meet David and bless him; these conditions were necessary. There was a design on the Lord's part on account of what was there for the help of those who accepted it.

Rem. The apostle speaks of the thorn in the flesh as the messenger of Satan (2 Corinthians 12:7) and speaks of glorying in his infirmities. Would that have a bearing?

J.T. It would. "For this thing I besought the Lord thrice"; then he left off, because he saw it was a fixed limitation. There are temporary limitations, but there are also fixed ones, and the prison at Rome was, I suppose, a fixed one, but then he was buoyant in it; he received all who came to him there.

Ques. Would you say Joseph did not look on his as a fixed limitation?

J.T. No, for he asked to be remembered so as to come out of it, and he did come out of it. God took him out in a remarkable way, He took him out in the way he meant to be taken out, for the butler remembered Joseph, although in a forced and tardy way.

Ques. Would you say those who accept the prison conditions are the ones who really remember Joseph today?

J.T. They are indeed; they do not forget Him.

R.B. If the prison conditions are accepted, the light is assured; we see that in the addresses to the assemblies; (Revelation 2,3).

J.T. I think that is the point; we are enabled by them to discern where we are. There is an opened door, and it is a question of discerning just where we are and what conditions apply, and it is in the humble acceptance of them, I believe, that the greatest light will come out.

Ques. Do you connect the limitations in a broad sense with the path of separation set out by the Lord?

J.T. I am speaking more of things which the Lord has allowed to happen, and for which we are all responsible. Whatever has happened in the public body is a question for each one of us to face; these things cannot be altered.

In imposing those conditions God's wisdom is seen, because in accepting them we gain through the discipline involved and we hold the truth more firmly. It is in discerning what God is doing in that way and bowing to it, that light comes in. We see what there was here. These men were where Joseph was, and they found a sympathetic touch with him. He had himself more cause for complaint than they had, but he is not complaining; whereas they were sad, but their sadness was caused by the light beginning to operate. So the dreams are told, and you get the unfolding of remarkable things in the interpretation of them.

J.S. You seem to have in mind the heavenly position a good deal.

J.T. What we are at is to show that the acceptance of the limitations owns the hand of God. You own

the hand of God in them. Paul, I believe, came thoroughly to it, so that he says, I am here the prisoner of Christ Jesus for you. I would have gone to the Jews, but I am here for you. He accepted it. And then in Ephesians 4:1 he is the prisoner in the Lord; he is perfectly restful in it now. It is not 'of the Lord' but "in the Lord". There is nothing on his conscience at all, he has arrived at the thing thoroughly, and so the light is streaming forth from him in those circumstances. Here in Joseph's case they tell their dreams, and he says, "Do not interpretations belong to God?" he is connecting them with God. He was conversant with visions; but he says "interpretations belong to God". You see thus how thoroughly he is with God; Jehovah is prospering him in these limitations. If anyone has a difficulty, God can meet him; God is doing it. There is thus a beautiful testimony to God in the prison.

Ques. Would you say that God interpreted Joseph's limitation in that way in the psalm where it says, "He sent a man before them: Joseph was sold for a bondman", (Psalm 105:17)? Paul interprets his imprisonment in that he says he is the prisoner of the Christ Jesus for the gentiles.

J.T. Yes. Here they say, We have dreamed a dream, but there is no interpreter of it; there is the acknowledgment of their poverty. That is the case with thousands of people; they do not know how things are; 'There is no interpreter', they say. It is well when people come to that. They have the dream, but it is no use to them, "an interpreter, one among a thousand" (Job 33:23) is the one they want. Where is he? He is in those limitations. Why? He is there of God; it is the place where the king's prisoners are. He is a man, a man of sympathy, but he is an interpreter.

Ques. When that sympathy is mentioned the prison is spoken of as "his lord's house". Would that

suggest the sympathetic interest and affection with which he viewed the prison?

J.T. No doubt. Joseph said to them, "Do not interpretations belong to God?" that is to say, he diverts them from any idea of a specialist. We must not look for specialists; the specialist will not always hold, but God will not fail us.

Ques. Did the prophets feel the need of an interpreter?

J.T. Well, it was revealed to them that the things they ministered were not for themselves but for us; they were set right about that.

C.C.E. Have we not found that people who have not really accepted the limitations you have referred to have, in a general way, lost light in the history of the testimony?

J.T. I think they have. And I will tell you what I think the people of God have suffered from -- specialists, men regarded as specialists on certain lines; that diverts you from God, does it not?

C.C.E. Quite.

J.T. So he says here immediately, "Do not interpretations belong to God?" but then he adds at once, "Tell me your dreams". He is not advertising himself as an interpreter; he is not that. It is not the time for assuming to be anything; but anyway, tell the dreams. If God is interpreting dreams, there is no knowing whom He may use. The thing is to connect those in need with God.

Rem. And Joseph was ready.

P.H. We ought to be able to help our brethren on this line. You were referring to an interpreter, one among a thousand.

J.T. You see how this principle comes in in Job, which is a book of limitations. God puts Job in prison, so to speak, and the instruction comes out in that connection. The interpreter, one among a thousand, is one who is "full of matter", first of all;

and one who can wait till his elders have finished speaking -- that kind of man. He is certainly no advertiser, no specialist; he is waiting till others have spoken.

P.L. Certainly he has a good deal of buoyancy; his belly "is as wine which hath no vent", (Job 32:19).

J.T. Yes, exactly, and he is full of matter. We often hear persons taking part in the meetings because they have something, but this man had not only something (and it was powerful in him), but he was able to hold it till his elders had spoken.

Ques. What do you mean by the term 'specialist'? There are different gifts.

J.T. Well, there are those who have had a recognised ability for certain things, but they fail you. We must move on with God, for the man who has helped you today will not necessarily help you tomorrow.

Ques. Have you in mind difficulties arising among us in various ways?

J.T. Well, whatever thing has to be solved, God will do it; it is His province.

Ques. Does the key of David come in on that line?

J.T. It is the Lord who opens and shuts; but how great a thing it is to turn to Him! to turn to God in the recognition that He has things in His hand. In turning to God in subjection to Him, and to one another, the difficulty will be solved.

Ques. Would Daniel and his three friends answer to that?

J.T. Quite; Scripture abounds with evidences of what we are saying.

Rem. I thought Daniel and his three friends turned to God and then God was able to make known Nebuchadnezzar's dream to him, and he said, God would give him an answer.

Ques. Does Paul bring God before us? "If in anything ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you", (Philippians 3:15).

J.T. Exactly. We must not force things. As time is given God will surely make His mind known. "God shall reveal even this unto you".

Ques. What is the distinction between "prisoner of the Christ Jesus", and "prisoner in the Lord"?

J.T. I think the Christ Jesus is the One who has done things for God; He is the anointed One, and He has the apostle now where He wished him to be -- among the nations instead of among the Jews.

Rem. So the mystery, the assembly, is revealed under those conditions.

J.T. That is what he goes on to say; and he wished them to know that. Then "in the Lord" in chapter 4 means there is nothing on his conscience he is not a felon, but under the Lord in the prison.

Rem. Chapter 4 has more to do with walk.

J.T. Yes; and the authority of the Lord. The next thing is Joseph says, "tell me your dreams, I pray you. Then the chief of the cup-bearers told his dream to Joseph ... and I took the grapes, and pressed them into Pharaoh's cup". It was as if the mind of God was that the precious life of Christ should be seen in those circumstances -- the vine, the branches, the blossoms and the ripened grapes, all in the order of nature, and the grapes pressed into Pharaoh's cup which was in the hand of the cup-bearer. It seems to me that in those circumstances the light that shines is the beautiful life of Christ pressed out at the end for God -- the life of Jesus.

Rem. The true vine.

J.T. Yes.

Rem. Very much like Aaron's rod that budded.

J.T. Well it is, in the sense that the fruit developed in its own order, but here it is pressed out instead of ripened almonds, the latter denoting faithfulness and

watchfulness. Here you have the result for God; it was into Pharaoh's cup they were pressed.

Rem. You can well understand the remembrance of such an one.

J.T. Then in the baker we have the opposite to that, where instead of Pharaoh getting the bakemeats, the birds got them. There was no ability to keep things for God -- really, you might say, marking the history of the assembly. There is that which is for God, corresponding with the life of Jesus, and there is that, alas! which is for the enemy which should be for God.

D.L.H. There is a passage which seems to correspond very much with that: "We are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish: to the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life", (2 Corinthians 2:15,16). God got His portion, and then there was blessing. On the one hand some got life, and found the testimony to be life unto life; but on the other hand, there were others to whom it was death unto death. I suppose that is true still.

J.T. Just so. In 2 Corinthians the apostle enlarges on that thought as to the life of Jesus, speaking of bearing about in his body the dying of Jesus -- what it was for God.

R.B. How beautifully the Spirit of Christ is seen in those words, "The lines are fallen unto me in pleasant places; yea, I have a goodly heritage", (Psalm 16:6). That is what you mean, is it not? Limitations were accepted fully by Him.

J.T. Quite.

Rem. So that if we accept the government of God -- the prison conditions -- there will be light, and there will be something for God -- the grapes.

J.T. Yes. There can be no doubt the first dream alludes to that, to the life of Jesus coming out in measure in the saints. So in 2 Corinthians the apostle

is able to bring himself forward in this connection -- how he corresponded with the life of Jesus; but in them the enemy was getting what belonged to God. The Corinthians were wonderfully endowed by God, but it was not intended that these endowments should be used for themselves or the enemy; but the enemy was getting the very things God had enriched them with; they were being used for their own glory.

Ques. Would that be through lack of watchfulness? The butler says, "a vine was before me"; he was not going to lose anything; but the baskets were on the baker's head.

J.T. Quite, the head was the difficulty; that was the trouble with the Corinthians, and as sure as possible if we rely on our natural ability, the enemy will get an advantage. We may be possessed with what is of God, but the enemy will get it.

Ques. Would you allow the thought of suffering in connection with this? If the life of Jesus is reproduced in the saints, there would be suffering.

J.T. Yes, it is in the suffering the grapes are pressed. You see the care with which the cup-bearer follows the thing up; there is no lapse, the grapes develop, and he uses them as they ripen; whereas with the baker the enemy is allowed to take away the things that were for Pharaoh.

P.L. Does not Abraham keep the birds away in the vision he had? (Genesis 15:11).

J.T. He did; he was watchful. You see in Protestantism the 'tree' in which the birds of the air have a roosting-place, whereas in Rome the birds of the air are in a cage -- it is "a cage of every unclean and hateful bird" (Revelation 18:2); they are caged, but nevertheless they are hateful.

Ques. What is the experience today that would answer to giving the cup into Pharaoh's hand?

J.T. I think it is following the thing up; whatever there is, you see to it that it is for God and that God

gets it. There is the vigilance with which the butler follows the thing up.

Rem. So it is not enough to have a personal appreciation of the life of Christ, but it should be presented to God.

J.T. Quite. The cup-bearer was thinking of Pharaoh; the other carried the bakemeats in a loose, unprotected way.

E.R. That was the butler's entire business. I think it is very important to recognise what our business is and to be set for it.

J.T. Yes, quite; to follow the thing up. Fruit comes in its order, and then, when it is ripened, we must see that God gets it.

HOME TEACHING

John 1:35 - 39; John 7:14 - 17; John 20:15 - 18

I have been thinking, dear brethren, of teaching. You will remember how it is said of an intelligent man, as he is called in Acts 13:7, that he was "amazed at the teaching of the Lord". Being an intelligent man he would have had to do with teaching, but he had not had to do with anything like that which came to his attention in the ministry of Barnabas and Saul. This is noted in the section in which we are told that Saul was also called Paul.

I turned to John's gospel, therefore, because it emphasises the thought of teaching, especially in its use of the title Rabbi, applying it to the Lord. It is explained, as you will observe, in this first passage, which I read in order that we should know what was meant. I apprehend that the title or designation has allusion to distinguished teachers, such as the scribes would aspire to be, as known of men, as the Lord said, "They ... love ... to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi", (Matthew 23:5 - 7). The evangelist John emphasises the use of this title as applying to Christ above the other evangelists. There can be no doubt that he means to convey the distinguished character of the teaching.

I selected the first passage because the title is applied by the two disciples who followed the Lord immediately on His challenging them as to what they sought. It reminds one of what is known in the scientific world, of which one knows little, of certain subtle forces which attract into their own currents. So these two who heard John speaking, followed Jesus and immediately find themselves in the drift or current that was moving with Him; for the movement of Christ necessarily moves everything in a

moral sense, and He was moving, He was walking. Thus they are, as it were, linking on with the thing, and without there being any premeditation or, so far as we know, any previous knowledge of the Lord, they addressed Him as Rabbi, as if their minds were charged with the idea. This suggestion ought to appeal to young believers, for they are made conscious, as directed to Christ and as coming under His influence, that teaching is there, that a Teacher, indeed, is there, One of whom they have need.

They had heard, it says, John speaking. We are told what He said, but that is not what is emphasised in regard of them; it was a question of the speaking; they heard him "speaking"; it was the kind of subtle spirit, as I may call it, which accompanied the words, more in value in a sense than the words themselves. As the apostle Paul says, "Whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son", (Romans 1:9). In listening to him presenting Christ, the glad tidings of God's Son, the words, of course, would be wonderful, but the spirit of the thing would be more wonderful. And so we find with Paul; he with Barnabas entered, as we read, into the synagogue "and so spake" (Acts 14:1); it is the kind of thing. So here they heard John speaking, and followed Jesus. It is, so to speak, one kind of positive linking them on in their spirits with another positive -- a greater. The work of God in this world involves immensity. Scientific men indicate to us, indeed we know by observation, what an immensity of variety there is in the physical system; but how much more so in what is spiritual. John singularly corresponds with the physical system in presenting what is spiritual, not that he takes up the terms, but as under the influence of the Spirit of God he brings the thing forward. It is a question of the work of God and what accompanies it. So they heard John speaking wonderful words, to be sure: "Behold the Lamb of

God!" but it is what was behind the words, the kind of indefinable thing that went with the words, which found correspondence in these disciples; they "heard him speaking, and followed Jesus".

Well now, I want to show how this peculiar influence that was operating linked on in their minds with the abode of Christ, and you will see how obvious it is -- especially young ones -- that in coming into the current of things that the drift is toward a home. Most of us have been in school in a literal sense, we have had teachers. You may get a teacher of mathematics, for instance, who is excellent, it may be, but you have no desire to go home with him. It is not so here. The Rabbi, the Teacher (for the Holy Spirit is careful to tell us the word means 'Teacher' ), where does He live? You can see how excellently set this is in John's gospel, because it is the home he wishes to lead us to -- the heavenly home, and so, "Where abidest thou?" The Lord knew well what was going on in those hearts, but everything is in perfect order here, in keeping with the idea of movement and influence. The Lord turned and saw them following. It is as if He were to say to us, If you have got a little light, if you have come in any way under this powerful influence, what effect has it on you? Is it affecting you? That is what the Lord would convey to us. He turned, it says. Think of what that meant! It was greater than the sun stopping in the heavens that He should turn round to see two people following: "Jesus turned, and saw them following". He wishes to convey to us how He prizes the movement that is the fruit of the work of God. That is what He is looking for; nothing else is of any value.

And so, seeing them following, He challenges them, because He would bring out more, for He loves to hear what they have to say, viewed as subjects of the work of God. The work of God is always true to

itself, and He knew the extent of it, hence He says, "What seek ye?" And they say, "Rabbi, where abidest thou? He says to them, Come and see"; that is to say, the idea of teaching, the drift of it is towards the abiding-place. Do you think the Lord was silent as they reached that place? What words would flow from His lips surrounded by the home circumstances, as I may say, the home furnishing, where the rigour of the school, and of the schoolmaster, would be absent! They would be in the environment of the home and learn there. What thoughts would be conveyed to them!

What emanates from these remarkable circumstances is the idea of the assembly. No one can be in the assembly rightly save as taught, and, I may add, taught in the abiding-place; that is to say, you get the impression in the abiding-place and you say, This must be in every way provided for, so that in a world of opposition we may have the home and its comforts and its environment before we reach it in finality. We are brought to the thing so that we might value it, and as we value it, we conserve it, and we want to see that as far as in us lies that thing is here.

Andrew, therefore, goes and finds his brother Simon and he brings him to Jesus, and Jesus looks on Simon and says, "thou shalt be called Cephas", and again, so that there may be no mistake as to what this means, we are told the word means "a stone". Now you see the teaching includes the idea of permanency, something that stands the test here. These disciples were thus receiving their first impressions of Christ, and if the Lord has His way with us, the first impressions He makes on us are the best. They may need development, we may need to be brought more fully to them, but they are all there.

In the name given Simon we have the idea of material for a building, and so you say, This wonderful

place where I have been with the Lord, where He abides, is to be a structure of which I am to be part. It is His thought that I am to be material for this building. It is "Wisdom's house". There is to be a house which is to be known as such, furnished with everything that wisdom can devise. It is love acting as wisdom. As the material appears, Christ, being Wisdom, names it, and in due course wisdom builds.

Now, I am not saying that all this is in John, but I am giving the setting of things here, and if you are ready for the teaching of the Lord as John presents it, you are brought into the divine abode; you are impressed with the divine thought initially, and then you are given to understand that you are to be material for the maintenance of that here in this world; that there should be here, where the opposition is so intense and inveterate, material that will stand. We have the thing in Peter's name: "Thou shalt be called Cephas".

That is what I may call the initial lesson in the home instruction. The home circle is the place for teaching, and that applies literally too. Whatever schools may be, they never supply affection; in the very nature of them they do not supply affection, nor are they intended to do so, they are intended to teach the elements, whereas John's sphere of teaching is in the home circle, and such a circle! It is indeed the circle where Jesus abides -- that is the place; and as I said, the subtle drift leads you there. The mind is drawn that way; and the Lord says, "Come and see", for He loves to see you coming. Every movement of the work of God is delightful in His eye; it is the movement you see in John resulting from the work of God, "Come and see".

And so, too, I would appeal to you, "Come and see" where the Teacher abides -- this great Rabbi that John presents to us. Nicodemus entitles him similarly -- another man who knew what teaching

means, for he was a teacher of Israel, as the Lord said. He says, "Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God". He connects the Lord with God. This is a sure evidence of the work of God in the man, and this is ever true to itself, as I said.

Well now, I want to go on to chapter 7, because in these last days the teaching of the Lord is in accord with John's gospel; it is home teaching. From the days of the so-called 'Fathers' there has been little or nothing of home teaching; it is lamentable going back in assembly history to note the sudden disappearance of it. You hardly get any of it outside the Scriptures until you come down to our own times. In our own times, thank God! there has been a revival of the idea. The work of God began to show itself in this connection; it shows itself in movement toward Christ and in desire to be where He is. The test of it is movement in relation to Him. In the thought of dioceses, parishes, cathedrals, there is no idea of movement, it is a fixed order of things, nor is there any idea of a home. They may talk of reservation of the sacrament in these buildings, but does that make them a home? Not at all! It makes them idolatrous; there is no 'real presence' in these things at all. The real presence is in the assembly, and God has brought us back to that; He has brought us back to the idea of the home, the work of God showing itself in response to Christ in this relation.

In our times some heart touched by the Spirit of God in regard of Christ began to speak, and others heard the speaking and they followed Jesus. No more sectarianism, no more partyism! It is Jesus and where He abides -- that is John. And so the teaching, the home teaching has necessarily taken a private or obscure form; and surely we are content to be obscure, if we realise and value the home. Privacy belongs to the home. Of course there is public testimony

but part with Christ in the home precedes it. That is the drift, beloved, in John's gospel; you get the impression of the home and the teaching there, and you say, I do not want anything outside of that -- that is the thing; no more theology, good-bye to theology and to doctors of divinity now; none of these things belong to the home, to say the least of them. As I said, all these things are fixed here; you would assume that they are to go on indefinitely; whereas the idea of christianity is movement. It is a question of following Jesus and hearing speaking of Him; He is moving. We are going out of the world, going through it and out of it, not setting ourselves up in it. And so the Lord is walking and John is speaking about Him and the two who heard him speaking follow Jesus, for He is the Teacher. Much might be said by way of reproach as to the kind of teaching, and the kind of teachers, but there is this teaching of the Lord, there is this distinctive teaching that goes on in relation to the home, and no christian can afford to be without it. If my speaking this evening were to attract anyone to Christ, one would rejoice, for that is the end of all ministry. There is such a touch, as in the case of John, such a kind of speaking that the hearers followed Jesus. They wanted other teaching and they got it, as I said, in the home.

But although all this is obscure and private, as I said, chapter 7 brings in the public side of it. You will notice, however, that in the beginning of that chapter the Lord is walking in Galilee. In chapter 1 we are not told where He was walking; but He was walking; whereas in chapter 7 we are told where He was walking; He was walking in Galilee; the allusion is no doubt to the remnant, to remnant times. There was a murderous element in Judaea, hence the blessed Lord accepted the limitations; He walked no more in Judaea, because they sought to kill Him.

You see what Judaea did for itself, and what christendom has done for itself in turning against Christ. It has restricted Him, but therein is the loss; but Galilee, that is to say, the place of reproach, is gaining. Galilee is where He is walking, but there were those even in Galilee -- His brethren -- who wanted to make a show: "If thou do these things, shew thyself to the world", (verse 4) What a subtle suggestion that is! How many have fallen before it! We may well take note of it. It was Satan's temptation, through those outwardly related to the Lord. If He had ability from God to do these wonderful things, why not trade with it, capitalise it, and use it to make Himself prominent in the world?

John the baptist, earlier, had stood the test of that temptation. They sent to him priests and levites from Jerusalem; (chapter 1:19). What an honour! but what flattery! what an effort of Satan! They were ready to confer anything on John could they have done it, because it would have put honour on them. But John says, No, I am just a voice, "I am not the Christ ... but there standeth one among you whom ye know not ... whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose". That was the position -- they were ignorant of the One who stood among them; but John eulogises Christ; he refuses to eulogise himself; he was not worthy to tie His shoe latchet. What a fine tribute! and what a fine model is John the baptist in this gospel for us! He is set down as such; there is nothing said about his failure in this gospel. And so the enemy comes to Christ: "Shew thyself to the world", he says. The Lord says, "My time is not yet come: but your time is alway ready". Whose time? Those who are in relation to Christ outwardly, but who have no faith at all, "For neither did his brethren believe in him", it says, (verse 5). It is persons who do not believe who speak thus; they want to make a show. Persons who do believe on Him retire

with Him, and are content to be in obscurity; they have the home instead of publicity, and that more than suffices.

But then this wonderful teaching is bound to come out; and it is, indeed, God's mind that it should; that there should be a testimony even in Jerusalem, even in Judaea, in spite of all the opposition to Christ there. Thank God, we see something of that in our day, and we do not grudge anything that reaches them; in fact, the teaching has reached them. The Lord went up to the feast, as in secret, but it was in love -- another wonderful overture of God to the Jews, notwithstanding their opposition! There need be no restriction or reserve in regard of the nominal people of God; let them have everything that we can give them. The Lord went up, we are told, and taught in the temple, not as in public, but as in private. Let the teaching tell its own tale, and it will! However much they may despise the Teacher, the teaching has its own voice, as it has had in christendom; a living voice has been heard there. God has spoken to the apostate system, and is speaking, and will speak, for His patience is involved in it -- the patience of God: "sent unto you all my servants the prophets, daily rising up early and sending them", as Jeremiah 7:25 says.

But what happens? If we read the chapter, we shall see the effect of it. One thing is, "How knoweth this man letters, having never learned?" That is the problem -- having never learned. Ah, how ignorant they are! knowing nothing at all about the home teaching, they may say, You have never learned, you have no degrees; they know nothing about the home. I am urging upon all to cultivate the home. Let them say what they please, the teaching tells its own tale; here they had to admit it. So if you run down the chapter you will notice how they are set against one another, and divided in their opinions. But there

stood Christ in majesty amongst them, and He says, "If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine". That is a voice for christendom. Why do they not know? Because their wills are at work. If anyone is ignorant, it is because his will is at work, there is no other reason. Wisdom's teaching is plain; there is nothing crooked or perverse in it. And so, the Lord says, "If any one desire to practise his will, he shall know concerning the doctrine". It is a great thing to accept the reproach as to where we have got the things, never having learned, as they say. The things themselves have their own voice, and wherever there is the desire to practise God's will they will be accepted, and they are being accepted. The work of God in this chapter is that they do the will of God. I am not seeking publicity, I am doing His will; I desire to practise it, so that the doctrine is known to be of God; it has its own credentials to those who are doing the will of God.

In going on to the last scripture, I want to show you how this principle runs through. In the interval, as you know, the Spirit comes in; the Spirit comes in as the Teacher; as the Lord says, "He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you", (John 14:26). He is here, as it were, carrying forward every word of Christ, nothing falls to the ground. Not only what is written, but every word of Christ is maintained by the Spirit; He is the Teacher, and so He says, further, "I will send to you ... the Spirit ... who goes forth from with the Father", (chapter 15:26). The Holy Spirit has come down from being with the Father, that is to say, He has a perfect knowledge of the Father's thoughts about Christ. Think of One coming forth from that abode, into which the Son has gone, to witness of Christ! He is the witness of Christ. So we have here, in the Spirit, perfect firsthand knowledge of the Father's thoughts about

Christ; He is here sent by Christ, as having been with the Father, to witness of Him.

Now all that, as I said, intervenes; so that when we come to chapter 20 we have Mary in the most interesting, the most touching circumstances, but still needing teaching, as if to remind us that affection alone, from John's point of view, however precious, is not sufficient. And so the Lord says, "Mary"! It is a question of the state of her heart. How precious to be called by name Yet it is a feature of John that the Lord names us; He would call us by name. Here He says, "Mary", and adds no more. It is a real revival of the link, a known voice pronouncing her name, and she says, "Rabboni", as if again, as I said, governed by the subtle spirit involved in the work of God, and again we have the interpretation of it; it means 'Teacher'.

We are now approaching the very highest position, beloved, but we need teaching. How many of us are interested in the teaching that belongs to ascension? What I have been saying as to the abiding-place involves much, but what about the teaching referring to ascension, and the relationship we are brought into in regard of the One who is ascending? How well we may say 'Rabboni'! How one is conscious of it oneself, how little one knows of the inwardness of these circumstances, for that is one point in John, that we are led inward.

And so the Lord says, "Touch me not", as if to say, This teaching is not to be connected now with the earth or with the garden, for at the best, however perfectly furnished our gardens may be, there is a sepulchre there -- an empty grave; desolation marks the whole scene, however perfect the landscape -- the garden remains desolate. The teaching is not to be in regard of it; it now has to do with something else. "Touch me not", the Lord says, 'do not connect Me with that'; after all, it is desolation, there is an

empty sepulchre in it. "Touch me not", He says, "for I am not yet ascended to my Father". The link is to be up there. How much she needed teaching in regard of all this! Then He says, "go to my brethren and say unto them, I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God". The teaching is all there, and in that blessed inward relation now; that is the thing, and she is to convey the first great message regarding it; she is honoured in that way. Favoured woman, to be so honoured! The Lord would say as a rejoinder, She well deserved it; yes, she did; she shines above the two great leaders, Peter and John, in this connection. They went to their own homes, but she remained at the sepulchre; she saw the angels, she heard them speak; they reminded her of the dignity of Christ; they sat one at the head and the other at the feet where He had lain; but He was not there.

Now He is here to call her out of the garden into the heavenly paradise of God, where the tree of life is. And so He says to her, "go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God". And she delivers the message in a comely way, showing how perfectly she was in accord with the teaching. She is now among the taught, the instructed, "the wise", as Daniel says: and "none of the wicked shall understand" -- that is to say, those who are self-willed -- "but the wise shall understand", (Daniel 12:10). As a truly wise, instructed, subject person she goes to the disciples, and instead of taking the place of a teacher, she says that she "had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things unto her". Very simple, but very powerful! What credentials have any of us, however many words we may use, unless we have seen the Lord? That is the thing, she had seen the Lord. "Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord?" says another great lover of Him (see 1 Corinthians 9:1),

and so he could speak of Him. Mary had seen the Lord, and He had spoken these things to her. That is all, but how powerful! You can understand the disciples receiving such words and pondering over them, and the Lord comes and stands in the midst where they were -- where these persons were who had received this message, who were to be the recipients of all that it meant, who were dignified as His brethren. As the ascending One, He stood in their midst and said, "Peace be unto you". They were among the instructed, they had the teaching, the most exalted teaching as conveyed in Mary's message.

How much has been spoken of it since. Volumes have been spoken of it; that wonderful message can never be exhausted. I suppose there are no words written so pregnant with meaning, so inexhaustible as those words to those who love Christ, to those who love the home. Those who go to the seminaries do not know anything whatever about them. It is those who love Christ and who learn in the home circle who value such a message as Mary brought.

READING ON MARK 13

H.H. Could you give us in a few words an outline of this gospel?

J.T. Well, it may be said to be the only gospel that speaks of the Lord as being in full manhood at the outset. It introduces Him as the Son at once. Matthew speaks of the Child and so does Luke; John involves His birth -- His childhood -- in the term 'flesh', but Mark only introduces Him immediately as the Son of God, so that it is obviously a levitical book, that is to say, the Lord is regarded as in the levitical position at the outset. He waits till John is delivered up; in John's gospel He does not. In all the synoptic gospels He waits till John is delivered up before He actually begins to preach and serve, but in John's gospel He begins before John is cast into prison, showing that it was a divine Person here doing what was to be done, whatever that may have been. But Mark particularly records that it was after John was delivered up that He began to preach, and he introduces Him as the Son of God at once, so that obviously, as has often been remarked, the Servant, or levite, is in view. The passage in Isaiah 9, "Unto us a child is born" is recognised in Matthew and Luke and implied in John, but not in Mark. It is, "Beginning of the glad tidings of Jesus Christ, Son of God", (Mark 1:1).

P.L. Does that connect the levite with the firstborn?

J.T. Yes, I think so. Sonship necessarily underlies the service that is acceptable to God, that is to say, dignity and maturity. I suppose that is what you have been engaged with all through in the consideration of the gospel.

H.F.N. Yes, I think so.

J.T. Here in this chapter it says that the Lord is leaving the temple -- a movement which has its own meaning. It is not a question of being obliged to leave it, but that He is doing it of Himself.

Ques. Would you say what the link is between that and the widow?

J.T. I think the widow represents the subjective side, answering to God in the old system. There were those who recognized "the treasury" to the very end, but it was for the Lord to make the change.

H.F.N. We were wondering on the last occasion whether chapter 12 was not the great education of the levite in view of an apostate state of things -- a fresh chapter in his experience. Would you go with that?

J.T. Well, quite.

H.F.N. Would this chapter flow out of that? There the Lord is seen sitting over against the treasury, and here He is seen sitting on the mount of Olives.

J.T. I think chapter 12 is the apostate state of things ("they left him and went away", verse 12), but what is of God is owned to the very last both by the Lord Himself and the woman. He is looking on, and she represents the recognition of what was of God to the very end. Then He has to make a change and the change is made in this chapter where He leaves the temple and takes another position on the mount of Olives. The woman is in the recognition of what was there as owning what was of God to the last.

H.F.N. Would you mind opening up the thought in regard to the Lord sitting on the mount of Olives?

J.T. I think it sets forth the present time, the new order of things connected with the Spirit, but there is the fullest care taken of the old before He leaves it. Chapter 11 shows what attention He paid to it, and how He walked in it and answered questions. Then in chapter 12 the apostate condition is dealt

with, and He sits over against the treasury and takes account of it to the last moment; the woman is the subjective side corresponding to that. For her there would be relief by faith in His movements. He moved out. As we get it here, "as he was going out of the temple", and then it says, "as he sat on the mount of Olives opposite the temple". That is what is done; He moves of Himself. It is deliberate movement made in freedom. He leaves, and in going out the disciples call attention to what it was He was leaving. He knew what He was leaving. So it is in leaving today; the thing should be done; you are not forced out, but you are going out intelligently; morally you are quite aware of what you are leaving. Whatever there may be worth speaking of morally you know all about it, but you are leaving nevertheless. As a matter of fact the temple continued for a good while, but the Lord was leaving it then.

Ques. Why is Andrew brought in here?

J.T. He is a very important servant from John's point of view, for he brought in Peter; but whilst he served well at the beginning he missed the mind of God in regard to food in chapter 6 and in regard to the Greeks in chapter 12. Nevertheless, he is a very important servant in that he was one of the first who followed Jesus. He was one of two of the most distinguished, in the sense that they were the first to follow Jesus according to John. Here He is linked up with Peter and James and John, so that he comes in the fourth in distinction.

S.J.B.C. Have you any thought as to who this disciple was -- one of His disciples?

J.T. I think when it says, "one of his disciples" it is to describe all of them; he would represent them all. The four are mentioned after. But we ought to keep to the two main points here, which are, leaving the temple, and the position on the mount of Olives.

P.L. Do you think that in the four being mentioned

we have the thought of construction before us in Mark? There are four carpenters in Zechariah, and Mark is the only gospel where the Lord is referred to as the Carpenter.

J.T. Well, I thought Andrew's place would have reference here to the fact that he brought in Peter according to John. He represents the element that would bring in material for the assembly in view of the Lord leaving the Jewish system. He was needed to bring in material for the new building.

P.L. Quite so. Does the mount of Olives suggest the domain of the Spirit through which the Lord would appeal during the dispensation?

J.T. I think so, but if Andrew had been in keeping with that, he would not have made much of the Greeks. Andrew and Philip are brought in together and they fail. In connection with the question of food, the Lord "knew what he was going to do", but He tested these two as to how the thing could be done. They are also connected together with the Greeks. They seemed to be impressed with the importance of the Greeks coming up, and I think the mount of Olives would check that spirit. The Greeks as such were important in the eyes of Andrew and Philip, but the Lord points out to them in His answer that the corn of wheat has to fall into the ground and die. They attached importance to certain persons of distinguished race or history coming into the testimony, and the Lord discredited that. It seemed as if those two brothers thought it was a matter of special importance that the Greeks came up to see Jesus, but the Lord Himself did not attach any importance to them because of their special place in the history of the world.

M.P. Would that correspond with what we have in 1 Corinthians 1:20? "Where is the wise? where scribe? where disputer of this world? has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?"

J.T. I think that is the ground the apostle goes on. He alludes to the wisdom of the Greeks, their great ability in language, learning and literature, and I have no doubt Philip and Andrew had in mind that it was a great thing for them to come, but it is not a matter of any special importance to the Lord. He is no respecter of persons, that is to say, christianity discredits what is spectacular, because God is no respecter of persons.

H.H. "Certain Greeks", it says. What would the temple idea be at the present moment?

J.T. It is the accredited system; the temple stood for that. It represented the accredited system of religion at that time clearly.

Ques. How are we to apply that now, as to the accredited system?

J.T. Well, there is an accredited system in this country, an established religion, and it is not only accredited in the world, but also by law. How are you going to get out of what is established by law and keep a good conscience? You have to understand sonship in order to do that. It is not only that the thing is wrong, but it is established by law; it is marked by antiquity and all that goes to make a religion respectable in this world. Now the Lord was leaving that.

J.J. Do you think the Lord had in mind to transfer everything that was good in the old into the new? He could do that.

J.T. I thought that was represented in the four.

J.J. I was thinking of the woman you were speaking of.

J.T. The Lord shows in the woman here what has to be carried over in the four. She represented what was subjective in the old and she was there till the last moment, but here is One great enough to make a change. It requires moral greatness to move out of that which was established by law and which had in

this case divine credentials. It took great moral power to do that; we see the reality of what it meant to come out in the Acts. The old system was not great enough for this poor widow -- she cast in "the whole of her living".

H.F.N. Is that only done by learning what the mount of Olives suggests? Does the power for it lie there?

J.T. I think so. As He is leaving the temple the remark is made, "see what stones and what buildings!" And the Lord answers, "Seest thou these great buildings? not a stone shall be left upon a stone which shall not be thrown down". That is a settled thing; they are seen in that light on the mount of Olives, that is to say, there is light in the movement out as to what is going to happen to the things you are leaving, however well founded they seem, and however ancient. You are made intelligent as to what is to happen to them as you are leaving.

H.F.N. You made reference to the Acts. Would it come out in connection with Stephen? There was a wholly new centre. The temple had stood for a centre of light.

J.T. I think it would. He represents all that there was in the old; he goes over the ground in a masterly way, and his death meant the end of that system; devout men buried him. There is nothing about the literal burial of the apostles. Stephen's burial is significant because it fits in with earlier burials. There was light in his face as the face of an angel, and the light from heaven in chapter 9 is a clear indication that the old system was over and done with.

H.F.N. Your reference to Stephen in relation to burial is very interesting. Would you mind opening it up a little more?

J.T. Well, I think it is burial in the way it is

spoken of in the Old Testament. He is regarded as representing what was in Israel and ending it in the full light of heaven; the thing is buried. "He saw the glory of God, and Jesus", and his burial is in that light. Sarah's burial represented the end of that system and Rebecca took her place, and I think the church in the full sense (Rebecca) comes in after Stephen's burial. He is buried in the full light not only of resurrection but of heaven; he is buried in the light of Jesus in heaven, so that everything is secured. There is no doubt of all coming to pass that was in the mind of God about Israel. The Spirit of Christ marked Stephen.

H.W.S. Is there anything in the thought of privacy connected with the new position?

J.T. I think it points to the access we have to Christ. Those four disciples took advantage of the position He took up. He took up another position, and they took advantage of the access. No doubt the others could have taken it, too. Those four would represent those who take advantage of access to Christ in the new position, and thus know what is coming. They are not content simply to know that the stones are to be thrown down. It is an entirely new position in this chapter, and the Lord is calling attention to the new thing by sitting opposite the temple. They want to know what is going to happen. "Tell us, when shall these things be, and what is the sign when all these things are going to be fulfilled", that is, they represent those who wish to know the whole truth. They are not content with an inkling, with the first glimmering of light, as many are, but want to get it all.

Ques. Is that the spirit of the woman at the end of the previous chapter?

J.T. Well, I think so. Her act is intelligent and commented on by the Lord. It corresponded with Himself and is that which enters into christianity;

it is complete self-sacrifice. It was too great for the old system.

Ques. Do you think the four would give a universal character to the new position?

J.T. I think they would -- the new material that He would bring in.

J.J. Why does the Lord give the new light in a prophetic setting?

J.T. That would be to release their minds from the old system they were engrossed in, and He gives the facts right on to the end. It would have a delivering effect upon them, and would acquaint them with what should happen in order to set them free of it.

J.J. Is it similar to the way Paul addressed the Thessalonians, giving them all the facts right to the end?

J.T. Quite. It is very like Revelation -- what the Lord says about Himself -- that the Son does not know is explained by the book of Revelation.

H.H. And would Mark's own exercise as a servant underlie this, in considering what the new system was?

J.T. Quite. The light in this chapter would help him.

H.H. I thought it was because he got help in his own recovery that he set it out in this way.

J.T. Undoubtedly. It is the bearing of the whole thing on the servant here.

Ques. Would Antioch represent the new position at all?

J.T. I think it does. The light from heaven in Acts 9 is a plain reminder that it is not from Jerusalem; that place was done with; it is from heaven, and chapter 10 is the substantive thing. Light is one thing, but substance is another. Chapter 11 brings out the preaching of the scattered ones on account of Stephen's persecution. They went as far as Antioch; there they preached to the Greeks, and it says, "the Lord's hand was with them, and a

great number believed and turned to the Lord". There you see the material coming in, but it is still kingdom material. They turned to the Lord and Barnabas goes down from Jerusalem, but he makes no reference to Jerusalem; it is a question of learning from the light. Then we are told "he was a good man and full of the Holy Spirit", and "a large crowd of people were added to the Lord". It was an extension of the kingdom; they were brought to the Lord and added to Him. Now the next thing is they make assembly material out of them. Barnabas goes and seeks out Saul and they spent a whole year at Antioch and taught in the assembly. Now you are getting material for the assembly which, I think, would correspond with Andrew, for he was the one who led in the bringing in of assembly material. So it says that they taught for a whole year, and "the disciples were first called christians in Antioch". Now you have them marked out as related to Christ outside of Jerusalem, and then the formation at Antioch is noted -- "The assembly which was there".

Ques. Did I understand you to say Barnabas would be similar to Andrew in bringing in Paul?

J.T. No; what I said was that I thought Andrew might represent the material brought in by Paul, as Andrew was the first to bring in assembly material; he brought in Peter. So that the work at Antioch proceeds and we are told there were at Antioch certain ones, meaning they were in that place, that is, in the assembly that was there. Hence we have set out the idea of a new system outside of Jerusalem in principle, and then the Holy Spirit administers there. They ministered to the Lord and fasted and the Holy Spirit asked for Barnabas and Saul. "Separate me now Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them". He recognises the assembly that was there, and Barnabas and Saul went in a missionary way, forming assemblies. Then we are told that in

returning they appointed elders in every assembly -- not yet in every city -- but in every assembly, because the idea was to set up the thing in local settings, each church standing on its own feet; each supplied with elders. I think all that legitimately fits in here with the mount of Olives, because it stood over against the things the Lord was leaving.

R.B. Is not the privacy characteristic of the new and contrasted with the public position at Jerusalem?

J.T. I think so. "For through him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father", (Ephesians 2:18). Christianity is private; although it is public in effect, yet it is characterised by privacy.

H.H. The thought of the Supper would be very important in regard to the mount of Olives -- the spiritual side of things; we need to give place to the Spirit.

J.T. I think so, in the sense of elevation and strength. The sitting here is to be noted, because sitting on the part of the Lord is taking up a definite position. It is not temporary. Then the first thing is significant. He "began to say, Take heed lest any one mislead you". That is the first thing to take notice of.

J.S. Would we be in any danger of being on the line of the old, of getting back to it?

J.T. I think that is a great danger always. We know full well how the misleading came in in christianity in spite of the excellent start made.

H.F.N. Will you say a word on the Lord here as Teacher? He is referred to as Teacher in this chapter and then in the next, "The Teacher says", (chapter 14:14). It is a title we do not often refer to the Lord. How would that bear on our levitical service?

J.T. You get it repeatedly in this gospel, as in the others, and I think the importance of teaching is seen in John in the two in chapter 1. They had been

disciples of John and now they heard him speak. They had often heard him speak and often doubtless commented on the way he spoke, for I am sure he could speak well. A man indwelt by the Spirit from infancy would speak by the Spirit of God. It is said they heard him speaking, and they followed Jesus. That shows how thoroughly the ministry had affected them. They were directed to Christ; they followed Jesus, and "Jesus turned", it says, "and saw them following, and saith unto them, What seek ye?" (John 1:38) They say unto Him, "Rabbi", and then the Holy Spirit tells us what that means. Rabbi means 'Teacher', signifying they were now ready to transfer their education to a greater. Although they had an excellent teacher, they were ready for a better one. They said, "Teacher, where abidest thou?" I think there you get the idea of teacher and of the appreciation that should be present with us of teaching. We should be able to discern what is superior; although we are glad to have anything that God gives, yet we should be able to discern what is superior. One might have said to the two, You certainly had an excellent teacher, but they discerned a greater, and so the Holy Spirit tells us what was meant by Rabbi, and they "abode with him". Thus you get discipleship in the sense of being with the one who teaches -- abiding with Him. You may get teaching at a distance, as in books and from addresses, but to abide with the teacher is the thing -- to get instruction direct and the things that go with it.

H.F.N. In John 20, where Mary speaks of Him as teacher in the same way, would that show the completion of the line of divine teaching?

J.T. It does indeed.

H.F.N. Are there not several notable people in John who address the Lord as teacher? First the two you have referred to, and Nathanael in the first chapter; then Nicodemus in chapter 3, and Martha

in chapter 11, and then Mary in chapter 20. Would they represent a course of education?

J.T. No doubt. Mary, I suppose, represents the completion of the education, so that disciple is the term habitually applied to the saints in John and they are thus instructed. It is most important in these days when there is so much bad teaching that the saints should be on that line, not at a distance only, but on the principle of "Where abidest thou?" getting the teaching where He is.

P.L. You get the thought, "One is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren", (Matthew 23:8). Does the allusion to the brethren suggest dwelling with the teacher?

J.T. I suppose so.

R.B. The Lord alluded to Himself as teacher in connection with washing their feet in chapter 13. What would be the import of that?

J.T. I think it is on the same line. It was a question of His superiority and greatness.

The prophetic side of our chapter is extensive, but it is there for us, and I think it ought to be linked up, especially in this gospel, with the Revelation, because the Revelation is to the bondmen of Christ. It is the "Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to him" (Revelation 1:1), that is to say, the Apocalypse is not something the Lord gives of Himself, but is on the line that the Son Himself does not know. He takes the ground. The prophetic ministry is received from God. It is received by Christ and given to His bondman John to show what is shortly coming to pass, that is to say, there is full recognition of God's place in the ordering of the world. Prophecy has to do with the ordering of the earth, and God is the sovereign Ruler, and the Lord speaks to them on that line. The Father is Ruler of heaven and earth and things are in His hands. The Son takes His place mediatorially as

subject and waiting for the Father's revelation, so that, when He receives it He gives it to John, who gives it in turn to the assemblies, but primarily it is for "His bondmen". I think therefore the Revelation should be fitted in with this chapter so that we may see the position in regard to prophecy. It is God's disposition of things, God's ordering of things, and He holds it in His own power until the time comes. Thus chapter 13 stands by itself in this gospel, but it is most important for us that we should be kept from these earthly things and wait on God about them. It is God's time, it is not in our power to know about them except what is revealed. In the end of the chapter it says, "This generation shall in no wise pass away, till all these things take place". It is perhaps a difficult passage to many, but I think intelligible as understanding what the word 'generation' means, that is, not necessarily the actual people living in a certain period of time; it is so generally, but it sometimes means the kind of people without respect to duration. Take, for instance, what the Jew is and will continue to be; there is no other generation like him in the history of the world; there is little trace left of the Greeks and Romans, but if you take the Jew, he remains what he was.

Then the Lord goes on to say, "Take heed, watch and pray, for ye do not know when the time is: it is as a man gone out of the country, having left his house and given to his bondmen the authority". I thought it would be well for us to take note of the authority; He gave "to his bondmen the authority". If He did not reveal the time, He gave them the authority, whatever that may mean. It is not simply authority, but the authority. He passed on the authority to certain ones.

D.L.H. Then how do you take the thought of the authority as having a bearing upon present conditions?

J.T. Well, I think the first thing is to notice there

is such a thing as the authority. It will never do to admit there is no authority, will it?

D.L.H. It will not, indeed.

C.C.E. Do you think the authority involves the Lord's absence?

J.T. Quite. It is power to act in His absence, and then, "To each one his work".

H.H. Would the name of Christ come in?

J.T. Well, quite. The authority is a very real thing. Things are, of course, done in His name, but there is the authority.

S. Is it connected with spiritual power?

J.T. It would go with spiritual weight. What you get in the book of Numbers was that Moses and Aaron were to be accompanied in numbering by heads of houses, not those appointed heads of houses. They were heads of houses and that means they had power. It is not simply a question of being appointed head, but I am head, and if I am that, then there is power.

Ques. Do you mean the way in which Abraham is spoken of as head of his house?

J.T. He commands his house, we read; but these men were heads in their father's houses. It is not that the father is head -- he is obliged to be head -- but that a person in the house is head of his father's house. That is a different idea. The illustration of it, I think, is Gideon. His father was alive, but Gideon became morally greater than his father. He recognised his father, but he influenced his father, so that it was his father's bullock of seven years old that he sacrificed, and the image in his father's house that he overthrew. These acts challenged his father's natural rights, but he succeeded; Gideon established himself as having power in his father's house. He acquired the thing; he was not appointed.

D.L.H. Would it be something like the king "against whom none can rise up", (Proverbs 30:31)?

J.T. That is the idea exactly. It is what the man is.

Ques. Would Paul's word to Titus convey the idea? "These things ... rebuke with all authority", (Titus 2:15)?

J.T. That is it indeed.

D.L.H. Then that means what a man really has and not what he assumes to have.

J.T. That is the thing. I think Gideon is a good illustration.

H.F.N. He acquired power in his father's house.

D.L.H. Well, he acted like a king.

J.T. And all his conduct afterwards was in keeping with that. He refused to be king; he would not go beyond what he was. The crown would not add to him really.

P.L. Do you see this in Elisha with the double portion of the spirit of Elijah? Do you see authority there?

J.T. Well, I have no doubt. You do not want a crown. "The locusts have no king", (Proverbs 30:27). That is in the very passage where the king is recognised, and yet the locusts have not one, but they have such as that amongst them. It is the other side of the picture, that is to say, you do not want the crown. The parable in the book of Judges is to show that. The worthless tree alone would take the crown. The fig tree, the vine, and the olive tree, were conscious of serving and that none else could do what they were doing, and they refused the crown.

Rem. So it is moral authority, not official.

J.T. And you are content with that. You are only thinking of the service you are doing, and you do not want a crown. Wherever you see aspiration to the crown, you may depend there is no service going on at all. You are content to remain in your service and leave the crown.

Ques. Would the thought of bondmen imply they were under authority at first before he gave them the authority?

J.T. I think that is right. It is not simply servants but bondmen; you belong wholly to the Lord.

J.J. "And to each one his work" is connected with that.

J.T. Some may be more distinguished than others, but each one has something from the Lord.

E.R. Is it not important that what we get in verse 10 should go on?

J.T. "The gospel must first be preached", quite. It seems it is imperative; it is the Lord's ordering.

E.R. I have been struck lately with the apostle in the last chapter of Timothy standing before Caesar and the nations, showing what a moment it was to him, the Lord standing by him so that the preaching might be fully known. Do you not think we ought to be very much stirred up?

J.T. I am sure that is right. Timothy was charged most solemnly and urgently to proclaim the word; (2 Timothy 4:2).

S.J.B.C. What about the reference to the porter?

J.T. I have been thinking lately of those who have broken off, as one may say, from divine principles, that they are descending into a low level of looseness and confederacy; for these are the features of those who have broken away from the path of divine principles, and I believe it is because there has been disregard of the doorkeeper. The command to the doorkeeper is that he should watch.

READING ON MARK 14

J.T. We dwelt on a previous occasion on the earlier and closing verses of chapter 13, first dwelling at length on the Lord, as it says, "going out of the temple", (verse 1) and the remark of one of His disciples as to the stones and buildings, as if to call attention to the things considered of value in that which the Lord was leaving. Then the Lord answering said, "Seest thou these great buildings? not a stone shall be left upon a stone, which shall not be thrown down", (verse 2). The overthrow of what seemed so important in the eyes of the disciple is announced, and that would deliver the disciple -- or those whom he represented -- from the thing the Lord was leaving. Then the Lord takes a seat on the mount of Olives, regarding it, I believe, as the representation of christianity as centring in the Spirit of God. "He sat", as it says, "on the mount of Olives opposite the temple", (verse 3). Sitting means in this connection not a temporary position but an abiding one; and there are four persons, not called disciples, who express in their names four distinguished things amongst the saints, who come and ask Him privately when these things should be. He warns them at the outset to be on their guard that they should not be misled. The first great suggestion as to taking up a position according to light is to be on our guard that we be not diverted from it. Then we spoke on the closing verses as relating to the present time also, the body of the chapter having reference to the prophetic side of things which was in the hands of God. The Lord tells His disciples those matters were in His Father's hands, even He did not know, which points to the book of Revelation as coming from God to Christ, and from Christ to John,

and from John to the assemblies. We spoke about the authority, which I think was interesting and important -- giving them the authority, that which was to remain. We dwelt on the side of moral weight; on this ground there are mandates from Christ at all times; we can always reckon upon that authority. I think that was about what we had.

H.H. I do not know whether you were interrupted when speaking about the porter.

J.T. There is importance given to it here. The Lord in the figure says, "and commanded the doorkeeper that he should watch", (verse 34). It was a command showing that it was of the very greatest importance there should be watchfulness on the part of the porter, because among those coming in as a result of the gospel there might be an unreal person hidden. In the Acts we find persons distinguished in this world converted -- Barnabas, the eunuch, Saul and the centurion. Then there was also Simon who, although ostensibly converted, was not real. He eluded Philip's eye, but was detected by Peter; that is, I think, an important side, because a man of that type would be hailed perhaps as a great trophy of the gospel, whereas he was not so at all. He had slipped in, as far as Philip and the others were concerned, but was detected by Peter and exposed. So that I think perhaps there is a suggestion of the need of carefulness as to persons who might have distinction in this world. They are apt to be over-estimated, yet they may be subjects of God's grace.

J.J. Is there anything of importance in the divisions of the night -- evening, midnight, cock-crowing and morning?

J.T. I suppose there is a good deal in that. It is for spiritual discernment as to where we are in the periods of the night. Cock-crowing time ought to be the time of repentance. The point is, "lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping", (verse 36). There is danger in

settling down, and therefore the need of wakefulness is insisted upon under all circumstances.

Rem. I should like to know your point as to repentance.

J.T. Well, it was in Peter's case. I suppose there has been such a time as that. Peter, I think, represents Protestantism, as Judas represents more the Romish system. There has been a measure of repentance in regard of the former, but in regard of the latter there is none, because the Lord says, "She will not repent", (Revelation 2:21). You need not expect anything from that quarter, save in individual cases.

P.L. Would the morning answer to the Philadelphian character?

J.T. I think so. The Lord is in view Himself. You feel that spiritually it is so.

P.L. The thing commenced with the departure from first love, which culminated in the Thyatira midnight.

A.H.W. Does Peter distinguish the periods of the night in his epistle in referring to the day-star having arisen?

J.T. I suppose so; it arises in the hearts of the saints. The morning alludes to His coming; the light of that day has already broken in upon us. It is in the light of these things that we have the Lord's supper introduced, the significance of which is obvious here. But first of all there is the state of the religious world -- its murderous attitude towards Christ, and then the condition within where He is -- the house of Simon the leper -- an antagonism not actually against Him, but against one devoted to Him. That is the form the opposition takes inside. Outside the opposition is directly against Christ; they take counsel how to put Him to death; inside the opposition is to those devoted to Him -- not ostensibly to Christ, but really so.

Ques. What do you make of being in the house of Simon the leper?

J.T. I think that would be a house of reproach; leprosy in the reckoning of the religious element outside would mean reproach -- something to be avoided. The Lord was in it, however. I suppose it would allude to those who own their leprosy and admit what they are publicly -- no pretence to being anything different. There is a full acknowledgment of leprosy being there, and that is where the Lord is.

J.J. That is not very far from the mount of Olives.

J.T. Well, quite. It is not that leprosy was working there; far otherwise, or the Lord would not have been there. It is that the thing is owned, and I think where the Holy Spirit is and that admission is maintained, any other reputation would be unbecoming.

H.F.N. You referred to the widow at the end of the previous chapter as representing the spirit of the old system; would this woman represent more the spirit of the new?

J.T. The woman at the end of chapter 12 is devoting all her living to the treasury of God, this woman has something very precious which she uses with intelligence. The casting in of the two mites was more an act of devotion; the woman knew into whose hands the two mites came and what would be made of them. That is what goes on in the house of God. You know what use is made of things. I believe that when Barnabas devoted the price of the land, he had confidence what use would be made of it, so he put it at the apostles' feet; and so generally, in giving in the assembly; it is intelligence. What marks this woman in chapter 14 is intelligent affection and that Christ was all to her, not only Christ in regard of what had been done for her, which would be more Luke 7, but Christ apprehended as officially serving. She anoints Him on the head, but He

refers to His body, that is to say, she was intelligent as to what was acceptable to God and effective in service. The allusion is to what He was officially, I think. He, however, associates it with His body, showing that in His mind it was the whole idea. The body is a complete thought, it comes out in Matthew and Mark. So the Lord's supper as we get it here is not the memorial side, but is in view of a vessel. "Take, eat: this is my body". I think she is on the way, so to speak, she is leading the way in regard to an official vessel which was fully understood and covered in what He said about it: "she is come aforehand to anoint my body".

E.R. There is a difference as to the anointing between Matthew and Mark. In one case it is the king and in the other the prophet, but it was His head which was anointed in both cases.

J.T. Whereas in Luke and John it is the feet, showing that in Luke it is more the grace side and the walk carrying it to her, and in John the love going into death -- His feet were carrying Him there. But the idea of a vessel is in Matthew and Mark because, whether it be the assembly or individual service, it is a complete idea -- not only the head, it is the body.

Rem. I have not quite got the thought as to the vessel.

J.T. Whether it be the assembly or the individual, it is a complete idea, not only the head, but the body. Matthew runs with Mark generally as to facts. He begins his gospel with the word 'book'; the first word is 'book', which alludes to that very thing. "In the volume of the book it is written of me", "A body hast thou prepared me", (Hebrews 10:7,5). That is the foundation of all books as recorded of God, and Matthew is the book of the incoming of the vessel. "Book of the generation of Jesus Christ, Son of David, Son of Abraham", (Matthew 1:1). It is the king clearly, but here in the body.

H.H. Would not Colossians 2:9 correspond with the thought? "For in him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily". The Colossians were in danger of taking up the wrong book.

J.T. That is so. The first chapter (verse 18) is, "he is the head of the body, the assembly". That is the complete idea in Colossians, and that is the thing to get hold of. "He is the head of the body, the assembly", and in the second chapter (verse 9), "in him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily". Now all that, I think, enters into these two evangelists because there is nothing said in the institution of the Lord's supper in regard of memorial in either of them. It is not a question of remembering Christ in these two evangelists, but of eating. Luke alone brings in the memorial, that is, he brings in Christ in the way of love. It is not a question of building up a constitution in Luke, but of having love for Christ and recalling Him, whereas Matthew and Mark have in mind the building up of a constitution -- a vessel, so that it is food. "Take, eat; this is my body", not My flesh, but My body.

H.F.N. With regard to the thought of vessel, do you refer to something wider than the Lord personally?

J.T. Oh, yes. I think the assembly is necessarily in view, particularly in Matthew.

H.F.N. You remarked some time ago that Mark brought in the vessel of service. Would that form the vessel of service? Is that your thought?

J.T. I think that is the setting of it. You see the great ideal in Scripture of service is Paul, and he is the first to be called a vessel, that is, it is a complete thought, a complete thing. He "is an elect vessel to me", (Acts 9:15). What you find in Paul is that the Lord had taken great care as to his reception amongst the saints, so that he should be rightly received; he got the word from Ananias that he was to rise and be baptised and wash away his sins. He did not wash

away the public reputation, because he afterwards refers to himself as the chief of sinners, but he washed away his sins. "And be filled with the Holy Spirit. And straightway there fell from his eyes as it were scales, and he saw, and rising up was baptised; and, having received food, got strength", (verses 17 - 19). These are all mentioned, not incidentally, but for a purpose, indicating the idea of feeding, that is, you have to get strength. I think the Lord indicates that in these two evangelists, it is a question of eating His body; it is not the flesh but the body, which has to be understood spiritually. In John's gospel it is the flesh: "But the bread withal which I shall give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world", (John 6:51). It is that bearing of His death, but in Matthew and Mark it speaks about His body as food and His blood as drink.

P.L. Would it suggest assimilating the spirit of the Hebrew servant?

J.T. Just so. You see what is set before you in the end. He says, "Take, eat", in Matthew 26:26, "this is my body". The word 'eat' may not be in this gospel, but we see in that what was in the Lord's mind, "Take this: this is my body"; so that it is in the apprehension of what is in the book, what is written in the book, and what came out historically as recorded in Matthew and Mark. That is the thing to get hold of; that that One went down into death, because what is before us in the Lord's supper is really a dead Christ -- it is Christ dead; He went to that length -- to death -- and one has to lay hold of that and eat it to understand what the vessel is.

M.P. Would the passage in 2 Corinthians 4:11 be the fruit of it? "That the life also of Jesus may be manifested in our body".

J.T. Quite. You see there "we have this treasure in earthen vessels", (verse 7). We want to lay hold of the complete idea, whether it be collective or individual;

that it is not using my head only, it is the complete person. In the Lord's case you have the anointing on the head and feet, and then you have Him calling attention to His head, His side, and His feet -- it is the whole person. So in regard to the consecration of the priest, it was the whole person.

A.H.W. Do I understand that we see "I delight to do thy will, O my God", (Psalm 40:8) expressed in the way the Lord used His body?

J.T. Quite. We are said to be sanctified by the offering of the body of Christ, and we have to be in correspondence with that. In Matthew and Mark we have that, and in Luke we have more the affectionate remembrance of Christ.

A.H.W. So this food and the strength you speak of would enable us also to delight in the will of God.

J.T. Exactly. It is by that will you are sanctified.

D.L.H. Then is the thought in Luke what is continuous, that is, a continual memorial, and in Matthew and Mark what the soul apprehends and feeds on?

J.T. Just so. You apprehend that it implies the knowledge of "the book". "In the volume of the book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will, O my God". Matthew is the filling out of that book, and it shows that the vessel was here. "They shall call his name Immanuel, which is, being interpreted, 'God with us'", (Matthew 1:23) but there in that body, and so in the institution at the Lord's supper what you get first is "as they were eating". You notice here they were lying at table and eating when it is said to them, "One of you shall deliver me up", calling attention to the importance of eating even if sin has to be dealt with in any of us or in a company. We get the importance of food being there, as if the ministration of food helps to the acknowledgment of the thing; and then it goes on to tell us that as they were eating He took the bread.

Ques. Are you emphasising what we might call the intrinsic value and preciousness of the Person?

J.T. Well, yes, but in the connection mentioned it is not only the intrinsic value, but in Matthew it is the king, and so, in the end of that gospel He says to Mary, "go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me", (Matthew 28:10), not that I shall see them, but they shall see Me. Here in Mark He tells them He would go before them into Galilee, which is an important thing, that is to say, it is the rejected position; we do not have to take it first. He takes it first; He goes before them, but in Matthew He sends a message and says they will see Him there. Thus it was their responsibility; it was what they were to do. Here it is what He would do, showing that He goes before in the place of reproach. In Matthew He tells them to go there and they would see Him, and they went to the place where "Jesus had appointed them" (verse 16) and they saw Him. That is to say, it is a governmental touch -- the Lord is supreme in government. You have to go to see Him, that is, He has everything, what you need He has, but you must go to Him to get it.

Rem. That is for the brethren.

J.T. Yes, and "the eleven disciples went into Galilee to the mountain which Jesus had appointed them" and they saw Him. Then He goes after them as much as to own that they had done what He told them, and they are going to get the gain of it. So He goes up to them and they worship Him, and then He says, "All power has been given me in heaven and upon earth", (verse 18). That is the position in Matthew, so whilst it is what He is intrinsically it is also what He is in relation to government in that gospel, and to the service of God in Mark. I think the woman's act here is to call attention to the kind of service that is acceptable so, "Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached throughout the whole world,

this also that she hath done shall be spoken of for a memorial of her".

E.R. I suppose the feature of breaking the box, which we get in Mark's gospel and in no other, is an important one. Would it not show how she shuts herself out entirely in all that she does?

J.T. Quite. Tell us about the breaking of the box.

E.R. I thought it was a very beautiful thought. Not only was there the anointing there, but she breaks the box, representing herself.

J.T. The action of Mary in John in the use of her hair is on the same line. It is the Person who is before her.

E.R. Only in Mary's case she retains the fragrance because her heart has touched it. "To you therefore who believe [is] the preciousness", (1 Peter 2:7).

J.T. Quite.

A.H.W. When you say this kind of thing should always be present at the preaching, do you refer to the way the preaching is carried on?

J.T. It is not to be a legal thing, but the Lord had in mind that all that this woman had done should be also spoken of for a memorial of her. It is what she did. Her name is not given us in John, so it is not so much the person of the woman as the thing that she represents. You want it to be evident that that is the kind of ministry. It is not clerical -- it shuts out clericalism. People brought up under a clerical system are sure to be damaged. They have not the right idea to begin with.

A.H.W. Is this the spirit that is to mark the preaching?

J.T. I think so. Paul said, "Whom I serve in my spirit in the glad tidings of his Son", (Romans 1:9). That is the thing. It was in his spirit he served God. Wherever he preached, you may depend, there was some suggestion of what this woman had done; it is the thought carried through.

H.H. Do you think it would suggest the assembly material in the sense of referring to the body? Would it go as far as that?

J.T. I think that is right when the preaching has that in view. Preaching has the material for the assembly in view, and persons converted under clerical preaching are sure to be warped. It is hard to make them fit into the assembly. So the presentation of what this woman did, that is, her act, not what she said, would save souls from being damaged by the clerical idea. They would refuse ministry not in keeping with Mark's gospel.

J.J. Would "these glad tidings" in that way correspond with Paul's gospel? It seems like a special view of the gospel.

J.T. No doubt, and then, in mentioning what she did you have to mention the fact that it was the Lord's head and that the Lord said it was His body. Therefore, you would have the idea of the vessel and obviously the convert is to be a vessel. You are to be brought in as a vessel because there is no other thought in the mind of God than that every brother should be a vessel; the thought applies individually and collectively.

J.J. So in connection with the man with the pitcher of water, the Lord allows for Paul coming in; that is the kind of ministry that leads to the assembly.

J.T. Exactly.

Ques. Do you carry on the application in the thought of the cup where it says, "They all drank out of it"?

J.T. Yes, in the sense that it was one thing; it is one idea. It is that out of which we drink. I think it leads to that in which the love of God is, a vessel for the love of God.

Ques. Is your thought, in what you have been saying, complete committal to the will of God?

J.T. Just so, complete as to your whole body -- indeed, body, soul and spirit.

Ques. Does Romans 12 suggest that in connection with the believer's body?

J.T. Yes, it is presented as a living sacrifice. The members are dealt with in chapter 6; they are to be used as "instruments of righteousness to God", (verse 13) but in chapter 8 the body is viewed as a whole. "If Christ be in you, the body is dead on account of sin, but the Spirit life on account of righteousness", (verse 10). The body is thus secured, and in chapter 12 it is presented as a whole -- one complete idea.

Ques. Is Paul on that line when he says, "We are unto God a sweet odour of Christ", (2 Corinthians 2:15).

J.T. Quite.

R.B. If I understand you, you are pressing two thoughts, one as to eating His flesh, as in John 6, the other as to eating His body. Is the thought of eating His flesh the building up a spiritual constitution of vigour and power, and the thought of eating His body the acceptation under the impulse of His love of the yielding of oneself (the complete person) to Him?

J.T. That is the way I look at it. John 6 is the condition that the Lord took, so that it says, "The Word became flesh", (John 1:14); it is the condition. Hence, in John 6:51 it is "the bread withal which I shall give is my flesh". It refers to the condition He took and which He laid down. It is terminated, that is, the flesh-and-blood condition. It has to be apprehended that that is terminated in His death. It is vicarious there; it is "for the life of the world". So that the eating of His flesh and drinking of His blood would be the apprehension of that condition laid down -- that life terminated. I do not live in this life in the flesh after that. He came down and laid down His life.

Rem. On the propitiatory side.

Ques. Is it based on the passover? You get the passover and the feast of unleavened bread here at the outset. What is the significance of that?

J.T. I think, carrying it to our own times, it refers to 1 Corinthians 5 as preparatory to the Lord's supper. It shows that the feast is to be kept and that it is a continuous thing, whereas the Lord's supper is a special thing. But the eating that precedes it is of all moment because you have no taste for it unless you keep the feast of unleavened bread. It becomes a mere outward thing. Then another thing comes out in these two evangelists -- Matthew and Mark. After partaking of the Lord's supper they sing a hymn and they go to the mount of Olives, meaning, I think, that it is a question of power in the soul. It is a movement not said to be led by the Lord. It does not say He did anything specially, it is what they did.

H.W.S. How do you apply that?

J.T. I think it is what you make room for by partaking of the Lord's supper. I certainly should be stronger after it. As a memorial it quickens my affections; I see the Lord in it. The breaking of bread is really for the eye, it is really what you see. They recognised Him, it is said, in the breaking of bread, but eating is for strength and it is in connection with the eating you have this movement towards the mount of Olives. It is a question of power in the soul.

J.J. Do you think the view of Matthew and Mark in the Supper is included in Luke?

J.T. You have to take all together, only you have to view each by itself. One would not like to think you partook of the Lord's supper without some gain, some additional strength, otherwise it is simply a thing done weekly and nothing more -- nothing added to you. There is on the one hand the question of the affections in the Person recalled. That goes on in freshness, but freshness is not everything. You

need strength and it is in the strength you acquire that you make the movement.

Rem. The bread that strengthens man's heart.

J.T. That is the idea exactly.

A.H.W. Is the idea that you are strengthened to reach this point of elevation?

J.T. Yes, I think so. Earlier the Lord goes there and sits down and they come to Him and ask Him privately, but here it is put as their doing. I do not say He was not there. He was, but it is the character of the thing; they were able to do this.

A.H.W. I was wondering whether the mount of Olives bears the presentation of being the Lord's own place.

J.T. I think it is heaven in the spiritual setting. I think the Lord would be there before us. It is the idea of getting strength to reach what is our own sphere. The prayer in Ephesians 3 is different from that in Ephesians 1. The apostle does not kneel down in chapter 1. He prays that we "should know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, and what the surpassing greatness of his power towards us who believe, according to the working of the might of his strength", (verses 18,19) but in Ephesians 3:14 - 17 he bows his 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 strengthened with power by his Spirit in the inner man; that the Christ may dwell, through faith, in your hearts". It is a question of power in the soul. I do not think there is much in light by itself, it is a question of the power in Ephesians 3. Paul insisted in 1 Corinthians that it was not the word but the power.

H.F.N. How do you regard what follows? Is the strength in the soul not only to touch the mount

of Olives -- the spiritual region -- but also to face what follows?

J.T. Exactly. "Jesus says to them, All ye shall be offended, for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered abroad".

H.F.N. Could we ever face that path apart from having sung the hymn and having been to the mount of Olives?

J.T. I am sure we cannot. To face the opposition we must come out in heavenly warmth and power.

H.F.N. Would it correspond at all with John? "I became in the Spirit on the Lord's day", (Revelation 1:10) and then he faced all the breakdown.

J.T. Quite.

Ques. Would that be really the gain in service?

J.T. You must face the sphere of responsibility and suffering in power. You are strengthened by eating the Lord's body as seen here.

H.F.N. Would you mind saying a word as to Mark's distinctive presentation of the sufferings of Christ?

J.T. The subject is very great. I have been thinking lately that generally in Scripture, that is, in the epistles and in the Old Testament, the sufferings of Christ are dealt with in relation to man's need, but in the four gospels you have the sufferings of Christ, the death of Christ, treated by itself. That is the greatest thing to be able to see -- these sufferings presented from four sides, because that is what we should all come to. It gives fibre to the soul to feed on them. It is difficult to speak of them really. It is more food for contemplation because the ground is so holy. We see the features in the gospels, but the understanding of the gospels requires the epistles, so that being free from our own need we can look at the thing by itself. As 1 Peter 1:11 says, "when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow".

Ques. Would that come out in the offerings in Leviticus?

J.T. It takes all the offerings to present the sufferings of Christ. The offerings are related to us; it is a question of what we offer.

Ques. So would you reckon that what precedes is for the purpose of building up a constitution to be able rightly to consider the sufferings of Christ?

J.T. Yes; He offered Himself. We have to look at His doing it. It is a wonderful thing to be able to do that, to be free, as knowing the power of them in regard to oneself, to look at the sufferings of Christ. He "through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God", (Hebrews 9:14). There is nothing in Scripture that would so subdue and comfort the heart as that theme.

J.J. Is it not rather striking that the Lord only says, "Abba, Father", once, and it is in this chapter? In every place where it is mentioned sonship is in view, and I wondered whether that would have a bearing in service.

J.T. We are led into that in sonship. I think the word 'Abba' is generally retained in translation so that it is available to all christians and means the first breathing of the Spirit of adoption. It is wonderful that we are led into it, because it is the term the Lord uses here and in the place of the greatest pressure; Matthew and Mark give the subject of the Lord's suffering in its severest aspect. It is the sin-offering; they are the only evangelists who mention the forsaking of God. There you have the thing in its awfulness. It says, "he began to be amazed and oppressed in spirit" -- a most remarkable thing to be said of the Son of God. Then the prayer, "Abba, Father, all things are possible to thee: take away this cup from me; but not what I will, but what thou wilt". This was uttered three times. What a theme for contemplation!

BUILDING MATERIAL

Haggai 1:7,8; 1 Corinthians 3:10 - 13

I have been thinking, dear brethren, of building material, having in view that this is the time of building, and if it is a time of building there must be material. Thus I have read from Haggai, a well-known prophet, not only because he speaks of building and of material, but because he took part in the work himself. Many of us can speak of what is needed and urge others on, but what God looks for is a leader, and to give a lead I must go on ahead.

So we find with Haggai, and his associate prophet, Zechariah, that they not only urged the builders to build, but it says they helped in the work -- "the prophets of God helping", as we read. One who thus puts his hand to the work deserved special attention, and I may add that prophecy is that which in the first epistle to the Corinthians is especially commended for building. Of the gifts, each of which is of value, prophecy was commended. Before, however, commending the gift of prophecy, the apostle said, "yet shew I unto you a way of more surpassing excellence" (1 Corinthians 12:31); he could not only speak of the way of love but show it. It is a thing rather to be shown than defined, and so having shown that way, he goes back to the subject of gift and urges prophecy, for he that prophesieth edifies or builds the assembly. So Haggai, associated with Zechariah, demands special attention, as a man who, in a day of very small things, spoke the mind of God. He also builded, worked with the others, with the rank and file of the people, as we may say.

But I am speaking now of material, for however clear the mind of God may be as to what is required, and however skilled the builders, there must be

material, and we should note what it is. What elements form the physical system around us, or what the primary materials were, we can say but little, but we are not left in any uncertainty or cloudiness as regards the material needed for God's building. The first building that we get in Scripture, as has often been pointed out, is in Genesis 2, but we read of the foundations of the earth being laid, which I suppose may be taken to lead to building. The word employed directly for the physical system is 'framed': "By faith we apprehend that the worlds were framed by the word of God", (Hebrews 11:3). The first building is that recorded in Genesis 2, and there is nothing vague as to the material. It was a rib taken out of Adam, and out of that, we are told, God builded a woman. The material therefore was to be understood as the building was there, and so in the New Testament we have the material for God's building. The Lord is very explicit, first in regard of the foundation upon which He would build, and then in regard of the material which He would use in the building.

First He says, "Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona". (Matthew 16:17). Now that, taken as it is, is not material for the building. Simon Bar-jona refers to the believer as he is here, born in this world, whose history is known; such a one is blessed, that is to say, as a responsible person here, having had a sinful history, you, like Simon who acknowledged his sinfulness, are blessed. "Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona". But that was only a part of the Lord's pronouncement, a part which involves much in principle, indeed, involving the epistle to the Romans, which contemplates us as responsible. Yet as convicted sinners who believe through grace, we are blessed. But then the Lord goes on with a new thing. What He says about Simon being blessed as receiving a revelation from God was not exactly a new thing, because the

reception of revelations of God was not new. Many before him had received such, not of that kind, of course, but nevertheless many had received revelations from God, and they were blessed. It was a blessed thing in each case.

But the Lord goes on as if He were saying something extraordinary, "flesh and blood has not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in the heavens". He has revealed that to you, "And I also, I say unto thee that thou art Peter". That is not a mere question of blessing, not that I would minimise blessing, but it is a question of material: "Thou art Peter", the Lord said. In John 1:42, the corresponding passage, He says, "Thou shalt be called Cephas", and then the Holy Spirit tells us the meaning of that word so that we should understand. Whenever the Holy Spirit interprets a word He means to impress it on our minds that we may understand it, so that in John we get the interpretation of the word 'Cephas'. The Lord did not use that word in speaking to Peter in Matthew. He used, as far as we can see, the ordinary word Peter. We have no word to be interpreted, it was a word that was known, the Greek word for Peter, that is to say, the material was divinely provided, and the builder has to understand, has to distinguish in himself between "Simon Bar-jona", being blessed, and "Peter", if he is to have part practically, and surely, in the great system which God is building, the great spiritual system for, from this point of view, wood, hay, and stubble have no part at all. They cannot be introduced. It is what the Lord Jesus Christ is building, and He never used any extraneous material at all. The material was there, He gave it a name, He pronounced upon it, and then He says, "on this rock I will build my assembly". Having designated the material for the building, He speaks of the foundation.

In keeping with that we read in Acts 19 that the

apostle Paul arrived at Ephesus on the upper line; it is the upper line. Matthew is the upper line, and so is Ephesians. What I mean by the upper line is this, that Luke deals with what is moral, what is in keeping with God morally down here, involving righteousness, whereas Matthew presents the thing from the side of elevation, and produces a vessel formed of spiritual material for practical use here -- the vessel of testimony. He produces it by way of the mount of transfiguration, where you have the Lord Jesus transfigured, His countenance shining as the sun -- a great heavenly thought; and then that we are associated with Him as sons; for He says, "Then are the sons free". And finally He says, "Take that and give it to them for me and thee", (Matthew 17:26,27). We are thus brought in on the upper line -- the mount of transfiguration and sonship. It is on that line that we have the vessel of administration in Matthew -- the assembly. It is not earthly, or governed by earthly principles, it is governed by heavenly principles, and its material is spiritual. It is formed of those who are the sons of God and companions of Christ. Luke gives us the moral line, and takes us up as we are, so that we are brought together as recognising the Lord's authority, as deposited in the eleven. They were saying as gathered together in Luke, "The Lord is indeed risen and has appeared to Simon" (Luke 24:34) -- not Peter. It is a question of Simon in his responsibility, and the Lord meeting him in grace -- an important side surely of the truth in our relation to one another.

Luke refers to Him as the righteous One. He introduces the centurion as saying, "Certainly this was a righteous man", (Luke 23:47). It is the moral side, and so the thief owns Him, "This man has done nothing amiss" (verse 41); and in keeping with that the Lord prays in Luke that the Father should forgive His murderers -- another moral feature which we need in our public

position; if God is to be related to us morally, these features must be present. But Matthew is, as I said, the upper line, and I hope you will take note of it. The thoughts presented in Matthew are immense, and I have therefore taken the liberty of calling it the upper line. It involves that we should be here representative of heaven in our administrative capacity.

Having spoken of Luke and Matthew, I want to open out the link between Matthew and Ephesians. The apostle, as you will remember, reached Ephesus by "the upper districts", (Acts 19:1). He had been there before he left Aquila and Priscilla there, and went off elsewhere in his service, and in the interval Apollos arrived and was instructed by Aquila and Priscilla. Apollos goes to Corinth, where Paul had been, and where he had built up the lower line of things, that is to say, the order of God in a city, in a locality. He had been to Athens, and there was not a word said to him in Athens about God having His people there, although there were a few; but arriving at Corinth he associates himself with two tent-makers, a man and his wife. This was not a vain appearance of things; he meant it, he lodged with them and the Holy Spirit tells us he wrought with his hands; he was a real worker, making tents. You will see we are coming down to everyday life, and it is important to see that the people of God are seen in that connection. The Lord said, "and no one shall set upon thee to injure thee; because I have much people in this city", (Acts 18:10).

Thus we are in the presence of potential material for the structure in its locality, or everyday feature. It is said that Apollos was at Corinth after Paul had been there, and after he had set up the structure there. It speaks of Apollos as at Corinth, as though he was there to hold that position. Apollos being there, Paul arrived at Ephesus by the upper districts, and he asked certain disciples whom he found there

if they had received the Holy Spirit since they believed. It is not a question of much people, of tent-making, or being outwardly anything -- that is not the point at Ephesus. The point is, "Did ye receive the Holy Spirit when ye had believed?" (Acts 19:2). And may I raise the question as to whether as believers you may or may not have the Spirit? If we are to approach the structure from the standpoint of Ephesus, it is most important for every professing christian to face this, for every one should wish to have part in it. "So then ye are no longer strangers and foreigners, but ye are fellow-citizens of the saints, and of the household of God, being built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the corner-stone", (Ephesians 2:19,20). There is nothing like it in the whole universe, and it depends on the Spirit. If you have not got the Spirit, you are out of it, and so it says, "Did ye receive the Holy Spirit when ye had believed?" and you know what they answered, "We did not even hear if the Holy Spirit was come". Paul says, "To what then were ye baptized?" and they said, "To the baptism of John", and he tells them, "John indeed baptised with the baptism of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on him that was coming after him, that is, on Jesus", (verses 3,4). John's own words were, "He it is of whom I said, A man comes after me who takes a place before me, because he was before me; and I knew him not; but that he might be manifested to Israel, therefore have I come baptising with water. And I have seen and borne witness that this is the Son of God", (John 1:30,31,34). That is John's witness, which would point the believer away from John to another -- to Christ.

The apostle Paul heartily endorses John the baptist's ministry, but John could not give the Holy Spirit, so immediately those at Ephesus were baptised to the name of the Lord Jesus. That principle comes in, for it was a question of their seeing what was

available. They would go in for all that was involved in that name. It was not only protection, there were great positive things involved. Paul laid his bands on them and they received the Holy Spirit, "and they spoke with tongues and prophesied", (verse 6). The Holy Spirit in those days was a Person to people, His presence was a reality, and as if the apostle recognised the material in those twelve men, it says he remained and laboured in the synagogue for three months -- a long time for him. Certainly it sets us an example to stay a good while in a place, but it is a question here of having found material. When some disbelieved in the synagogue he leaves it and goes into a school-house, and he teaches in that school-house for two years. You see how all this is linked up with the material he had found. He remained there for two years and three months, and in another scripture we are told that he stayed altogether three years. All this work is in relation to those twelve men receiving the Spirit.

The assembly at Ephesus was built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the corner-stone. Acts 20 is Himself; it brings out affection, the love of Christ as expressed in Paul. The building was complete and as Paul was leaving them he embraced them; he also embraces Eutychus in the same chapter. In his reference in Ephesians 2:20,21, you can see the love of Christ, Jesus Christ Himself is the Head of the corner, and the response to that in the end of Acts 20 is that the elders of the people of the assembly at Ephesus fell on Paul's neck and wept. You see what reciprocation of affection there was. It is a fine picture of the dispensation viewed from the spiritual standpoint! It is just a picture of it, but you can see how important the material was as it stood there; the apostle coming in by the upper districts and finding spiritual material, he stops there and rears up the great structure at

Ephesus. While addressed as a local company, the assembly at Ephesus is treated in the epistle as representing the whole assembly formed of Jews and gentiles, both reconciled in one body by the cross. It is a habitation of God in the Spirit. It is a spiritual thing, and as I said before, no one could afford to be outside of that. If you are to be in that, and linked up with it, you must have the Spirit in a conscious way. In the scripture I read you see all these things, for it is a question of the kind of material that is needed now.

I have been speaking of the spiritual side at Ephesus and in Matthew, but I want to speak now of what is presented in 1 Corinthians 3, for there we have the foundation that Paul laid. He does not say "built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets"; he is speaking of what he laid. He says, "According to the grace of God which has been given to me, as a wise architect, I have laid the foundation, but another builds upon it. But let each see how he builds upon it. For other foundation can no man lay besides that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ". The words are chosen with wisdom, as discovering the effect of his ministry in that setting, for it is a question of bringing in amongst the Corinthians the kind of man that shone in Jesus here below -- a Man who had to do with all kinds of men, and ever remained Himself. Never for one moment did He come under the influence of any one. He was ever Himself; from His infancy to the cross He was "the man Christ Jesus", never anyone else. You can understand how this was in God's mind when Peter and John were imprisoned and He opened the door and said, "Go ye and stand and speak in the temple to the people all the words of this life" (Acts 5:20), that is to say, the life of Jesus in detail. "The words" -- every detail of that life was precious under God's eye, and it was to be preached. If you heard Peter speak

about Jesus, you would understand this -- all the words of that life, that perfect humanity as it is presented to us, particularly in the gospel of Luke, would be presented; and that was the kind of thing that Paul introduced at Corinth.

If anyone had come to him as he wrought with those two, Priscilla and Aquila, and had said, 'Paul, what is it that you are doing here?' he would say, 'Do you not know that my Master served at a carpenter's bench?' Would not that touch the heart? How it builds into your inner soul the idea of Christ! Think of Him, the Lord of glory, working as a carpenter! "Is not this the carpenter?" (Mark 6:3) It is not the words of this ministry, but the words of this life. Ministry is wonderful, but the life of Jesus, what a life -- all the words of it! the Holy Spirit Himself choosing the words; what an interesting matter! All this was brought into Corinth, and the intent was to shut out all Greek pretension. Some Greek philosopher might come to Paul, but he could say, 'Andrew and Philip told me that on a certain occasion the Greeks came up to my Master to see Him and He did not make much of them'. He did not say, 'I would like to hear a Greek discourse or oration'. I never heard of my Master reading the Greek letters. Indeed, it is said of Him, "How knows this man letters, having never learned?" (John 7:15) That is how the matter stood.

Is what I have spoken of found in the men of this great educational centre? No, it is not found. I may add that it is as sure as possible if I am living in a town of letters, I shall be defiled by the thing unless I set myself against it. If I am living in a manufacturing town, I am defiled by the spirit of it unless I set myself against it. The spirit of it is militant against the Spirit of God, and flesh is flesh. There is nothing that appeals to the flesh of the cultured class more than Greek philosophy, and yet it is nothing.

Paul shows in this passage that it is so. He says, "That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men but in the power of God".

If I lived in a centre of learning, I should read 1 Corinthians 2 and 3 frequently, for learning has nothing to do with Christ. It is useful to a point, but it has nothing to do with christianity as such. So Paul says, The kind of foundation I laid in your town was Jesus Christ, and nothing else. Build on that, and let every man take heed how he builds thereupon. So that everyone has to build. Paul does not divert anyone from building. Build, but be sure you get the right material; you will not get it from the colleges, you have to get it from Christ. It is a question of the kind of humanity that shone in Jesus, and of Him it is said He had never learned. Think of the Lord of glory having that reputation, and yet He is frequently called Master by those who knew! Even if He thought it necessary to acquire ordinary education, this would be an extremely small matter to Him. He knew all divinely.

The word in Haggai is, "Go up to the mountain" -- not to the university -- but to the mountain; that is the word here. "Go up to the mountain and bring wood, and build the house". Wood, in Scripture, is used in a variety of ways. It does not always mean the same thing, but in this instance it undoubtedly points to that kind of material which is needed for divine building, that is to say, the kind of man God requires. I might point out the character of the leading woods of Scripture. There is the gopher wood, the first wood mentioned in Scripture that is used in a structure. Its identity is not known, but it is a wood -- Scripture is sufficient to indicate that -- which was exactly suitable for the purpose required; it could go through the flood. It was a question of going through the judgment of God, and retaining intact through the judgment every living thing; all

was carried through. Everything that is of God was embraced in Christ. Think of the kind of man, think of that one Man embracing in Himself every divine thought, and going through the judgment, and bringing all out intact on the other side, and setting up another order according to God!

That is one most important feature. Then acacia, or shittim wood is the one used in the wilderness for the tabernacle. It refers, too, to Christ, the kind of humanity, the power of bearing, and going through the wilderness patiently. How important these features are, carrying everything through for God on the one hand, even through death, and on the other, walking with patience and love with the people of God in the wilderness! It is Christ in His love, the more excellent way, and that is what is needed. There are also the cedar, olive and other woods spoken of as used in God's building.

Now the point is to go up to the mountain, and that means exercise. The word 'exercise' is one much used among the people of God. Paul used it: "Herein do I exercise myself, to have always a conscience void of offence toward God, and toward men", (Acts 24:16). That is a fine exercise, and if you are exercised in that way, there will be in you material for the building of God. You want a conscience void of offence toward God, and toward men. I think it is righteousness, for every one that is born of Him is righteous. In every case going up to the mountain requires purpose, and that calls out the Spirit's power in the builder, but as you come to do the thing, you are surprised at what you do, and God goes with you.

Here they said, "The time is not come, the time that Jehovah's house should be built"; but it was the time, and the prophets of God were telling them it was. "Go up to the mountain and bring wood, and build the house". It was necessary to get suitable

material. For us it is what is according to Christ. The gospels present it to us. We are to go up to the mountain and get it and build the house. God will take pleasure in it and be glorified in it.

God is not so concerned about quantity as He is about quality. The wood here refers to quality, what is suitable for the building, and it is obtainable on the mountain. It is a question of exercise, of judging ourselves, and so making room for the Holy Spirit to work in us and produce the character of Jesus Christ. God will not ask anything of us which we have not the means of providing. He sent Elijah to the widow of Zarephath, saying, "I have commanded a widow woman there to sustain thee". Elijah goes, and he found her at the city gate. What a tax was laid on that poor widow! The prophet says, "Fetch me, I pray thee, a little water in a vessel, that I may drink". He told her to bring it in a vessel. She would have to do that, but he mentions the vessel. You see how God looks for things as they should be. If He is asking anything from you, He is asking for it as it should be, however little it may be. It is in a vessel.

She goes for the water without a murmur; and then see the fresh test; Elijah says, "Bring me, I pray thee, a morsel of bread in thine hand". How she is tested! Now it is a question of what is in her hand. This brings out what is there. It is God's way with us at the present time, and He never asks anything from us that we have not got. She had already made an inventory of what she had -- a little meal in a barrel, and a little oil in a cruse -- and so she says, "I am gathering two sticks, that I may go in and dress it for me and my son, that we may eat it, and die". She is going to eat to die, but we eat to live. Then the mind of God comes out. The prophet says, "Thus saith Jehovah the God of Israel The meal in the barrel shall not waste, neither shall

the oil in the cruse fail, until the day that Jehovah sendeth rain upon the face of the earth!" So she went and made bread with her own hand and she and her household (a greater thing than she mentioned) lived on that for a whole year, (1 Kings 17:9 - 16). What a result! God in that way will demand what He knows we have, and what we have as we respond in obedience will be enlarged. As we yield ourselves in obedience to the divine will, the Spirit in us will work and the demands of God will be met -- our own needs, too.

Now that is what God proposes. He knows we can get it; it is only a question of going up into the mountain to get it. Go to the mountain, there is plenty there, plenty of wood. The prophet points out that the latter glory of the house shall be greater than the former glory. There is thus, dear brethren, every incentive to sacrifice, to go up to the mountain, to get the wood and build. May God grant us all this purpose and energy!

QUALIFICATION FOR THE ASSEMBLY

Luke 24:13 - 48; John 19:25 - 42; John 20:1 - 23

P.L. Would you give us an idea as to what is in your mind?

J.T. I was remarking on certain having been said to have stood by the cross of Jesus, as a feature of John's gospel. "Now there stood by the cross of Jesus", it says. There is power to stand by the Lord in His death; and in chapter 20 the disciples are inside, conscious of the evil outside, but the doors are shut for fear of the Jews. John seems to call attention to the spiritual side in the saints -- that which stands notwithstanding opposition, whereas Luke records that the people "beholding the things which were done, smote their breasts, and returned", (Luke 23:48). Even those who knew Him stood afar off; and then two of them, although conversing about what had happened, were going away from the divine centre.

I thought that might furnish a subject for inquiry at this time, how that in Luke the interest of the Lord in going after them is evident, and that recovery is through their minds, or intelligences. It is not exactly a shepherd using external means to bring the sheep back, but He operates in a moral way, through the intelligence and the heart, the result of which was that they returned to Jerusalem "the same hour", having recognised Him in the breaking of bread. So that material for the assembly in Luke has the public position in view; it is a gathered company, and the breaking of bread is a great feature of it.

In John it is not that they gathered or assembled, but that they are in a certain place, and recognising the evil outside they protect themselves against it; it is more instinctive, the doors were shut for fear of

the Jews. According to John 20 there is nothing to reprimand in the company. In Luke 24 there is.

Rem. In Luke 24 the two going to Emmaus had lost hope.

J.T. Yes; and yet they were deeply interested. They were conversing together; their remarks to each other were not casual. The Lord says, "What discourses are these which pass between you as ye walk, and are downcast?" showing they were really intent in what they were saying. I think it is to call attention to the possibility of our being interested in the things of God, and yet we may be going in a direction away from where these things are centred, and thus we see that mere intelligence about the things does not hold us.

H.F.N. It is helpful to see the kind of people who stand in John; John brings before us four persons who stood by the cross.

J.T. These must have been distinguished in the testimony later, I suppose, this narrative having been written long after. Possibly the reference would be an explanation of what they were afterwards.

R.B. Is there any significance in the fact that it was women who were standing with John by the cross?

J.T. I think the women represent, as has often been remarked, the subjective side of the position and John, the disciple whom Jesus loved, represents throughout the gospel an element of trustworthiness, as one to whom the Lord could commit a charge, one who could be entrusted with something the Lord valued.

J.H.J. What had you particularly in mind in speaking of the two going away from Jerusalem in Luke?

J.T. There is a great deal of intelligence, and we can thank God for it, but then what effect has it on us? Is it attracting us towards the centre of God's

interest on earth, or have we our backs on that centre?

C.C.E. The two knew the facts, but they did not know the spiritual meaning and import of them. They discoursed about the things that happened, but they did not understand them until they had their understandings opened.

J.T. Would that not be an index to the state of their souls?

P.L. Is Luke's line connected with priesthood? He goes after the erring, but John's line is connected with headship -- the state of love amongst them that attracts Christ.

J.T. Yes; in Luke it is more the service of the priest than of the shepherd. The shepherd goes after the sheep and brings them back by external means. For instance, he carries the sheep. Here it is through their intelligence. But with regard to the remark that whilst they knew the things literally they were ignorant of their import, is not that the outcome of a state of soul?

C.C.E. Yes; surely.

J.T. In John they do not go back; they stood by the cross in the presence of the fiercest opposition. I think it is to call attention to the length to which those who love Christ would go -- the cross. Joseph of Arimathaea was a disciple, but secretly for fear of the Jews, that is mentioned; and Nicodemus, who came to Jesus by night; but there were those who stood by the cross (John 19:25), whereas the two in Luke, although conversing about the things that happened, are going away from the centre.

H.F.N. Is it your thought that they were not prepared to accept the public shame connected with the cross?

J.T. That is what I thought. We might hang crosses about our necks, but to stand by the cross of Jesus whilst He was there brought them into complete identification with Him. In Luke, the crowds returned

beating their breasts; all those who knew Him stood afar off, and then two of them moved away from the place.

J.S. Do you connect the position in John 20 with the intimacy of privilege?

J.T. Yes. They were there, and the Lord owned them in coming into their midst. They were conscious of the power against them and of the danger of it coming in amongst them, but they had shut the doors, showing that they had power. It is not a question of so many doors being in the building, but it is a spiritual allusion -- power to shut the doors of our hearts against evil; it is a question of inward power with them in John.

Ques. Is the inward power the result of accepting the reproach outwardly?

J.T. I think they go together. Luke would call attention to intelligence in the breaking of bread, and the place where they were gathered together, and that the eleven were there -- the authority of Christ in His apostles. Luke makes much of what is public, whilst John deals with what is inward.

Ques. Does Paul stand by the cross at Corinth?

J.T. Exactly. There were those of whom he speaks as enemies of the cross of Christ; (Philippians 3:18). They were nominal christians; they were not said to be enemies of Christ, but enemies of the cross. And so he stands firmly by it in his first letter to the Corinthians.

H.F.N. With regard to the thought of that which the Lord valued being committed to one standing at the cross, does not that feature stand out in a peculiar way in John? The Lord committed His mother to the care of John, the light in regard to the brethren was committed to Mary Magdalene, and to Peter is committed the care of the sheep. Is it not a principle that the Lord commits to us whatever we are equal to?

J.T. That, I am sure, is very helpful; there is

trustworthiness. And so He breathes into them and says, "Receive the Holy Spirit whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted to them; whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained" -- a most important trust. As was remarked, we get the word of the cross in 1 Corinthians 1:18. Paul is standing by it. It is not a thing that I hang about my neck, it is the word of the cross in my heart, in my mind; I know what it means. To those who perish it is foolishness.

P.L. "Yea, a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also" (Luke 2:23); there is the searching character of the word, as in Hebrews 4.

J.T. Quite. The word of the cross is foolishness to the cultivated mind of this world; they may wear the cross around their necks, or carry it in their pockets, and yet the word of it not be in the mind at all. It is the word of the cross that is power.

E.S.H. It means that you are prepared to die, would you say?

J.T. I think you not only die, but you are identified with the Lord. Paul says, "I am crucified with Christ", (Galatians 2:20). "But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world", (Galatians 6:14). It is real deliverance. The Lord's supper brings all that vividly before us; it is His own device as a symbol, and is intended to bring vividly before us that He was actually dead. It is a dead Christ that is brought into view before us; the symbol is there to be seen.

Ques. Does not that lie at the root of all true spiritual state?

J.T. Well, it does, if you are identified with that. It is Christ in these circumstances, and the circumstances are vividly before you.

C.C.E. That is most helpful. It is a weekly remembrance of it. The Lord's supper, as you say, in a most vivid way brings the thing before our souls.

P.L. It is the cross of Jesus; the Person is in evidence in His dying.

H.F.N. Does John's ministry produce the kind of people who stand by the cross, and Luke's ministry prepare for John's?

J.T. They go together. Luke would bring us back to that point, but through our intelligences. Although the two have their backs to the centre, yet they are conversing about the Lord, and such cannot but be of interest to heaven; and so the Lord drew near and went with them. He could do that. There would be some moral basis for His going with them but what He had in His mind the sequel shows. It says their eyes were holden so as not to know Him; this has allusion to their state of soul.

Rem. They were "slow of heart", the Lord says.

J.T. That is the explanation of it: "O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: ought not the Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?" They were foolish.

Rem. Their affections did not correspond with their intelligence.

J.T. Just so. They had, however, hearts capable of burning when they heard Him conversing; that is important. If you hear people talking about the Lord and His things, although they may have turned their backs on the centre, yet they may have hearts capable of being touched. The Lord knew it was so in their case; He intended to touch their hearts.

Rem. There was movement with them when they constrained Him, saying, "Abide with us".

J.T. I think they were being gradually restored. There was something there different from what they had been accustomed to. Although apparently a stranger, so far as they knew, they were willing to invite Him in. "Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come

to pass there in these days?" But then they invited Him in. But despite all the burning owing to the effect of His words, and despite the opening up of the Scriptures to them, they did not make a move to go back to Jerusalem until He had left them.

P.L. You must abide by the cross in order to have right thoughts of Christ or the brethren. "Certain of them which were with us" is different from "my brethren" of John 20. The former attaches the saints to ourselves. But is not "my brethren" finding them by way of Himself?

J.T. Quite.

P.L. You feel the need of John's line to meet this in Luke.

H.F.N. Their eyes being opened, the moment they get a sight of Himself, they are prepared to return to the centre.

J.T. That is a point to be noted. It is through their eyes they recognised Him. All this process has the moral state in view. It is through the mind and heart that He is operating; in other words, the assembly is to be formed of "intelligent persons"; persons who have gone through a moral process. They know where they are, and why they are there. That is a great thing to come to, and that is Luke's point of view -- to have a people who are intelligent, so that they are talking of the Scriptures first, and then when He would have gone further, constraining Him to stay with them. Then in the giving of thanks and breaking of bread He is made known. The point of view in Luke, I believe, is to affect you so that you are according to the assembly publicly. The breaking of bread is what they saw; it is what is presented to their eyes, and they are enabled to see the Lord in it: "and their eyes were opened", it says, "and they recognised him". It is a question of intelligence, and the power of discernment.

Ques. The Corinthians did not recognise the Lord, did they?

J.T. They were defective in discerning the body; the apostle approaches the subject, "I speak as to intelligent persons do ye judge what I say" (1 Corinthians 10:15), that is, you have to judge what is said and discern what is meant by it.

Ques. Does Luke, writing with method, arrive at that point?

J.T. Yes; it is to bring about the public body here, that in which the divine order is to be seen, so that the Scriptures are opened up, and they are to be His witnesses. John is dealing with the inner thing, which is in a sense the greater, because it is a question of power in your soul to stand where the opposition is, prevailing against it, so as to be independent of it. You are able to stand. They did not leave Jerusalem, but the doors are shut against the evil there.

Ques. Would the Lord's washing their feet have a moral bearing with this in view? That was a private matter, was it not?

J.T. I suppose all the instruction in John has this in view. You can see how it fits in to our own times. Power to stand against opposition, to stand where it is greatest.

P.L. Would you say it goes on to "part with me"? We can go on with all that He is going on with as drinking into His suffering spirit.

J.T. Quite.

Ques. Referring to your remark in regard of the Lord's supper as to everything being before our gaze there, would you say that Christ on the cross as the sin-bearer comes before us then?

J.T. It is Christ in those circumstances; the circumstances are vividly before us; we are brought back to the solemn fact that He was there. But I do not think the efficacy of His death comes before us so much, although, of course, we cannot ignore

that, but He was there in those circumstances, and we are brought back to that, and we feed upon it.

Rem. He was glorifying God in the place of sin.

J.T. Well, all that enters into it, but you are thinking of the Person in the Lord's supper; it is a memorial. That He was actually there is a most solemn thing to be brought back to; you are thinking of Him. You know that He is now alive and that He is not in this world at all, but that He was in those circumstances. In occupation with Him in them He is brought to your attention by that in which love is fully expressed. He is always expressing love, you might say, in all His care for us; but this is that in which love was fully expressed; that is what you are brought to see, that it is Himself, but Himself in those circumstances. It is a question, not of remembering Him in those circumstances, but of remembering Him by them; the Person you are remembering is the One who went into those circumstances; it is the Lord in death.

Ques. It has been said that we often start on too high a note. I suppose we might dwell on the Lord as the sin-offering at the commencement of the meeting?

J.T. The point is that you are occupied with the Person; it is a memorial. You face the fact that the One who is absent, who is to be remembered by the assembly, by the saints, was in death. There is no circumstance that brings Christ to you so vividly as this. If it were a question of remembering Him in His death, then you would expect the saints to have had the Lord's supper during the forty days between His resurrection and His ascension; but they did not; there is not a word said about the Lord's supper during the forty days. The incident at Emmaus was not the Lord's supper; it was an ordinary meal. It was incidental; but directly He goes to heaven and the Spirit comes you have the breaking of bread.

F.E.S. In emphasising the fact that we recognise Him in the breaking of bread, what had you before you?

J.T. Their intelligence is appealed to; they recognised Him. That shows that the breaking of bread brought Him before them. They must have recalled what they had known earlier -- they recalled His features.

H.F.N. Would the Lord opening their understanding that they might understand the Scriptures have any connection with what you have been saying?

J.T. I think it would; the two returned from Emmaus, it says, the same hour, and they found the eleven -- that was a mark of intelligence, because the eleven represented the Lord's authority. And then, not only the eleven, but those with them -- they found the company; and they were saying certain things -- that the Lord was risen. In John there was not a word about anything they said. It shows that in Luke it is a question of their intelligence; they were saying, "The Lord is indeed risen and has appeared to Simon". They had in their minds that the Lord was acting on the line of grace and that is in keeping with Luke. Then the two relate how He was made known to them in the breaking of bread. These remarks are full of intelligence, if you examine them and connect them with the Holy Spirit and the unfolding of the truth of christianity. They are able to see the meaning of the movements of the Lord as well as His words. "And has appeared to Simon" meant a good deal as exemplifying spiritual intelligence. So also that He was made known to the two in the breaking of bread; it means really the opening up of the truth of the Lord's supper. That is what the Holy Spirit records in Luke. It shows that those who come into fellowship should be concerned about intelligence -- to know what they are doing. They have love, of course, and love is the great thing;

John would emphasise that; but Luke would say there must be intelligence. The public body is formed of those who are intelligent, and who recognise authority. Then Luke goes on to tell us that the Lord came in as they were saying these things. It is not a question of what was in their hearts, as you would expect in John; it was the things they were saying -- "And as they were saying these things, he himself stood in their midst, and says to them, Peace be unto you". But they "supposed they beheld a spirit. And he said to them, Why are ye troubled? and why are thoughts rising in your hearts? behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself". There again you have a touch of intelligence because it was His feet. In John it says that He shewed them His hands and His side, that is to say, it is more the love side in John. Then another thing is worthy of notice; in Luke we read He stood in their midst, that is in the midst of people of that kind; in John it is "in the midst", to show the position which the Lord takes up.

Ques. Does not that limit the thing rather to those who are intelligent?

J.T. I would not like to differentiate so much as that, because whoever were there, He was there in their midst. There are those who discern Him and those who do not, but I believe the Lord comes in in relation to all, that is, into the midst of a people who are thus gathered, and who are thus the subjects of His grace.

R.B. There are no absentees in that sense; they are all gathered.

J.T. Thomas is not said to be absent here.

Ques. Why the unrest? why were they terrified and affrighted?

J.T. That is to bring out another feature. There may be intelligence but an inward state that requires adjustment. It is extraordinary that they should

require adjustment in regard to the Lord Himself -- that it should be Himself whom they supposed to be a spirit. His appearing here is the final touch to bring them to apprehend Himself.

J.S. You would say that the Lord would be greatly endeared to those two who had failed in affection; they would say, It was His faithful service that restored us.

Ques. So that on the Lord's day morning, if we are going in this direction, we should look for the Lord to come in and take the lead?

J.T. Well, He is absent, and the Lord's supper is to bring vividly before us the circumstances in which love is set out; the facts of His death are there before us, and this has a very sobering, solemnising effect. That, I think, is what the apostle is pressing in 1 Corinthians 11:29; "not discerning the Lord's body", he says. And then in respect of misbehaviour, whether outward or inward state, it is in respect of the body and blood of the Lord, they are guilty. It is the solemnity of the thing. I have been impressed lately with this -- the Lord is bringing before us vividly the circumstances in which love was shown, in which alone, indeed, it could be fully shown. Love may be shown in other ways, and is constantly being shown by the Lord, but these are the circumstances in which it could be fully shown.

Ques. Would you emphasise the thought of a dead Christ in the memorials as showing the extent to which love went?

J.T. That is the way I look at it. It is a dead Christ before us, His blood separate from the body. These are the circumstances in which love is fully shown, and there never can be any increase in that; it is the full expression of love. That is where Christ was. The Christ that I am remembering was in these circumstances, so that the symbols of Him in those circumstances is the memorial.

Ques. Is it in the light of the risen One that we cherish the death of Christ?

J.T. Oh, surely. You are remembering the Christ who is absent, who is gone into heaven. In Luke He is carried up into heaven. In Acts 1 a cloud received Him out of their sight. Here in Luke it is to call attention to heaven's receiving Him, but in Acts it is the beginning of the faith period. The Lord's supper looks on to the faith period when He is out of sight literally, and so we remember Him, and the symbols denote the circumstances in which love is known. It is in His death that love is fully shown.

P.L. Do you get the two lines in Joseph? He pleaded to be remembered by those to whom he had rendered a service in love; that would be Luke's view -- the explanation of the dream in prison; while the great sustainer of life would be more John -- Joseph on the throne.

J.T. Quite.

Ques. It says in Deuteronomy 21:23, "his body shall not remain all night upon the tree"; is that in any way connected with the Supper?

J.T. In the Supper it is not a question so much of the curse but of the circumstances in which love was shown. He laid down His life for His friends.

Pages 134 - 329 -- "Nearness to Christ and Public Service". Belfast, March and April, 1929 (Volume 95).

NEARNESS TO CHRIST AND PUBLIC SERVICE (1)

Ephesians 2:11 - 13,17,18; Genesis 43:31 - 34; Genesis 45:1 - 4

S.L. Do you suggest that these scriptures contain the way of the recovery of affection, not only to the Lord, but to one another?

J.T. Quite so. Ephesians presents what God has effected in Christ. We have been brought near -- brought near through His blood. I was thinking of the difference between being brought near and drawing nigh, the former is what God has effected, the latter is our side. I thought Genesis would help us as to how we are brought near, as already in the relationship of brethren, but at a distance from God and from Christ practically, through our state. Ephesians, in keeping with the parable of the prodigal son, shows us how we are brought near who were afar off -- we have been brought near in Christ, through His blood, and then we have access to the Father through Him by the Spirit. That is the truth from the divine side, but it has to be taken up; and it is in taking up the privilege of drawing near to God by the Spirit that the question of our state and associations comes up.

R.W.G. Speaking of state and associations, do you get these in what you read in Genesis?

J.T. Yes. Chapter 43 gives an extraordinary set of facts. Joseph has bread set on for him by himself, for his brethren by themselves, and for the Egyptians by themselves. That does not indicate nearness or family relationships. Although there is food and the position is in the house, as the chapter teaches, yet we are impressed with the distance that

existed, the distance with which, in the antitype, many are content -- content to be fed alone, to remain by themselves, different coteries or sets feeding by themselves; but it does not satisfy the Lord's heart.

R.McB. Would that be occupation with self, do you think?

J.T. Well, division is there, groups feeding each by themselves.

W.W. That is what the Corinthians did.

J.T. Quite so. That sort of thing sprang up there, and has developed into the grossest forms now. The Lord is not indifferent to it, nor has He been. He cares for all His own, nevertheless.

P.J.G. You mean in all the systems around?

J.T. Yes.

H.H. Is it not important to see that from the divine side all the distance has been dealt with, as in Ephesians and in Luke 15? But, as you were saying, the exercise is as to how far we are in line with the fact of all that having been disposed of. Is that your thought?

J.T. That is right. I am thinking particularly of the passages in Genesis showing typically that groups feed by themselves; whereas the Lord has to eat by Himself, so to say, in those circumstances. In view of a move such as is depicted in the chapter, the house comes into view; as soon as they bring Benjamin down to Egypt, the house is in view and one over it. And it is said of Joseph that he came home at noon, so that from his point of view the conditions were there, the family affections to be reciprocated from his side, but not from their side; and certainly not among the Egyptians, for, they could not have anything to do with the Hebrews. They had their own discriminations.

J.McM. Thinking of what God has effected, is that why we "are made nigh by the blood of Christ"?

J.T. Yes; the blood represents death, in the sense

that it can be applied, I think. It is that side of the death of Christ that has to do with God's rights.

J.B. Do you think that Joseph recognised that in Judah, and that he could then ask them to draw near?

J.T. I think he did. In Judah's speech you have the recognition of the rights of the father and of the child. Judah represents progress being made. Chapter 43 is the house, Benjamin being in view. Benjamin, I think, is the overcomer; not yet having overcome, but he is in that way -- he had no part whatever in the guilt of the ten. So that as he comes into view you have the house and one over it who is in the secret of things. But what has been said about Ephesians is a good basis to go on, that from the divine side we are brought nigh by the blood. We have a status before God from the divine side, and His rights are fully met by the blood of Christ.

R.McB. "He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?" (Romans 8:32). God has come out thus.

J.T. Yes; He has come out to bring us near, that is the point. Love abhors distance, and He would have gentiles near, but if He brings them near, it must be in keeping with His own rights; so, while the status is in Christ, it is by His blood.

R.A. Would you say that the blood suggests the thought of the removal of distance?

J.T. Exactly; it is that which may be taken and placed before God. It is placed before God in the sin-offering, so that the distance is removed thus. It is not only that God can come out, but also that man is brought near. In Ephesians it is not that God has reached man where man was -- that is Romans; but that the gentiles are brought near, showing that that is what God has in His mind. In Romans He has come out to where we were; in Ephesians He has come out that we might go in.

H.D'A.C. It could only be in Christ Jesus. The blood would remove all distinctions, would it not? Then, allied with that, there is "in Christ Jesus".

J.T. Yes. "In Christ Jesus" is the thought of the status in which we are set up before God. The blood is that which meets His rights.

R.A. You were referring to associations, had you in mind that our associations can hinder our enjoyment of these things?

J.T. What has come about today is that christians have set up barriers between themselves and God, whereas His thought was that they are to be brought near. They have reverted to the old barriers which God has done away with. God has done away through the rent veil with these barriers that stood between Him and men. God began by bringing the gentiles nigh, and that not only objectively, as we say, in Christ and by the blood of Christ, but He gave the Spirit that we might have access to Him.

H.H. Is not the activity of divine love set forth in the blood of Christ, all the value of the One whose blood is poured out? I was thinking of what the apostle says in Acts 20:28, "shepherd the assembly of God, which he has purchased with the blood of his own". Does it not show what lay behind the blood?

J.T. Quite so; the Holy Spirit is the witness in our hearts to that love.

W.D.G. Do you think the silver cup would give a link between these chapters? Was it not Joseph's mind that they should drink with him?

J.T. The cup is no doubt the link; it was his cup. I am thinking particularly of Ephesians 2, how it brings out what was in the heart of God. He has wrought to bring us nigh, we who once were afar off.

S.L. Is not relationship with Christ a most powerful thing to attract our souls?

J.T. It is indeed. Ephesians shows, not simply

that God has come out in Christ to where we were, as in the case of the man who fell among thieves, but that He has wrought to bring us nigh; and so that we might draw nigh He has given us the Spirit. We are told that the Lord coming "preached the glad tidings of peace to you who were afar off, and ... to those who were nigh" (Ephesians 2:17); and then it is said that by one Spirit we both have access to the Father through Him.

S.L. So that nearness is secured by the blood of Christ, and that is entered upon as the Spirit forms us.

J.T. Quite so. It is by the Spirit we draw near, according to Ephesians. It is presented as if God brought about these conditions; now, can we take them up? The gentiles have reverted to the old state of things, of distance between God and themselves. The whole system of so-called worship abroad in christendom implies distance between God and His people; it is a denial of the dispensation. And what God is doing now is to bring about nearness to Himself in His children, to bring us nigh in a practical way.

W.D.G. Is it priestly?

J.T. It is. You find all depends on the skill of Joseph in this section of Genesis. Everything hinged on Joseph's skill in dealing with his brethren. What is before us is the Lord in His apocalyptic character. He has to be apprehended, since the great falling away, in His apocalyptic character. The addresses to the churches in the book of Revelation imply distance, but distance with a view to a state of things being brought about in which the Lord can manifest what He is to His own. He brings about a state of love amongst the saints, and thus He can show what He is to the assembly, and what the assembly is to Him.

Ques. Does not Genesis 44:14 correspond with what you are suggesting from Revelation? In

Revelation John falls on his face; here the brethren fall down.

J.T. That is good, it shows they are being led on. The Lord works at a distance under such circumstances. He cannot assume to be near to us if we are in a bad state, He has to maintain distance.

W.D.G. The rough speaking (Genesis 42) then has to do with the fact that He would have us near Him.

J.T. The whole process is in order that we should be near. Love abhors distance, and what impresses you is the skill of Joseph in bringing about the nearness.

Ques. Is that in any way seen in the woman who touched the hem of His garment?

J.T. There it is a question of touch, that is, contact for healing power. You see in these chapters in Genesis how the ten brethren must come up with Benjamin. It is Benjamin that is the link, they came up with Benjamin. Then the house comes into view; thus they are drawing near to the time of disclosure. In this we learn how the Lord can make known what He is to the brethren, what He is to the assembly, and what the assembly is to Him. If He can find a few answering to it, He has opportunity of disclosing what He is to the whole assembly. We must apprehend Him as to what He is to it.

R.McB. Would you speak of the kingdom in connection with Benjamin?

J.T. I think Joseph is in that position -- the lord of all Egypt. But in the presence of Benjamin the house comes into view and the ruler of it, who is in the secret of things.

J.H. It is a time of activity on the part of Joseph. He is not yet ready to ungird himself.

J.T. While christendom remained as it was through all the centuries, there was no thought of the Lord ungirding Himself and sitting down, so to speak, in the evening. The Lord's supper is the evening

meal, that is to say, it suggests freedom from ordinary activities; whereas what you get here is a noonday meal -- it was the time of day when things were being done. Although they had the repast and rejoiced, it was not the Supper, it was not the evening meal. The evening meal is the Lord's supper; He introduced it then. Of course He does not eat it -- I speak of it as the occasion in which, love existing in those partaking of it, the Lord is free to be with them.

L.D.B. Why have you alluded to the house frequently in this connection?

J.T. I think it indicates that that is what the Lord has before Him in all these dealings; He has nothing less than Ephesians before Him, He has the very best before Him; the full thought of the house is in Ephesians.

E.P. Is Ephesians priestly nearness, or family nearness?

J.T. I should say both.

E.P. Would you say a word as to the distinction?

J.T. Priesthood is based on the family relationship. "Through him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father" is family, insomuch as it is the Father that is approached; but it is also priestly, for we must approach in holy intelligence as well as in family affection.

Rem. No one could be a priest unless he were a son of Aaron.

J.T. No. In Leviticus 8:13 the word is, "Moses brought Aaron's sons near". The gathering of the congregation was to be at the door of the tabernacle, and they were brought near; so that they were in full view of all that in which their service was to be carried on. Then they are clothed with their high caps and vestments, so as to be qualified to have part in that service according to God.

E.P. Is the nearness in Hebrews 10 equal to this nearness in Ephesians?

J.T. I do not think it is quite on this level. Hebrews is elementary; we draw near there by the blood; the access is by the blood. "Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus ... let us draw near", (chapter 10:19 - 22). Of course there can be no approach to God without what is presented here, but it is not the same level as Ephesians. In Hebrews you need the high priest. Ephesians does not say that; it says, "through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father".

F.W.W. Would this nearness involve not only moral suitability, but frame of mind and movement of affection? It is not mere material closeness.

J.T. It is a question of what goes on in your soul. You see how God has wrought to bring you -- through the blood; and then by the Spirit you may draw near through Christ.

Rem. It says that on the mount of transfiguration "they saw no man, save Jesus only" (Matthew 17:8); and here Joseph says, "Cause every man to go out", as much as to indicate that the blotting out of every other thing from one's heart induces what the Lord is wanting -- nearness.

J.T. Joseph ordered everybody to go out; that is to say, the time had come for him to make disclosures; whereas in John 20 the saints are concerned that there should be no foreign element there -- the doors were shut.

Ques. Would the family features you are suggesting be seen in Benjamin, he had the same mother as Joseph?

J.T. That is what comes out. The link was between Joseph and Benjamin. The recovery implies that the saints are not only brought back to the same father -- that is, God is our Father -- but to the same mother, the saints are brought back to the assembly -- that is the work of the Spirit. We are brought to

Galatians -- Jerusalem above is our mother. These men were sons of one father, that was their boast; they could not say they were sons of one mother, because they were not. Most of the saints of today hardly dare say they are sons of one mother for they are in different systems. God is aiming to bring us to that; but as long as I am allied to a human organisation, that is my mother, and I am taking character from it, whereas Benjamin had the same mother as Joseph.

Ques. You referred to Benjamin as a type of the overcomer; would that be the state which would be produced suitable for this?

J.T. I think so -- the saints brought to the apprehension of the church in some sense; as soon as Benjamin comes into view, the house is referred to. Now you have got the conditions, the father and the mother, and the house comes into view. The house of God is not composed of people who have different mothers.

S.L. The soul, being conscious of relationship, reaches up to the house.

J.T. Benjamin is fit for the house; in the mind of Joseph the house was essential to that one. As soon as he saw Benjamin he was moved, he was stirred in his inner affections; and you can understand how, applying that to Christ, in the overcomer you have one who recognises only one mother, that is, the assembly; there is the abandonment of human organisation for what is of God.

H.H. Many souls speak of God as their Father and seem to be sensible of the relationship, yet fall short of what you are speaking of.

J.T. They do. The house conditions are not really depicted in chapter 43, Joseph (that is, Christ, typically) eating by himself, and the Egyptians eating by themselves, and the Hebrews eating by themselves;

that is not suggestive of house conditions, nevertheless the house was there.

Rem. He would seek house conditions with them before he could ungird himself.

J.T. Yes; so chapter 44, as has been suggested, brings in the cup.

Ques. Would the cup suggest what is introductory to the house of God?

J.T. Yes. It was the cup in which Joseph divined. Joseph would retain Benjamin through the cup, the cup was the link. It was a humiliating process so far as Benjamin was concerned, but it was very effective. You want what is effective, however painful. Joseph was operating in all this to bring about, not only the house, but house conditions.

Ques. Is that 1 Corinthians 10?

J.T. Quite so. In Corinthians you get the cup mentioned first -- it is a cup of blessing -- but then you get the bread. What you want is a complete idea in divine things, not a partial thing. Some of us were remarking the other day about the woman of Sarepta, who was a widow. The prophet said, "Fetch me ... a little water in a vessel", then, as she went for that, he said, "Bring me, I pray thee, a morsel of bread in thine hand" (1 Kings 17:10,11); there is not a whole idea in it -- it doubtless alluded to her state; she was not governed by a complete idea, neither are any christians in the 'systems', they are partial. Then he says, "make me ... a little cake first" -- not a little morsel, but a little cake -- that is a complete thought. That is what God is working for, to bring about a complete thought -- that is Christ. A cake is a complete thing in itself and that is the Lord's supper, it is bread, not a piece of bread. What is right is a cake or loaf; there is thus before us a complete thought of Christ and of the assembly also, and that is what the Supper conveys to you. "The bread which we break,

is it not the communion of the body of the Christ? Because we, being many, are one loaf, one body" (1 Corinthians 10:16); that is a complete thought and it brings about unity.

J.P.G. So the Lord reproved Sardis, He had not found their works complete before His God; (Revelation 3:2).

J.T. Exactly. They were wanting in completeness. All that which man builds up is wanting in completeness, but in Christ you have a complete thought, and that is presented in the Lord's supper. Rightly apprehended, it works out in completeness in every way.

H.H. Would the woman of Sarepta typify people who are exercised about individual things and with no spirit of adjustment as to what is connected with the assembly, resulting in saints being held up in regard to entering on privilege and unable to touch the Ephesian side of things, because, although there is a certain amount of exercise, things are not in suitable adjustment?

J.T. Quite so. Ephesians 4:13 is, "until we all arrive at the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, at the full-grown man, at the measure of the stature of the fulness of the Christ".

J.B. Have we a similar thought in Ephesians 1:23, "his body, the fulness of him who fills all in all"? It is complete.

J.T. Yes. God graciously takes account of us; if we are thinking of a morsel, He is able in grace to bring the whole together in our souls. The prophet conveyed to the woman of Sarepta the idea, a little cake; but he says, Make for me first.

H.B. Really the thought of a sect is a broken part.

J.T. That is it, exactly. They can have their piece of bread, but those who are intelligent about Christ want the whole loaf. You are formed on those lines, and thus you become a member of Christ.

S.L. Even in Romans and Corinthians and Galatians, the Spirit of God had the very highest thought before Him.

J.T. Yes, God has never anything less than that, so the house comes into view in Genesis 43 that house conditions might come about.

S.L. Nothing could possibly satisfy the heart of God for His people but to bring them up to the affections and love of the bride.

P.J.G. Would you say that the introduction of anything of man is productive of distance, such as organisations and rules of etiquette, or anything official?

J.T. You see, what the religious world would say is that a part will do for Christ; they acknowledge the divisions as if they were good enough for Christ. But they are not good enough for Christ, He wants the whole church, and He would bring that about, in principle at least, by introducing the bread. "The bread which we break" (1 Corinthians 10:16) signifies one whole.

D.McI. Being in the good of that, you would be a help to others.

J.T. Joseph insists that they must bring Benjamin, because I think Benjamin represents what is in his mind, he had the same father and the same mother as Joseph. This thought is reached in Exodus 6:20, where those who lead in the testimony, Moses and Aaron, have the same parents.

Rem. Benjamin represented the true family of God.

J.T. Yes; Joseph had that in his mind, and the basis of it was that he and Benjamin had the same father and the same mother. The others had to come to that, but that was the line on which God was working. You cannot leave Benjamin out if you are to reach the whole idea, you must bring him in, otherwise you have fragments. Fragmentary things will never do for God or Christ. Paul says, "I have not

shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God", (Acts 20:27).

H.L. In that connection, would you say a word about the twelve shewbread loaves?

J.T. They represent a whole administrative idea. Twelve is also suggestive of what is capable of divine manipulation, it being so very divisible.

Ques. What would be the aim of that manipulation?

J.T. To get the greatest possible service. We do not need to be together, as we are now, for instance, for that. You may be sent in one direction in the world, and I in another. We are subject to divine manipulation, so that the greatest possible results may accrue. But although we may be working severally and at distances from each other, as under the Lord, we are in unity and co-operating to the same end.

Ques. How does Joseph's cup test us today?

J.T. It enters into the Lord's supper, I think, in the way in which it is presented to us in 1 Corinthians 10, the bearing of it in our everyday life.

Ques. Does the death of Christ come in, in that regard, as serving us?

J.T. I think it does. You see Benjamin had the cup. It seemed a calamity that he had it, at first, but the calamity is changed, it was for his advantage that he had it; he is brought back to Joseph through it. The process was humbling, but it was effective. We are brought back to God in connection with a high order of things, not mere discipline; there is this, but you are brought back with very high things -- the cup that Joseph used, for divining was no small matter. It refers to a very high level; we want to be brought back on the level God has designed for us. You remember it is said of Paul that he reached Ephesus through the upper districts; (Acts 19:1). There was not full recovery at the Reformation, the

church was not reached at all, things were on a low line, whereas the recovery of the last century was on a high level, it is in connection with that which is most valuable; in the type the very cup with which Joseph divined. Luther and others of his time were raised up and used of God, and so we owe them much under Him, but the church and the purpose of God generally were not reached; room was not made for the Holy Spirit. By way of contrast, we see how wonderfully honoured the saints are in these days, brought back to God on the very highest level.

Rem. You want to be recovered to something.

J.T. That is the very thing. Then we see the state of Judah, who represents the ten. He is concerned about their father, an old man (he had right feelings), and his youngest son, whom he loved. "His brother is dead". His brother, note, not 'our brother'. Judah's remarks lead up to the line Joseph was on. "We have an aged father, and a child born to him in his old age, yet young; and his brother is dead, and he alone is left of his mother; and his father loves him". Such a group of circumstances arouses the most tender family feelings. These are in keeping with the cup.

Ques. What answers to the cup today?

J.T. It says, the cup in which indeed he divines. Think of being brought back in connection with that by which the Lord divines! "The eyes of the Lord run to and fro throughout the whole earth", (2 Chronicles 16:9). And in Revelation 3:1 we read of the "seven Spirits of God". It is in that connection we are brought back in connection with the Spirit of God. It is said that "the spiritual discerns all things", (1 Corinthians 2:15).

Ques. Do you think that God is exercising us to bring about family affections for the comfort of His own heart?

J.T. He is. The Reformation did not reach the

church level. Someone was saying the other day that it is very doubtful whether Luther reached the first verse of Romans 5; he spoke much of being justified by faith (and of course we thank God for this and the great stand he made), but was there peace with God, access into favour, and rejoicing in hope of the glory of God? That is the line. The Lord has nothing less for us today than Ephesians.

Ques. Is it not by means of the truth that we are recovered? "Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free", (John 8:32).

J.T. Yes; but justification by faith was truth, but not the whole truth. The 'cup', so to speak, was not there at the Reformation. Whereas what we are considering here shows in type that recovery is on the highest line; we are brought into the family consciously, and all that is contrary is put out.

Ques. Did the Lord approach the woman in John 4 on that line?

J.T. On the line of worship of the Father. Joseph put all out here. Chapter 43 contemplates operations -- Joseph comes in at noon from his business -- but that is not chapter 45, there all are put out and no one is there but Joseph and his brethren; it is the time of disclosure, of manifestations, wherein he shows what he is to his brethren. In chapter 44:14 we read that Joseph "was still there" -- in the house -- when his brethren returned, as if waiting and not occupied with other things. So that what follows occurred in the house.

Ques. Do you connect this cup with the cup of the new covenant?

J.T. Well, no doubt it is connected, but it is really on a higher line -- it is what Joseph uses, by which he drinks and divines. Today nothing will answer the Lord's heart but the very best He can give for His brethren; you can see that now we are to be brought into the secrets of the Lord, what He is

doing. Having that cup looked like a calamity, but it was not; in result it meant that they were brought into his presence as brethren and he was revealed to them. Then, secrets were revealed to them as to what was going to happen. The idea of divining is, the Lord discerning and taking account of things. We have the mind of Christ, the means of thinking as He thinks.

L.D.B. In that way there is nothing much more testing than the love of God.

J.T. Oh, it tests you, surely! but do you not think that the Lord in all these centuries has had His own mind about things? The book of Revelation shows that everything is known to Him. Having His Spirit we come into the understanding of all, and we are brought consciously into the family. So we are lifted out of the whole realm of current religion into an order of things in which Christ is operating -- that is the line of recovery.

Rem. John is marked out as the one who leaned on Jesus' breast.

J.T. Yes; he was like the Urim and the Thummim, through him the mind of the Lord was obtained.

Ques. Is it like, "I call you not servants ... but ... friends", (John 15:15)?

J.T. Quite. You are brought into a realm where you get to see how Christ has been viewing things all through the centuries.

Ques. Would it suggest that Joseph saw something in Benjamin to which he could commit himself?

J.T. I think it does. Benjamin had the same father and the same mother as Joseph.

Rem. In many minds, the cup is buried in the food sack, they view it as a means of grace.

J.T. Quite.

Ques. Is there any difference between that and Luke 15?

J.T. I was thinking at the beginning that it

corresponds with Ephesians; the prodigal is the gentile brought near and made suitable for the divine presence. What you get in Genesis, is, I think, the family of God, as we may say, in parts. Benjamin represents the real thing; he had no part in the wickedness, and he had the same mother as Joseph; and so Joseph's requirement was that they must bring Benjamin. As soon as he sees Benjamin the house is in view, and he is moved. He comes in at noon; he has not reached the end yet, but he is nearing it. "Set on bread" -- it is a question now of the administration of the goodness of God; it is carried on in the way of distance -- "for him by himself, and for them by themselves, and for the Egyptians ... by themselves" -- that is how the matter stood. And then the cup comes in because he would bring Benjamin near; Benjamin must be the link, and he has to be brought back, and when they returned Joseph was still there, as if waiting for them. Then comes Judah's speech, and the Egyptians are put out, and he makes himself known.

Rem. It is not only the cup "in which my lord ... divineth", but the cup in which he "drinketh".

J.T. Yes; you can see therefore what a high level we are on. You get into the way of divine enjoyment.

Ques. You spoke of Benjamin having to go through apparent calamity, what would answer to that?

J.T. Well, you have to go through things with your brethren, even though you may have no part in the guilt. You cannot escape the ordinary discipline, but the Lord has His eye on you specially. In chapter 44 we are introduced into an order of things where we learn the divine way of viewing things, and doing things. That is, to my mind, very wonderful, and indicates the peculiar character of the present time. The great revival is in relation to the very highest things.

Rem. With Israel the revival comes in through Benjamin, "Let thy hand be upon the man of thy right hand, upon the son of man whom thou madest strong for thyself", (Psalm 80:17).

Ques. Do you think that the features of Benjamin are brought about through exercise? I was thinking of the death of Rachel.

J.T. Yes. Judah conveys what they had reached, in telling what he was to his father.

Rem. Benjamin would be far removed from any party spirit.

J.T. That is what I thought. He recognises the assembly, in principle. Brought to this, you disallow all partisanship, you come into the good of the house. But then the others are to be brought into it as well. The Lord, if He is operating with an overcomer, has the whole idea before Him, He would bring all into what the overcomer has. In the meantime Benjamin has to suffer with the others, but he is already reminded of the place he has, in the five portions, he has already a testimony to the place he has with Joseph. Later he gets the kisses.

Rem. Coming into the light of these things involves a good deal of suffering.

J.T. However spiritual you are, you go through with the brethren whatever may come upon them through the governmental dealings of God.

Rem. He was the only one who wept on Joseph's neck.

J.T. Yes; he responded fully to Joseph's affections.

H.D'A.C. The picture is not complete without Judah coming forward and taking a large share of the blame. That spirit is important, is it not? He was not the guilty one, but he faced the situation, and it was through his admissions and confession that Joseph saw the time had come to make himself known to his brethren.

J.T. Judah therefore represents what was becoming in the ten; he did not speak for Benjamin. Judah in his exercises represents the ten -- all as responsible. The Lord has nothing less than that before His mind; therefore, as Judah speaks, Joseph says, "Cause every man to go out from me". It is a question of showing, typically, what Christ is to the brethren as a whole.

R.McB. Is that so that He could seek all his brethren?

J.T. Quite so. Every man is put out. It is not now a question of doing outwardly great things, but of being engaged with his brethren. "In that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me", (John 14:20). The Lord's prayer in John 17 shows what they were to Him, they were enough to engage His affections.

Here it is disclosure of His relation to us -- under these circumstances He makes us know that we are His brethren. This is marked by great feeling -- Joseph "wept aloud" as he "made himself known unto his brethren".

Then he said, "Come near to me, I pray you. And they came near". Then follows the expression of mutual affection. All this shows in the most striking and affecting way how the Lord has wrought at the present time to bring His own back to Himself in the apprehensions and realisation of the most exalted family relationship.

NEARNESS TO CHRIST AND PUBLIC SERVICE (2)

Luke 8:1 - 21

J.T. Here the Lord is seen going through the country, city by city, and village by village, preaching and announcing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God, after certain events -- "afterwards", it says. The mind is directed to what preceded, especially in chapter 7, in which we have attention called to a state of things governed by grace. The presence of the Lord here, from Luke's point of view, involves the spreading abroad of the principle of grace -- the influence of it. So that chapter 7 calls attention to the incident of the centurion and other occurrences, showing that the principle of grace had spread abroad and was being effective; the knowledge that the centurion had of the Lord, and his own relation with the Jews; then the dealing with death, and John the baptist's ministry. Chapter 7 thus shows the bearing and effect of the grace of the Lord's ministry and the exposure of what was contrary to it. The Old Testament -- what came down through John -- was merged in what the Lord was doing, so that there is adjustment. The Pharisees and the lawyers are exposed, and all the people and the publicans are said to have justified God, being baptised by John. There is thus adjustment, and the full result of grace is seen evidently in the woman who anointed the Lord.

So that we have a state of things showing the success of the ministry that was proceeding. With a product like the woman in the Pharisee's house before us, it is well worth combing the cities and villages to find such. "Afterwards ... he went through the country city by city, and village by village, preaching

and announcing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God". Nothing is said as to how the woman in Simon's house learned of the Lord, whether she had ever come in contact with Him before, but the principle of grace was ruling to such an extent that she sought Him out. She represents the full result of His ministry in that way, and in this chapter (coming in after that), He is seeking out, we may say, all such.

Ques. In view of material in each locality, would you say?

J.T. That is what I think we may see. In the second half of this chapter the sowing comes in as necessary. I think we shall see, as we proceed, that the object in view is to bring about local conditions answering to the assembly. But every city and every village has to be searched out. That is the principle, that whatever there is of God has to be searched out, so that it is every city and village.

Ques. How would you apply that to a country like this today?

J.T. Well, you get the principle. When we get the principle rightly in our minds, the application becomes easy. Principles are so important; here the principle of finding what there is of God. You omit no city or village. This may easily be applied in any country. You see what the principle involves; you have got two things here, preaching and announcing.

Ques. What is the difference?

J.T. I think preaching is authoritative. The Lord was anointed and sent to preach; it is representative. Announcing here may also be rendered "bringing", as in chapter 2:10. The thing is set out in such form as to make it intelligible.

Ques. Would the preaching of the glad tidings of the kingdom of God bring to light that of which you have been speaking?

J.T. Yes; it brings to light an order of things in which God intervened for the deliverance of man; it

is the "glad tidings of the kingdom of God" here. It is an order of things marked by divine power wielded in grace, so that it is the kingdom of God. Luke emphasises that it is God: "The Spirit of the Lord [Jehovah] is upon me", (Luke 4:18). So that in Luke the Lord, as He challenges them as to who He was, is confessed as the Christ of God. You have God, but then God in His kingdom, in an order of things through which believers are delivered from the power of Satan.

Rem. He is anointed by "the Spirit of the Lord", and then by the woman.

J.T. She anoints Him on the feet; evidently she discerns that to bring grace to her He had to travel; and was travelling. The service is not an easy matter, it is not for those who sit in their houses and think that God will do the work. It is a question of travelling, and hence here, one city after another, and one village after another is visited. Later (chapter 10) we have the Samaritan journeying.

Rem. With regard to the preaching and announcing, both these words seem to be used in connection with John the baptist's ministry at the beginning of this gospel: "preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins" (chapter 3:3); and then (verse 18), "exhorting ... he announced his glad tidings to the people"; the Spirit of God uses both these words.

J.T. Yes. I think 'announcing' has the force of showing that the glad tidings exist. The thing is opened up -- made intelligible. But 'preaching' is generally more authoritative.

Rem. And would it not suggest that in preaching there is a herald. Paul was a herald.

J.T. Yes. Preaching seems to have authority; it is one who is anointed that preaches.

Ques. Do you suggest that the Lord is seen here as an example?

J.T. Well, I think He is. He sets out that we are here in relation to a system; not only now one preaching on his own account as gifted, but preaching in relation to the system. Hence you get here the glad tidings of the kingdom of God, and the twelve were with Him, and certain women, too. I am sure you see what I mean -- in your service you recognise a system of things, you are taken up in connection with that. God has set up a system of things. That is where His power lies.

Ques. Does that mean that you announce what exists already, you have not to produce it?

J.T. That is right. Of course you preach Christ, but then you preach the kingdom of God. It is the glad tidings of the kingdom of God.

Ques. Why are the feet said to be anointed with myrrh, rather than oil?

J.T. I think it refers to a suffering path; it is a thorny way.

Ques. Does love play a great part in this system? The centurion "loves our nation", they say; (chapter 7:5). Then the woman's son is restored to her, so as to satisfy her affection.

J.T. Quite so; you see how grace is operating in relation to what is of God here. "He loves our nation", well, God still owned that; "and himself has built the synagogue for us". God still owned that. And then the widowed mother is taken account of in a compassionate way by the Lord. Grace in service takes account of what God owns here. Then you have John -- his ministry taken account of. He himself shows that he is waning, but this wonderful service of grace brings to light all the good things about John and his ministry. Those who heard justified God, and those who did not rejected the counsel of God; they rendered null the counsel of God as to themselves. It was their own doing. That is how grace takes account of things. Then here is this

woman who loves much: "Wisdom is justified of all her children". The thing is working out in this way. That is chapter 7. All this is included in the position in the opening of chapter 8.

Rem. She "stood at his feet behind him"; that would be as much as to say, He is going before.

J.T. A very fitting position for a believer. She recognises His lead, and in the leading He is a sufferer; she anoints His feet.

Ques. Does the action suggest intelligence on her part?

J.T. It does. She knew, she stood behind him weeping; there is the expression of feelings; it is a sure evidence of the work of God. Then she washes His feet with her tears and wipes them with the hairs of her head, and anoints them with myrrh. It is a beautiful service, done so well in such an adverse atmosphere. Many of us do things well under good circumstances, but she did it well in very adverse ones.

Ques. Would that be ministering to Him of her substance?

J.T. That is the point; she was doing that. He said in spirit (Proverbs 8) that those who love Him would have their treasuries filled, she would be enriched through Him. But she did the thing well and deliberately. She was proving her love. She really condemned the coldness and indifference around her. She was doing what Simon should have done.

Ques. In regard to the preaching being in relation to a system, would the twelve being with Him be more the public side?

J.T. The twelve allude to the administrative system, a system capable of His manipulation; the twelve are in His hands, so to say. We shall see later how He uses them, but for the moment they are there. We have to wait to see the development of the system.

Ques. Would you enlarge a little on the thought

of the glad tidings of the kingdom of God -- the characteristics of it?

J.T. Well, I think it is, as we were saying, a system of things in which God is known in power; it is grace acting in power. The point is grace. Grace is dominant in chapter 7; but the Pharisees and lawyers are exposed -- in spite of the presence of grace they are exposed -- in that they did not submit themselves to the baptism of John. The Lord makes it plain that John's was a powerful ministry; opening up in grace the way of escape. Its rejection sealed the fate of those Pharisees and lawyers.

Ques. What is the counsel of God?

J.T. It would be all that God had in mind for Israel. It was all there, and He was ready to make it good, but they rendered it null.

Rem. It was presented in John the baptist.

J.T. It was presented in Christ, to whom John witnessed (see John 1). In rejecting his ministry they rejected all that God had in His mind for them in Christ. Seeing Jerusalem, as entering it finally, He wept over it, knowing that He would be rejected.

Rem. So that the preaching of the kingdom is the setting forth of the way God has revealed Himself.

J.T. "If I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you", (Luke 11:20). That is to say, it is a question of power -- grace acting in power for man's deliverance, a power great enough to overthrow every enemy. The "strong man" kept his palace, but a stronger than he bound him; here the Lord is really spoiling his goods; grace is acting.

Rem. Verse 2 shows that those who appreciated that power were in sympathy with Him.

J.T. The twelve were with Him. The twelve showed that they were qualified, in that they were with Him; not now that He is with them (chapter 6:17), but they are with Him. That is to say, they

are moving, their position is determined by His. We shall see later how He uses them. "The twelve" signifies material which can be divinely manipulated for service.

Ques. It says of the women who went with Him that they had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities. Would they be an evidence of the kingdom?

J.T. Exactly. There was one, Mary Magdalene, for instance, from whom seven demons had gone out. It was not simply that there was power, but they had gone out. There was a vessel -- the work of God became such in her that they went out, they could not stay there.

Ques. Was it the operation of grace?

J.T. Well, yes. But it is a great tribute to what had taken place in Mary Magdalene.

Rem. They were not cast out.

J.T. Elsewhere they are said to have been cast out, but it is as if they had to go; there was no more room for them. As with Judas, he went out; (John 13).

Ques. Who took their place?

J.T. The power of the kingdom. Now it would be the Holy Spirit. Christ would occupy her affections, if Mary Magdalene be the woman of chapter 7, for it is a continuation morally; there was no room except for Christ.

Rem. So that we arrive at the power of the kingdom by our need.

J.T. I think it is a very fine thing when we see evil going out, it shows a certain change in the conditions. Here there were seven of them -- complete power, but they went out.

Ques. Are you connecting the completeness of the work with the preaching and announcing?

J.T. Well, that is what He was doing, but, you see, He had by Him twelve. These twelve men had a formative history -- thus they were with Him, it is

put that way. He has by Him a number of persons, material that can be used as He pleases, so that the greatest good may result. Peter may be taken to represent the work of God in them all. "First Peter", that is the way Matthew 10:2 presents it. Luke gives us his history in this way; the Lord entered into his house and healed his mother-in-law. He had an exhibition in his house of the Lord's power, He stood over the woman and the fever left her; but, apparently Simon did not get the thing then, but the testimony was before his eyes -- in his house. Then, in the next chapter, the Lord is in his boat; we are reminded, as it were, that if He cannot secure us in our houses He touches us in our businesses. And in the boat the Lord secures him, He secures him on the principle of subjection. The Lord says, "Launch out into the deep, and let down your nets for a draught"; it was a direct word to him. He first begs him for his boat, but in the second instance He directs him. And Peter says, "at thy word I will let down the net", (Luke 5:5). That is to say, his natural experience would have suggested to him that the letting down of the net was useless, but there is obedience to the Lord's word, "at thy word". Thus we have a man subject to the Lord, and now he learnt that grace was there and he fell down at the Lord's knees. The next chapter shows what the knees mean; the twelve are selected after a night's prayer, and thus they are here with the Lord. You can see, therefore, that He has those by Him that are under His hand; He uses them so that the greatest result accrues. But then these women are also with Him, evidences of the subjective results of grace -- there is no room for demon power in that environment. The twelve would represent intelligence and authority.

Ques. Why are their names given?

J.T. No doubt to indicate the features of the work of God. They had become distinguished among

the saints, for this account was written long after the occurrence. They are an evidence of the work of God. The wife of Herod's steward is there, "and many others, who ministered to him of their substance".

Rem. So that the work of God subjectively would always be distinctive.

J.T. I think so. It is diversified; the distinctions are marked off by the names.

Ques. Referring again to the announcing -- would it be consequent upon being with Him, and the preaching the outcome of being sent?

J.T. Yes; the preaching is authoritative. But we bring or announce glad tidings. For this we are to learn how to speak. Moses had to come to the point where he said he could not speak, and God accepted that, for not one of us can speak according to God unless we have discovered that naturally we have no ability. You might speak with the tongues of angels and not have love (see 1 Corinthians 13), that would not be the thing. God says to Moses, Aaron "shall be to thee instead of a mouth", (Exodus 4:16). But He says, "I will be with thy mouth and with his mouth", (verse 15). We need that as well, not only the announcing, but God with the mouth, so that the words convey the thing according to God. Much is made of Paul's speaking. For instance, in Acts 14:1 he and Barnabas entered together into the synagogue; "together" -- that is a nice touch. But then it says, they "so spake" that a great number believed. We are told that Paul was the chief speaker (verse 12); others had said his speech was contemptible, but the Holy Spirit says he was the chief speaker. Then the lame man heard Paul speak -- not preach, but speak, and Paul looked on him and saw that he had faith to be healed, and he cried with a loud voice. It is a question of speaking.

Rem. In Galatians 1 the word 'announced' is

used five or six times. I was wondering whether it referred to the defective way in which the Galatians had taken in the gospel; they had not understood what was in the mind of Paul.

J.T. It does not seem that they had. The thought of speaking is important, because it has to do with the testimony presented; you want to present it rightly. He "so spake", it says.

Ques. Does grace carry the thought of teaching? not only power and authority, but is there also teaching?

J.T. Yes, you are thinking of Titus: "the grace of God which carries with it salvation for all men hath appeared, teaching us", (Titus 2:11).

Ques. In 1 Corinthians 15 the apostle says, "I make known to you" (verse 1), "I announced to you" (verse 1), and "I delivered to you" (verse 3); what are the differences in these expressions?

J.T. In writing he wished to make clear what he had announced when with them. Then delivering would be, so to speak, conveying the impression -- the thing was passed over to them.

Now the Lord here speaks this parable, "a great crowd coming together, and those who were coming to him out of each city, he spoke by parable". Speaking by parable means, I think, that in the general interest the natural mind is apt to intrude, but speaking by parable excludes it; only those who have ears to hear can follow. Christianity is to be set up on that principle. The natural mind has to be shut out. That is not 'announcing' and 'shewing'. Parabolic ministry is to shut out the natural mind, however clever.

Rem. It brings to light the state of those addressed; there would be those who heard the parable, and did not come in to ask the meaning.

Ques. How does the parable take shape with us?

J.T. I think you have to be exercised that in

ministry you do not appeal to the natural mind. The Lord spoke by parable, He shut out the natural mind. Christianity was not set up in the recognition of the natural mind at all. And it is the natural mind in a religious way that He is dealing with. Parables were judicial; the Jews were rejecting the testimony of Christ, and so henceforth it was for those who had "ears to hear".

Rem. He did not begin with parables; there was a special time when He began.

J.T. Now that He has a system of His own He does. The natural mind is shut out altogether. In the previous chapter they rendered null the counsel of God, now they are being shut out effectively by parabolic ministry.

Rem. So that the kingdom of God comes not by observation.

J.T. It does not. Every other kingdom of the world has come by observation, their leaders make everything of show. But He says, "the kingdom of God is in the midst of you"; it was there in a moral way, but in power; (chapter 17:21).

Ques. Does that apply today?

J.T. Surely. If you get the principle, I think you can see the application of it. We must move on these lines. Where there is a general rejection of the truth we have to count on God to give ears to hear, and not seek to gain the public ear by appealing to the natural minds of men.

Rem. We might not have ears to hear the ministry of today.

J.T. Well, the appeal is, "He that has an ear, let him hear", (Revelation 3).

Rem. It deals with the capacity to receive ministry.

J.T. Yes. When you are called upon to have ears to hear, it shows that God is working, and those who serve must count on this.

Ques. What is the meaning here of the seed that is sown?

J.T. The Lord says that the seed is the word of God; it brings in God as He is in Christ.

Rem. It is not fruitful in the souls of men apart from repentance.

J.T. It is that God is working. In Mark the Lord says it brings forth fruit and you do not know how; (Mark 4:27).

Rem. There is no repentance with the first class therefore.

J.T. The fourth class only bears fruit according to God.

Ques. Would Simon (Acts 8) illustrate that? He was not "good ground".

J.T. He did not represent the good ground. As our brother has been remarking, the word received had not been accompanied by repentance. Where the word of God is received honestly, as on the day of Pentecost, it is accompanied by repentance. Not that they said they were repentant, but the principle is there. Peter said, "Repent, and be baptised every one of you", (Acts 2:38). The word of God coming in in Luke would, I think, be an expression of God revealed in grace. He is not imputing trespasses, so that my heart is subdued and assured, and what can I do in the presence of a God like that but humble myself? How can I retain my will in the presence of such grace? "To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses", (2 Corinthians 5:19). That is the kind of thing.

Rem. So that the goodness of God, where it is known in the soul, leads to repentance.

J.T. Yes; the word would convey that to you.

Ques. What is the meaning of the 'anointing', speaking of the Lord's words, "he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor"? (chapter 4:18).

Could it be said of the twelve afterwards that they were anointed?

J.T. They were. "The Spirit of the Lord", that is, the Spirit of Jehovah, "is upon me". That would convey at that time what God was in grace. He quotes from Isaiah. I think Isaiah is the most evangelical of the prophets, a man who learnt how to judge himself. He saw the Lord, he says, in the year that king Uzziah died, "sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple. Above it stood the seraphims: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly. And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory", (Isaiah 6:1 - 3). And then he says, "Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts". Now the seraph comes in with the tongs. He did not touch the live coal -- it is another that bears the judgment of the fire. But he takes the coal with the tongs from off the altar, and touches Isaiah's lips. It is a question of what his lips were -- what He was saying. I suppose that is what we should all have to admit, that what we are comes out in what we say. He is now cleansed, and then he is ready to be sent. So that Isaiah is aptly quoted by the Lord in chapter 4 as representative of the evangelical spirit of Scripture, and Jehovah presented there would be God as then known in grace. That was the Spirit that was upon the Lord.

Ques. In the latter part of Isaiah 6 it says, "Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not" (verse 9). Is that at all analogous with what you have been saying about the parable?

J.T. It is; it fits in here. He is one who has

judged himself in that sense. The idea of the tongue, or mouth, is taken into account. The Holy Spirit as coming on Christ took a bodily form. That is to say,all that God is, but in the character of a dove. The speaking would develop that -- the way that God has come in, in Luke -- in this holy Vessel. His speaking brings that out.

But at Pentecost the Spirit comes in in the character of cloven tongues as of fire, and they sat upon each, meaning that it is a question of speaking, and speaking by many. But the fire is to deal with what would be corrupting in our tongues, the speaking is to be pure: the Holy Spirit attends to all that in us.

Ques. What do you connect with the word 'cloven'?

J.T. It is 'parted'; I suppose the speaking would be universal: "we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God", (Acts 2:11). The divine thought was that in the coming in of the Spirit the thoughts of God should not be limited to any one tongue.

Rem. Showing that the gospel is universal.

J.T. That is the thought. There was no need of that under the old economy, because it was one nation, now it is all. You remember the word in Luke 24:47 is "that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name", not to all men, but "to all the nations". The divisions under the government of God are overcome.

Ques. The twelve being with Him, does it suggest that in the preaching and announcing it is necessary to have sympathy?

J.T. The point is that He had those by Him whom He could use. 'Twelve' implies spiritually that I am not thinking about myself, I am simply at the will of the Lord, so that I can be used according to His wisdom. Isaiah says, "Here am I"; he was a true servant in that sense.

Ques. Would you say how the Lord manipulates today?

J.T. The principle of service is that I am available to the Lord in relation to others, for He has others as well. That is, He had twelve apostles, and each one was to be available to Him in relation to the others; He had work for each one of them. Hence Paul was the apostle to the gentiles, and Peter to the circumcision; there was no interference with each other's ministry. Those serving are not envious of each other; they are working under the Lord, and so they are not at cross purposes. Love for one another must underlie service. The intensification of the principle is seen in the heavenly city in the measurements, governed as they are by twelve. Nowhere is it so intensified as there, showing how perfectly the city is formed in the divine nature.

Ques. Do we have to get at the root of things in self-judgment to be effective as with Peter and Isaiah?

J.T. That is a feature which must mark those who serve. You see in the history of Peter how the Lord brings about the twelve. They must go to the root of things. Peter says, "Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord"; but he fell down at His knees, that is the thing.

Rem. That would have to be maintained.

J.T. Indeed! See how Barnabas and Saul worked together beautifully, and yet in Barnabas' strongest point he broke down in the end. The strongest point was, I think, that he unjealously brought Saul to Antioch, yet that is the point where he broke down, for he afterwards departed with Mark, allowing natural feeling to influence him.

Ques. Would the ministering to Him of their substance imply support of the testimony?

J.T. Quite so. You see in the early part of the Acts how each held what he had as not his own. And it comes to light that Barnabas had lands, which

he sold, and laid the money at the apostles' feet; and then at Antioch you get those who were "well off", (Acts 11:29) determined to send to the poor saints, which also they did. That is the way of ministering to the Lord of our substance.

Ques. Has the sowing something in view for God?

J.T. It has. What comes out here is more the result for Him. Bringing forth fruit with patience marks the good ground. It is noticeable that in both Matthew and Mark you have a graded result, here you have a hundredfold, that is, the full result. But when you come to the explanation of the parable He does not say a 'hundredfold', but "with patience". Patience is one great feature with God, and Luke would bring us to it; you are bearing fruit with patience. I think God would bring us into accord with His thought -- the patience of God -- how He has borne with men all these centuries. Then what follows on that is light; and then what follows on that is that I have things "whosoever has, to him shall be given". That is what I think is going on now, those who have are getting more, and those who have not, what they seem to have is being taken from them. Light comes in after the bearing of fruit with patience. Verse 14 says that some seed fell among thorns; "these are they who having heard go away and are choked under cares and riches and pleasures of life, and bring no fruit to perfection". No doubt such have a place for a time, but they bring no fruit to perfection. Those that fall on good ground are those that hear the word and keep it, and bring forth fruit to perfection -- with patience. And then, what is consequent upon that is light. It says, "No one having lighted a lamp covers it with a vessel or puts it under a couch, but sets it on a lampstand, that they who enter in may see the light". That is an additional thought -- one bearing fruit has light, and you want to see to it that

every one who enters in sees that light. You are looking for people to enter in.

Ques. Is that the Philippian position, "among whom ye appear as lights in the world"? (chapter 2:15).

J.T. Here it is a question of entering in; if God is working, people will be entering in. For those who seek to be in fellowship with God's people your desire is that they should see the light. You are not covering it. The point is that it should be seen by those who enter in.

Rem. The product of the sowing.

J.T. There is such a thing as entering in, and in entering in they see the light. But the word here is to see to it that it is not hidden. The fact that we have the light is not everything, you want the people who are entering in to see it. Why should they enter in? There is something there they do not find anywhere else; but the word here is to see to it that it is not hidden.

Rem. "Take heed to the ministry which thou hast received in the Lord, that thou fulfil it", (Colossians 4:17).

Ques. What exactly is the entering in?

J.T. Well, there is something to enter into. You see, if you take the earlier verses -- the Lord, and the twelve, and those holy women -- there is something there to enter into, a wonderful circle indeed. What interests were there! But the Lord emphasises here that in coming in they should see the light; it should not be obscured by any selfish consideration. The lighted lamp should be set on a lampstand, not covered by a vessel or put under a bed.

Rem. So that the bringing forth of fruit with patience is the maintenance of the light.

J.T. But there might be neglect, such as being too much engrossed in business and household affairs, and the light thus become obscured.

Ques. Would the fruit be for God?

J.T. Quite so; but the light is the other side, it is for men.

Ques. Is it entering into the kingdom of God?

J.T. No doubt. You get in the beginning of the chapter Christ, and the twelve, and those women -- what an order of things that was!

Rem. A circle of blessed interests, as you said.

J.T. Yes, indeed! We see these women ministering to the Lord in unselfishness. Mary Magdalene -- think of what she would be to Christ! And what an influence in the circle! Then Peter and John, how they would get on together! Well, that indicates what there is in the fellowship of God's Son. We want to be sure that we are not obscuring the light.

Rem. There is fruit in perfection inside.

J.T. Yes. So that, if people come in, they come in to this. It is not only a place of light, but there are things going on there that reflect what is in heaven. If one entered into heaven, what would he see? Not only light, but persons; he would see them in their blessed relations to one another. Normally there is a representation of this in the assembly.

Then we have here, "there is nothing hid which shall not become manifest, nor secret which shall not be known". That is another thing that is very important -- hidden things come to light. Where the Holy Spirit is operating everything comes to light; the patient man knows that and he waits on God. He says, "there is nothing hid which shall not become manifest". That is very sweeping and necessary in our fellowship. This is going on -- the exposure of every dark thing, every secret thing.

Rem. The heavenly city is marked by transparency.

NEARNESS TO CHRIST AND PUBLIC SERVICE (3)

Luke 8:22 - 56

J.T. It is proposed to read the chapters beginning with this one and ending with part of chapter 11 at these meetings, so that we may see how -- the new order of things being introduced, seen in the beginning of this chapter -- the assembly in its local setting is reached. We noticed this morning that the Lord went through the country city by city and village by village preaching and announcing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God; that having taken place, it says 'afterward', referring to what had gone before, particularly chapter 7. The Lord is no longer ministering in an individual way. The twelve are said to be with Him and certain women who ministered to Him of their substance; the woman in chapter 7, who is said to have loved much, representing the desired result in the preaching and announcing. But for this there must be sowing, and so the Lord introduced the parable of the sower. We noticed that the fruit on good ground is borne with patience; consequent on that we have a lamp which is to be set so as to give light to all that come in. It is assumed that some would come in. Following all this, in verses 19 - 21 we have the brethren, those whom the Lord regards as in relationship with Him, as His mother and His brethren; those who "hear the word of God and do it".

H.H. That would be a new generation.

J.T. Quite so. You have more now than one lover of Christ. The woman loved much because she was forgiven much, but now you have a generation in relation to Christ marked off as hearing the word of God and doing it, a generation that would be morally

after God. I think these early verses, therefore, introduce a set of principles which, taken together, may enter into the ship in which He crosses the sea with them.

Ques. Would these be the product of the seed sown in the good ground?

J.T. Yes; they hear the word of God and do it.

J.B. You say these principles enter into the idea of the ship; what is the idea of it?

J.T. I think the principles that go through, taken together -- what the Lord had set out. "He entered", it says, "into a ship, himself and his disciples; and he said to them, Let us pass over to the other side of the lake; and they set off from shore". The initiative was His; His disciples were with Him in it.

J.B. That is helpful, but could you open it out a little more?

J.T. I think the test was as to whether the ship was staunch enough to go through. The Lord falls asleep; it says, "as they sailed, he fell asleep" -- they were doing the thing now. He had entered into the ship with them and given direction to move; then, as they sailed, He fell asleep. Therefore they are tested, not only as to whether He could save them even if the ship were sunk, but whether He would have entered into a ship unable to go through.

Ques. Do you mean that the thought of the ship embodies the principles that you have spoken of, so that the disciples, if they maintained these principles, would go through?

J.T. That is it. If they had understood the principles they would have had no anxiety even if He went to sleep, for if He went to sleep He assumed that all was well, He had no uncertainty as to what would happen. He knew the ship would go through.

Ques. Would the ship be something akin to the fellowship of God's Son, which He inaugurated?

J.T. Quite so, the principles hold. In chapter 6

you have the bottles -- the wine in good vessels. There are principles laid down in chapter 6, I think, but here you have the ship -- another idea. There it is a question of the preservation of the wine -- the Spirit of God; here it is a question of going through, whether you can go through to the other side of the lake.

Rem. To go through, we need to be sure that we are standing by divine principles.

J.T. If the Lord entered into a ship, it was His own choice; He did not ask the disciples to provide it. Earlier He had asked Peter for the loan of his ship, but here He entered into a ship Himself. They sailed under His direction, but they do it, and now He sleeps, that was the test -- it was to bring out what He could be for them in such circumstances. He entered into the ship knowingly.

Rem. It looks as though they were not in the good of the kingdom; they were not prepared for a sudden squall.

Rem. Divine principles are calculated to take them through.

J.T. Especially as the Lord is in them. It does not say here that the ship belonged to anyone; in chapter 5 it does; but He entered into it. They might be sure He foresaw all the contingencies of such a voyage. He was not ignorant of the conditions on this lake.

Ques. Would "the other side" be till the time of testing is over?

J.T. I think so. "The other side of the lake" -- the whole thing is taken into account. He knew the lake well.

H.H. Do you think this would have particular reference to Paul's teaching? Would Luke have that in mind in setting things out in this way? So that the new order of things that Paul ministered would be in regard to that which is imperishable.

J.T. I think what was introduced at Pentecost proved itself quite staunch; it was quite capable of meeting a storm. But no doubt Luke has Paul in view.

Ques. Do we get the principles that carry us through in 2 Timothy -- righteousness, faith, love, peace?

J.T. Just so.

Ques. Why do you emphasise "the lake"?

J.T. "The other side of the lake", the Lord says; it is an area well known, and exposed to such things as this -- these sudden attacks. The Lord knew that; we must not assume for a moment that He did not know; the disciples assumed that He may not have known or thought of the matter.

Ques. Could the ship go down?

J.T. I should think not if the Lord were in it! He entered into it with His disciples, and directed them to pass over.

H.D'A.C. They had not taken the initiative, or they might have blamed themselves; He did it.

Ques. The ship is still sailing, is it not?

J.T. That is another matter. We are here at the initial thought of the thing. There is no break-up of the ship yet; in Paul's day there was a break-up of the ship; that supposes unfaithfulness in those responsible -- another side of the truth. Here we are dealing with the ship into which the Lord entered, and in which He directed the disciples to pass over to the other side of the lake. From this point of view there can be no disaster.

Rem. As holding by the principles, the Lord is there, and we get through.

J.T. That is right. They sailed, and if they sail, that means there were equipments. They were not rowing, they sail -- the equipments were there.

H.D'A.C. I suppose it was an attempt of Satan to drown the Lord.

J.T. It was; but such an attempt as the Lord would expect. It was no surprise to Him; we can never assume any surprises in regard to the Lord. The enemy would come in, but He is aware of that beforehand.

Rem. The enemy can never destroy or alter divine principles.

J.T. No; they are indestructible.

H.H. He would always make an attack on new features.

J.T. Yes; but what is of God cannot be overthrown.

H.H. I wondered whether it would illustrate how we often feel that though our principles are all right, we get into a great deal of distress through not counting on the Lord; for principles in themselves would not suffice without Him.

J.T. No. "As they sailed" -- the ship was in motion, it was going, and then He went to sleep. As holding to the principles only, we shall not be with Him. But we shall be tested as to whether we can rely on Him.

Ques. Is the "squall of wind" a sudden attack of the enemy on some principle?

J.T. It was the whole position here, as in Acts 5:3, "why has Satan filled thy heart that thou shouldest lie to the Holy Spirit?" That was an effort of Satan to upset the whole testimony. It was a question of the presence of the Spirit. Whatever God is putting forward is what Satan will attack.

Ques. Why does it say "they were filled with water", not 'the ship'?

J.T. It was in their minds, I suppose -- they were filled with it. Literally, it reads, "they were filled".

Ques. Have we anything to correspond with that in the present day?

J.T. Satan is always attacking. The thing is to hold to the principles, and to see that the Lord has

committed Himself to them; they are His own and He has committed Himself to them. We must never assume that anything is lacking. Moses said to God, "Have I conceived all this people ... that thou sayest to me, Carry them?" It was as much as to say that God had not foreseen all the contingencies. Well, God tells him to select seventy others, and He says, "I will take of the Spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon them", (Numbers 11:12,16,17). There is no extra power provided, but there is instrumentality. So when we pray, it is not for increased power, but that what we have should be effective: "according to the power that worketh in us", (Ephesians 3:20).

Ques. Was it not faith that was lacking?

J.T. Yes, faith in what existed; faith in what was actually here. The principles in themselves have no power in them; it is the principles laid hold of in the hearts of the saints; that is what really matters. Of course, the power really lies in the presence of the Spirit in us.

H.D'A.C. How gracious of the Lord to say to His disciples, "Let us" bringing them into a bond with Himself in that way. That 'us' could not be drowned. Do we not often find in our localities that we have these principles all right, but the difficulty comes in with the sailing, with the use we make of them and how we handle them, and things are often hindered by a sudden squall?

Ques. Does it depend on faith in the presence of the Lord?

J.T. Exactly. He had been working with them, it was for them now to put into action what they had learned, but He takes the initiative and sets them going. It was well that it could be said of them, "they sailed" -- they sailed and He fell asleep.

But now they get to the land, and you have Satan in another form, not as acting on the winds or the

sea, but a man out of the city, possessed with demons, met the Lord. I think that this section of the chapter introduces you to potential material for the assembly, that is to say, the man, and the woman and the child. If we keep these in view, I think we shall see how the minister will be put to the test. The principles the Lord brought in are put to the test in the storm, and they come through; He is better known consequently. But now you see what the minister has to contend with. A man meets the Lord out of the city; the service of the gospel has to do with concentrated evil. We have to do with concentrated evil, and this is represented in the man who comes out of the city. It is said of him that he "had demons a long time, and put on no clothes, and did not abide in a house, but in the tombs".

Ques. What difference would there be between this man and the woman in chapter 7, for she is spoken of as "a woman in the city", here it is "a ... man out of the city"?

J.T. I think she was delivered where the sin was -- completely delivered where it was. She was a woman of the city, she would be well known, and known as a sinner -- that was her reputation; but a change had come about, she loved Christ. This man is "out of" the city; he is a product of it; he represents the power of wickedness in the cities, extending beyond their limits -- a very solemn thing. For we have to make up our minds, if we are to serve in the gospel, that these are the things to be contended with; concentrated evil, but evil that extends -- the man came "out of the city". But as delivered from the power of Satan he becomes material for the assembly. That is the idea, the composition of the assembly. It is the male side -- he is sitting, clothed and in his right mind at the feet of the Lord. That is the element the Lord would use in the way of intelligence and order. Then you have the woman. The child is

mentioned first, but she comes in last rightly. The woman is the second component part of the assembly, then there is the child, not a babe, but a child of twelve years old. These are what I should regard as the component parts of an assembly. But we must have them as passed through the hands of Christ; there is a complete change in every one of them as passing through His hands.

Ques. Why do you make a distinction between a child and a girl of twelve?

J.T. I think this chapter contemplates the family order. She is not called 'damsel', but 'child'. The man is the intelligence; the woman is an inner state of transparency (she tells all the truth), and the child is young, fresh life. If you have these features, you have the assembly.

You have intelligence, you have restfulness. There had been secretiveness with the woman, her trouble was a long one, it had lasted all the life of Jairus' daughter; it was a secret matter, and she would have it healed secretly; but things must be open in the assembly of God, they must be transparent. The man would speak of a sound mind, a balanced mind. This is just one side of the assembly; there is intelligence, order, stability and restfulness -- that, I think, is represented in the man.

H.D'A.C. And there would be learning from Jesus, sitting at His feet.

J.T. Quite so. Instead of learning the defiling sophistication of the city, you have him sitting at the Lord's feet.

F.W.W. There should be the freshness of a child in the man and the woman.

J.T. Yes. I understand that the three represent three features that should mark us all.

Rem. A balanced mind is of very great value in the things of God.

H.H. I thought what you said about the woman

seeking to be healed secretly is an exercise we sometimes have to face in our local meetings. Things have got to come out, they cannot be dealt with secretly.

J.T. It is so, indeed. Not that you would cast any aspersion on the sisters, but the woman's side is taken up, I think, to represent secretiveness, the disposition to hide. (See Genesis 31:34; Matthew 13:33.) In our chapter the woman would have the healing done secretly, but the Lord would not have it that way. He says, "Some one has touched me"; it was the touch of faith, true enough, but it was a secret touch, and the Lord would have things open. So that "she came trembling, and falling down before him, she declared unto him before all the people for what cause she had touched him, and how she was healed immediately"; she told Him all the truth.

Rem. The Lord wanted His portion from her heart.

J.T. And He was thinking of her gain, too. She would be a very different sister afterwards. If God is working with us, we need not fear having the whole thing out.

F.W.W. The man was sent back for testimony.

J.T. He wished to be with Him, but the Lord says, "Return to thine house and relate how great things God has done for thee". He represents the element in the assembly that can be trusted.

S.L. Right-minded brothers conferring would lead to all speaking the same thing.

J.T. That shows the wisdom in having meetings for brethren to come together in a local way and take counsel, for in them you arrive at a right mind, the mind of the Lord; you are able to look at things from every point of view.

Ques. Would you say a word as to the clothing?

J.T. It would allude to dignity, and also decency. "Let all things be done decently and in order". A

man clothed, who had been accustomed to nakedness, would show that he had come to a right sense of things, and he would exhibit it in himself; all his demeanour and circumstances would indicate that he had a right sense of things.

Ques. You do not suggest that the man in the assembly is to have alone the prerogative of a sound mind?

J.T. We are speaking of features of the assembly; it is no question of individuals, but of all. The first is intelligence and balance and decency, comeliness and public order -- such an one is trustworthy. This man wanted to be with the Lord, but He says, "Return to thine house". That is necessary, or you could not have the public features; there would not be trustworthiness. Then the next thing is the feature of transparency, the opposite of secretiveness. The man, we are told, was possessed of demons "a long time"; but we are given the number of years in which the woman suffered; it was a known period to herself. I suppose the woman's case is alluded to in Romans 7 -- what do you say?

H.D'A.C. Very good.

Rem. It would appear, from what you are saying, that these three principles must be existent in connection with the local company before there can be building up, for it is not till these are settled that the food question comes into view.

J.T. It is in the child that you have the idea of food presented, because that is what is to be sustained, things are to be sustained in freshness. I believe the teaching connected with her carries the other two with it.

H.D'A.C. In the power of Christ to heal them you would have the teaching of Romans 8.

J.T. The 'virtue' here would be the Spirit, as seen in Romans 8.

Ques. With regard to the woman in chapter 7,

her faith is in connection with salvation, but in this chapter the woman's faith is in regard to healing, is it not?

J.T. Yes, it was a question of bodily condition.

Ques. Does everything being exposed call attention to Christ personally, as the woman said in John 4, "a man, which told me all things that ever I did"?

J.T. Quite so, she had everything exposed to herself; the exposure is to herself, "Come, see a man, which told me". That is an important thing, to have the thing brought home to oneself. But this woman did not need that, the thing had been brought home to her for twelve years -- her actual state. But she was not going to let it be known that she was healed by touching the hem of His garment. The Lord would not have that. If she had kept that secret, she would also want to keep other things secret that should be made known. Thus she would begin her spiritual history with a serious defect.

Rem. It is very detrimental to the assembly that things should be kept secret.

J.T. If you have things concealed, you will not be fit for standing on the sea of glass. It is not that everything must be told, for there are things that are rightly concealed. "A prudent man concealeth knowledge", (Proverbs 12:23).

Rem. Things will come out, anyway.

J.T. Yes. How much better to let them come out at once. Then He owns her as daughter; there is a family touch, she is a daughter. Henceforth she will not be marked by a dark part.

Ques. Would this include the confessing of our faults one to another?

J.T. I think it would. It is a great matter to have things dealt with -- brought into the light. There are things that need not be made public, but the principle of transparency is very important.

Ques. Is not this rather more than the confession

of her faults? It is the confession of the thing, and how she got healed of it, and to whom she owed the healing.

J.T. That is it. "All denying, Peter and those with him said, Master, the crowds close thee in and press upon thee, and sayest thou, Who has touched me? And Jesus said, Someone has touched me, for I have known that power has gone out from me". That was an extraordinary situation! The Lord knew that power had gone out, yet the disciples were questioning Him. You see the position the Lord is placed in through this. We do not want to place the Lord in a false position. To clear up the position everything hinged on this woman's confession. You often see a situation like that arise, where everything hinges on one person making a statement or a confession. Here the Lord was under a cloud even with His disciples, and so the matter had to be cleared up; the Lord insists that it should, and the matter was cleared up by the woman's confession. It says, "the woman, seeing that she was not hid" -- she was made to feel that the thing must come out.

Ques. Do you not think that Paul was in the spirit of the woman when he made confession that he was "a blasphemer and persecutor, and an insolent overbearing man", (1 Timothy 1:13)? Does he not make a confession that is good for thousands?

J.T. Covering what is before us, Romans 7 is his confession. Very few of us are prepared to confess the terrible things that go on within us.

Ques. Why is there this tendency to keep things secret?

Rem. "The fear of man bringeth a snare", (Proverbs 29:25).

J.T. Quite so, we are afraid. The woman was afraid. It is innate in us, from this point of view, to conceal a thing.

Rem. Courage comes with knowing what was done in her.

J.T. Romans 7:24,25 is the statement of a man who is out of the experience depicted. I believe a multitude of christians are afraid to confess their inward difficulties, for the reason that they have not seen the way out. "Who shall deliver me? ... I thank God, through Jesus Christ our Lord"; you are brought into touch with a Person who becomes your Deliverer. This chapter speaks of touching the hem of His garment, but the Lord says, "Who touched me?" For deliverance the believer comes into contact with Himself.

Rem. So in Romans 7 it is a question not only of deliverance, but of the Deliverer.

J.T. You come to know the Lord. "There is then now no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus ... God, having sent his own Son", (Romans 8:1,3). There the heart is taken up with Christ; it is not simply God sending His Son, but His own Son; the heart is thus appealed to. God sending Him "in likeness of flesh of sin, and for sin, has condemned sin in the flesh", (verse 3). As you are able to say that, you are not afraid to disclose what you have experienced.

Ques. Would there not be a link formed with the company now?

J.T. Yes; so she is now a daughter. "Be of good courage, daughter; thy faith has healed thee; go in peace". Now you are ennobled; instead of losing ground you have gained ground in being open about it. Think of the One who called her 'daughter', for it is not here a daughter of Abraham, as in chapter 13:16, but the Lord calls her 'daughter'. Think what a sister this woman would be in after years!

Rem. The Lord doubtless knew, but it was to bring the thing out in her.

Rem. We suffer largely from not being ennobled in this manner.

J.T. I think we do, for the saints are brought together on the ground of ennoblement; we are not gathered on the ground of the littleness of the flesh, but as having received the Spirit of God. Romans prepares for Corinthians.

Rem. It is the Lord's own word here.

J.T. Yes. If the Lord calls this woman 'daughter', why need she mind if others call her anything else? Then He says, "Go in peace"; that is another word to be noticed. When the Lord says, 'Go', I think it means He has confidence in her, she is to be trusted.

Ques. Does the Lord in that way bring her into the circle He speaks of as "my mother and my brethren"?

J.T. I think so; only 'daughter' is a distinct family touch.

Ques. What do you understand by the Lord realising that power had gone out from Him?

J.T. I think it shows how conscious He is of what goes on spiritually. Every bit of power that goes out to you and to me, the Lord is quite cognisant of it, and He would have it disclosed, He would have it public.

Rem. The great difficulty in a local assembly is often the lack of transparency which would bring about healing.

Ques. Are you speaking of this question of transparency individually or collectively, or both?

J.T. It is a feature of the company; but of course the company is formed of individuals.

Rem. So that, until everything is out, there can be no healing amongst the brethren.

J.T. Now what you see here is that "while he was yet speaking" there came some one from the

ruler of the synagogue's house, saying, "Thy daughter is dead; do not trouble the teacher". Now we are linked on with the following case.

Rem. So, while the question of freshness is raised first, it is solved after the inward question as seen in the woman has been solved.

J.T. You can understand that. The source of freshness is introduced in Romans 5 -- the love of God shed abroad in the heart -- but the state ensuring the continuance of it is not seen till chapter 8.

H.H. It is rather remarkable that, in connection with Marah, the word was, "I am Jehovah who healeth thee", (Exodus 15:26). Does not that fit in with this?

J.T. Yes. In the gift of the Spirit. God has freshness in view, but before that freshness can be maintained permanently, the sin question has to be dealt with -- not sins, but sin -- the thing working within us. Romans 7 is the process; chapter 8 the result.

Rem. And it is only solved by virtue from Him.

J.T. That means the Spirit. But now, the little girl becomes extremely interesting, because it is a question of young, fresh life. He said, "Do not weep, for she has not died, but sleeps. And they derided him". He entered into the house, it says, with Peter and John and James, and the father and mother of the child. When we come to this case, it is not only a question of the Spirit, but of what is spiritual. I think the case of the woman involves the Spirit, the virtue involves the Spirit coming into the believer from Christ; but the girl's case is not only that but what is spiritual. I refer to those whom the Lord would have in the house, having put others out. The Corinthians were not spiritual; they had the Spirit, but they were not spiritual. The Galatians, too, had the Spirit, but they were not spiritual. "Ye which are spiritual", the apostle says; (Galatians 6:1).

It is not simply that virtue has come out to us for our relief, but that we are to become spiritual. So He puts everybody out, and suffers no one to go in save Peter and John and James, and the father and mother of the child. Those put out were persons who would act on the flesh. Colossians warns against those who would introduce philosophy and vain deceit and ceremonialism. All that has to be put out, it is a question of those who are living spiritually. The child is raised up into a spiritual environment. The Lord was there, and Peter and John and James, and the father of the child and the mother. She was raised up into that environment.

Ques. What does 'spiritual' mean?

J.T. It is not only that I have the Spirit, but my mind and affections are brought under the influence of the Spirit.

Rem. These features would mark the child.

J.T. Yes; it is the spiritual state in the saints that is to be nourished. Paul deplored that he could not minister to the Corinthians as spiritual, but he did to the Ephesians; it is the spiritual side that is introduced at Ephesus.

Ques. How could anyone become spiritual?

J.T. I think you begin by recognising the Spirit, on the ground of His having come to us by the death of Christ, and you carry that out in everyday life; having the Spirit, you put to death the deeds of the body, and so you live. That is the negative side; He also acts on our minds and hearts, forming after Christ in intelligence, affection, etc.

Ques. Does transparency come in there?

J.T. Quite so. The virtue that has come out of Christ becomes power in the soul, and by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body and live. This lays the basis for the ministry in Colossians and Ephesians.

Ques. Does not receiving the Spirit from Christ put us immediately on the line of the Spirit's energy?

J.T. Yes; and it could be only through His death.

H.D'A.C. There must be no carnality; so the apostle in opening up the truth of the Spirit says, "If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit", (Galatians 5:25). If we walk in the Spirit we shall not fulfil the lusts of the flesh. So the great thing is, if anything happens to cause the conscience to act, you judge it, it is the flesh, but then you get back immediately to the Spirit; you cannot be right except in the Spirit.

J.T. "For we, by the Spirit, on the principle of faith, await the hope of righteousness" (verse 5). Everything in a practical sense is by the Spirit.

G.S.G. The apostle says in 1 Corinthians 2:4 that his speech was "not with enticing words of man's wisdom", but he brought before them Christ, and Him crucified, so that they might have experience of the demonstration of the Spirit. Would not our being occupied with Christ personally produce a state that is favourable to the Spirit working in us?

J.T. Yes; but you must have clearly in your soul the judicial basis of all, and that is, that "God having sent his own Son, in likeness of flesh of sin, and for sin, has condemned sin in the flesh", (Romans 8:3).

Rem. The woman touched Him, and then the issue was staunched.

J.T. Yes. Then as to Jairus' daughter, the Lord clears the ground of all that is unspiritual. People were there playing the flute, and making a tumult and weeping, all to stultify the sense of death. There must be the clearance of all fleshly elements; we are entitled to put them all out, for God has put them out judicially in the death of Christ, He has shown His abhorrence of them there

and we are entitled to condemn them. But you retain the spiritual elements -- Peter and John and James, and the father and the mother of the child. The father and mother refer to responsibility -- what I am responsibly. Then the Lord addresses the child: "he, having turned them all out, and taking hold of her hand, cried saying, Child, arise". Now you have her formally named by the Lord; she is brought into life with that designation. The woman is called, 'daughter'; she is called 'child', that is to say, it is a spiritual element that is under designation -- youthfulness. He is identified with her (He takes her hand), and He cries -- it is very urgent.

Ques. Would that verse, "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free from the law of sin and of death" (Romans 8:2), apply here?

J.T. Yes. So it is not that she was raised up, but "her spirit returned", and then she rose up. The son of the woman of Zarephath (1 Kings 17) had a severe illness, that is to say, it produced feelings and patience; it was a severe illness, so that his life gradually ebbed out of him -- the prophet correspondingly went through a severe exercise, and through this the boy's soul came back again. So here, the Lord asserted that she had not died but fallen asleep. It is resuscitation rather than resurrection.

Ques. Is that viewing it in its setting, because of what had occurred in regard to the woman? She was free through the Lord's death; but He could say of this child, "she is not dead, but sleepeth".

J.T. That is right, it is another side of the truth being developed -- that you are brought to life in a spiritual sense, as it says in Romans 8:10, "the Spirit is life", and "the mind of the Spirit life and peace", (8:6). It is not here a question of resurrection exactly, but of the spirit coming again. It is more Romans 8 than Colossians. So it says, "her spirit returned, and

immediately she rose up"; there was power in herself, she rose up; and then it says, "he commanded something to eat to be given to her"; that life is to be sustained.

Rem. In the one case the woman touches the Lord Jesus, and in the other the Lord Jesus takes the child by the hand.

J.T. Yes, that is right; showing, in the latter case, that He links on with you now.

H.D'A.C. Not only did He say, "Child, arise", but He called; there was a voice, the voice that wakes the dead. We have all heard His voice. It was a distinct voice, which reached the dead.

F.S. Why were they to tell no one what had happened?

J.T. This is not for publication. "Our life is hid with Christ in God"; it is what is private in family relations. There is that which is hidden. It leads on to "the mystery ... in which are hid all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge", (Colossians 2:3).

Rem. The injunction not to tell was only for the time being, for the time came when Luke wrote about it.

J.T. It represents a principle. What is spiritual is not to be brought down to the range of the natural mind of man. By it the Lord was derided.

"THE LORD'S COMMANDMENT"

Matthew 28:1 - 10, 20 (first clause); 1 Timothy 6:13 - 16

I have in mind, in reading these scriptures, to dwell upon the idea of commandment. As you will observe, in the last scripture read, the injunction is in regard to "the commandment". The commandment has peculiar application now, especially as the keeping of it evidences love for Christ. However much we may speak of our love for Christ, we can only show it by keeping His commandments. A non-lover of Christ, I need not say, is unthinkable in the assembly, viewed in its proper relations and material. The apostle says, "If any one love not our Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha", (1 Corinthians 16:22). He makes much of this feature in writing to the Corinthians, that is, of love to Christ; he says that a spiritual man or a prophet would prove himself by recognising the things that he wrote as the Lord's commandment (chapter 14:37) that is to say, he emphasises the idea of divine commandment coming by am accredited representative. The apostle asserts that he was accredited, no one can represent God save as accredited in some way, so he says, "The signs indeed of the apostle were wrought among you in all endurance, signs, and wonders, and works of power", (2 Corinthians 12:12).

In this first scripture the angel says to the women, "I have told you". There is a good deal of latitudinarianism abroad among the people of God; that is to say, your view is as good as mine, and mine is as good as yours; this principle sets aside the idea of accredited representation. God has never left Himself without this, so that we may be sure (and we shall be sure, if spiritual) as to the Lord's commandment. The angel, here in Matthew, represents accredited

divine representation. He says, The Lord is not here. We need divinely accredited representation if the Lord be not here. Thus the angel speaks as such; he says, "Behold, I have told you". As we look at the description given we cannot doubt his authority.

This scripture, as we should expect, is in full accord with this gospel, for it is the gospel that presents to us the Son of David. You will all remember the opening verse, "Book of the generation of Jesus Christ, son of David". It is therefore the gospel in which you may look for divine authority. How much this element is needed among the saints of God! And so, as the genealogy is pursued by the Spirit, as David is reached, it is the king -- "Jesse begat David the king". He was pre-eminently the king, and "the word of a king is power", (Ecclesiastes 8:4). It is also said, "A king sitting on the throne of judgment scattereth away all evil with his eyes", (Proverbs 20:8). So that we may look in this gospel for authority, but authority first of all in One who, as Son of David, has moral power as well as power by divine right; these two things must go together. There is the doctrine of the divine right of kings, but then that right can only be taken up by one who is morally fitted for it, and that One is the Son of David.

Moral power is of immense importance. Solomon, who typifies Christ, is presented to us in the divine narrative as a man of great wisdom and intelligence, and withal of compassion; a man who could bring to light, in his wisdom, the mother of the child (1 Kings 3). And yet he was then but a young man; this may remind young brothers and sisters that moral power is not to be regarded as the peculiar possession of older ones. It is within the reach of the youngest, for David says of Solomon that, as coming to the throne, he was "young and tender" (1 Chronicles 29:1), but nevertheless he had such wisdom as to bring to light which of the two claimants was

the mother of the child. Such discernment, in a spiritual sense, is an important element in the house of God. It is required if we are to discern the maternal instincts that are proper to the assembly.

But then his knowledge was universal; we are told that he "spoke of the trees, from the cedar-tree that is on Lebanon even to the hyssop that springs out of the wall; he spoke also of cattle, and of fowls, and of creeping things, and of fishes", (1 Kings 4:33). Besides that, he was well versed in moral things. The book of Ecclesiastes shows the depth of his penetration into moral things, good and bad. There is nothing left behind by him in that field, in human conditions "under the sun" he has left nothing to be told. "What can the man do", he says, "that cometh after the king?" (Ecclesiastes 2:12).

And then as to marital affairs, we see in Solomon a man capable of a most remarkable composition, showing that there was there an understanding of holy love. His song, which is called, "The song of songs, which is Solomon's", treats of holy love; no one can read it aright or profitably, save as he reads it from that point of view. He had also great discernment as to family affairs. The book of Proverbs is from the son of David. Every young man and young woman should read that book from the standpoint that the writer knew parental love. Proverbs speaks of parental affection and the due response in children; you have in it the wisdom of the son of David, as entering into all family relationships -- and how entangled they are! The family idea is becoming lost in this world. In the East, indeed, it hardly ever had a footing; in the Western world it had a certain place, and hence, as I apprehend, this section of the world was selected in the wisdom of God for the development of the assembly. East of Palestine the gospel and the mystery made little or no headway. In regard to marriage, the Lord goes back to the

beginning; (Matthew 19:8). Genesis is quoted in Ephesians 5:31 in the same connection. The saints need to be reminded of that wisdom that preserves intact family relationships. We cannot be in the assembly according to God, save as our houses are ordered according to Him. But I speak particularly of the spiritual family, and Proverbs is intended to maintain us in that relation. It is intended to maintain the links between us and the Father and the Son, and with each other as brethren.

Thus, dear brethren, you can see from these three books, and what I have cited from 1 Kings, how morally qualified the son of David was to rule. And hence the setting of Matthew's gospel, and especially this chapter. It is to enforce the idea of rule and of commandment coming to us through accredited representatives; so that we may have no question in our minds as to its being of God. "Let him recognise", says the apostle, "the things that I write to you, that it is the Lord's commandment", (1 Corinthians 14:37). And when we come to commandment thus given we are on the surest footing. Acting on it we are perfectly certain of our position. As one said, 'Here I stand, I can do no other'. It is a fine moment in the history of a young christian when he reaches the sure footing of "the Lord's commandment". It sets aside man's will, what he would have -- it is the Lord's commandment.

Now these women, Mary Magdalene and the other, came to see the sepulchre. They needed adjustment. There was not so much in coming to see the sepulchre, and yet others had not come. There was no rush that morning, and yet it was the most glorious of mornings. Never a morning like it in the history of time! There was no stir, but these two women came. How devoted and privileged they were! "Mary Magdalene and the other Mary". They came to see the sepulchre, we are told, and then we have the description

of the accredited representative -- the angel. Is there anyone here unbelieving enough to assume that God has left Himself without an accredited witness in this world? He has not. There is such a thing in this world as accredited witness, and that is the point here. "An angel of the Lord", we are told, had descended from heaven. He descended from heaven. You see, Matthew always sets heaven over against Jerusalem. For him heaven had superseded Jerusalem, and heaven was asserting itself in the most positive and unmistakable manner; as later, on the day of Pentecost, there was heard "a sound from heaven" (Acts 2:2) as of a rushing mighty wind. There also heaven was asserting itself. And so here, an angel had descended from heaven, and there had been a great earthquake; the angel had rolled away the stone and sat upon it, and his countenance was like lightning and the keepers were like dead men for fear. Can there be any question as to this angel being accredited?

And so he says to the women, "Fear not ye". There is nothing to fear from an accredited witness from heaven, if we love the Lord. The Corinthians were losing sight of Paul; they were discrediting him indeed. A sorrowful situation, but he says, "examine your own selves if ye be in the faith", (2 Corinthians 13:5). They were an evidence of his apostleship. We very readily slip into discrediting what God accredits. It is a most serious matter to be at issue with God in this way. That is what the Corinthians were doing, and yet they were christians. But the angel says to the women, "Fear not ye" -- they loved the Lord. The lovers of Christ have no fear in regard to divine representation, even in the sense in which it appears in a king, or a president, or a policeman; but I am now dwelling on one qualified to represent God directly -- an angel come down from heaven -- the lovers of Christ have nothing to fear from him. We

have nothing to fear from anything that God establishes or supports -- it is all for us. As regards angels, "Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?" (Hebrews 1:14). The angel says, "Fear not ye, for I know that ye seek Jesus the crucified one".

And then he says, "He is not here". And I say to you tonight, in the same sense, The Lord is not here. The position is that the Lord is not here, He is in heaven; He is risen and gone into heaven. He is here in the sense of representation, and woe be to him who sets that aside, that is, the principle that the Lord is here in a representative way. The point is, "He is not here"; but the angel was there, and he was there armed with divine credentials. Who could deny it? If you had asked those keepers, could they deny it? They could only do so by lying, which they did. There are those who lie to set aside this great principle of the resurrection, and accredited representation. The angel further says, "Come, see the place where the Lord lay" -- they are invited to do that. It was "the Lord", not 'Jesus' there. Then he says, "go quickly and say to his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and behold, he goes before you into Galilee, there shall ye see him"; it is a question of commandment, he says, "I have told you". Can anyone here say that such a word has not come to him? "Behold, I have told you", he says.

Now I want you to see the effect of this. They were "not disobedient to the heavenly vision", as Paul says of himself later; (Acts 26:19). They ran, it says, to tell His disciples with "fear and great joy". Not that there was really occasion for fear, he told them there was not; but in view of what we are it is a very wholesome combination. Where were they going? They were running to the disciples to tell them. Happy is he today who is in such an employ! There are many who are fitted for it, thank

God, under commandment! The idea of being a free-lance is foreign to Scripture. There are many such. "I go a-fishing", says Peter (John 21:3); he is doing what he wishes to do. Poor man! How many there are like him! The apostle Paul, on the contrary, says, "What shall I do, Lord?" (Acts 22:10.) It is a great thing to be consciously under command, and no christian is right till he learns that. Thus we are available to God in His service.

In the case of the woman of Zarephath, God says to the prophet, "I have commanded a widow woman there to sustain thee", (1 Kings 17:9). The whole creation is under that principle; man has veered from it, carrying all under with him; but the whole physical system obeys divine commandment. What about us? I appeal to young people here, Have you the sense of being under command? You may say, You want to make us legal. Not at all! for "his commandments are not grievous", (1 John 5:3). I have often thought of regulations that are in wisdom imposed upon us, even in a meeting like this; but there should never be rules formulated or imposed upon the people of God that do not bear the character of the perfect law of liberty; (James 1:25). That belongs to the people of God, it is their heritage, the royal law (chapter 2:8), the inheritance of the congregation of Jacob; (Deuteronomy 33). And so the commandment is not grievous; every lover of Christ finds pleasure in the commandment, and what you find is that there is always an advantage in it, as we see in what follows.

The women ran to tell His disciples, and the Lord met them. Is that not worthwhile? It is not now an accredited representative -- it is Himself. As they ran to bring His disciples word, Jesus met them, and, as it were, saluted them, saying "Hail!" What an honour! Is that far away from us? Not at all. John tells us that the lover of Christ who keeps His

commandment should be loved of His Father and of Him, and that He would manifest Himself to him. You see, it is the keeping of the commandment. I would urge on young christians the importance, as loving Christ, of being under command and doing it -- keeping it. You will find a manifestation of Christ in it. "Jesus met them, saying, Hail!" How delighted He was as He saw those quickened steps hastening in the fulfilment of a command; a commandment not directly from Himself, but from an angel, an accredited representative. He says, "Hail!" now they are in direct touch with Him. You see how the commandment brings you into touch with Christ. Those who disregard the commandment do not come in touch with Christ, nor do they show their love for Christ; He manifests Himself to those who keep the commandment. And now they hold Him by the feet, and they worship Him.

But the commandment is not everything. The Lord says to them, "go, bring word to my brethren"; there is also the word; they are linked together in John 14. The 'word' is an additional thought; it is adjusting -- the mind of the Lord. One said to Him, "how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?" He said, "If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him" (verses 22,23). That is a further thought. These dear women needed that, no doubt. This was no time to hold Him by the feet, for He was in movement, He had others to see, doubtless, that day. But they worshipped Him, they had the manifestation, and would be prepared for the word. Now, they bring the disciples word; but the Lord does not here call them disciples, He calls them "my brethren". The angel sent them to the disciples; the Lord sent them to the brethren. You see how beautiful that is, to be sent to the brethren by the Lord. 'Brethren'

is a family term. He says, "go, bring word to my brethren", and they go and tell the brethren that they should see Him in Galilee.

Over against their action we see -- and it is a very solemn thing -- that the enemy acts. In their keeping the commandment of the Lord, there is a lying movement to discredit it at the same time. As they went to tell the brethren there was a movement on the part of the enemy to deny the resurrection of Christ. I do not dwell on that, but it shows what we have to contend with in keeping the commandments of Christ. And the word to the apostles is, "teaching them to observe ... whatsoever I have commanded you". They were to see Him in Galilee, and He met them there. The Lord came to them in the mountain, and said, "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations".

What a word to those who are in the position of teaching! Can we make disciples? You see what a test that is to all of us who are seeking to serve the Lord. How can I make a disciple until I am a disciple myself, having learnt from the Master? A disciple has learnt from the Master. It is a question of moral power in those who are sent. True disciples can be made in no other way. "Baptising them", He says, "to the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit"; this introduces those baptised into the full light of God revealed in Christ. And then, "teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you".

Of course this is apostolic, but it bears on us in principle. I am speaking particularly of what the Lord commanded. Let us not let slip one iota of this. There can be no compromise whatever on this line, no meeting in the plain of Ono, as of old; (Nehemiah 6:2). How much compromise there has been in the so-called evangelisation of the world! Kings have been baptised and remained kings and sinners,

and other lawless men accepted as well! That is not discipleship, that is not "teaching them to observe ... whatsoever I have commanded you". Nothing must be let slip of what is commanded or Satan will have an advantage. Then He says, as if to assure them that all that He said could be done, "lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world".

There is just another word, and that is in Timothy, and it is a very solemn one. It is one of the most solemn charges, if not the most solemn charge, that you can find. He is enjoined before God, and before Christ Jesus, to keep the commandment "without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ". It is urgent at the present time. We cannot say we have not got the commandment; we have, and it is to be kept. We are enjoined in the presence of God and in the presence of Christ Jesus, to keep it without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ. The commandment takes the place of Himself. "He is not here", says the angel, but there was one there accredited to convey His mind -- His will, and the women carried it out. They stand before us as models of obedience, and of the gain of it, for the Lord met them.

And so it is until the Lord comes, until His appearing, that the commandment is to be kept without spot. Then we shall have the display of personal authority, for that is what it is; authority is not vested in a council, it is vested in a Person -- that is the divine thought. The divine thought is the endowment of one Person with divine authority, so that when He appears He shall show in His time who is "the blessed and only Potentate" -- the blessed One, and the only One, who is "King of kings, and Lord of lords"; that is to say, all divine authority is vested in Christ, "who only has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light; whom no

man has seen, nor is able to see". What a prospect, as we suffer under the irregularities of the government of this world! It is not that one says a word against them (we recognise rulers as of God), but we see the irregularities and the powerlessness of legislation.

What a prospect to see it in its infinite perfection in one Person, the King of kings, and Lord of lords! What an incentive there is in all this to love His appearing and look for it! Every one who loves His appearing, we are told, will have a crown of righteousness; (2 Timothy 4:8). Why have I a crown? Because I am righteous now, I love righteousness if I love His appearing. As the hymn puts it:

'We look for Thine appearing, Thy presence here to bless; We greet the day that's nearing, When all this woe shall cease'. (Hymn 200)

That is what we look for; but what is our employ in the meantime? Keeping His commandment. Be assured of it, the commandment takes the place of Christ in this sense; it is here in His stead. The Holy Spirit enables us to carry it out. It stands for Christ. The angel said, "He is not here", but instead there is accredited witness in the power of the Spirit; so that the lover of Christ has no question as to the commandment, that it is the commandment of the Lord.

Accredited representation of Christ here lies in the Holy Spirit, but He uses believers in this service. The 'seal' (2 Timothy 2) implies this representation in a moral way. It has on the one side, as it were, "The Lord knows those that are his", and on the other, "Let every one who names the name of the Lord withdraw from iniquity". Where these things are maintained, there is divine representation in a moral way. The Holy Spirit supports it and makes it effective, without pretension to be official. May we all have part in it!

NEARNESS TO CHRIST AND PUBLIC SERVICE (4)

Luke 9:1 - 36

J.T. This chapter is especially for those who serve. The Lord had wrought from chapter 4 to chapter 7 alone, as it were. The apostles were not much in evidence. In chapter 8 they are with Him, and crossing in the boat with Him, but now they are sent out to serve by themselves; He sends them out. I think that we may be helped as we view this chapter from the standpoint of those who serve. What is to be noted is that the Lord calls the twelve together, a word that has its place, I think, among those who serve, that they should be together through the Lord's call. There is a general unity, which, of course, involves the assembly; but then there is a unity that should especially mark those who serve, I think. Do you not think so?

H.D'A.C. Yes, indeed.

Ques. A unity that marks those who serve, did you say?

J.T. Well, a unity that belongs to those who serve.

H.D'A.C. Later on, when they went out in their service at Pentecost, there was no divergence, there was no difference of thought.

J.T. In the main the apostles were held together; the Lord, indeed, had prayed for that, that they should be one; (John 17). There should be that sort of thing in relation to the testimony. We see how it was worked out in connection with Paul and those labouring with him; how the unity was maintained with Jerusalem. So that, not only are the saints as a whole bound up in unity, the unity of the Spirit, but those who serve are specially to be united in the

service, that there should not be any independency. The unity of the Spirit enters into the whole position. The unity of the faith enters into it, too, but it lies largely with those who serve; that the service bears in one direction, that is the unity of the faith: "until we all arrive at the unity of the faith", (Ephesians 4:13).

Ques. Do you say that this is more connected with the unity of the faith?

J.T. Well, I thought so; the gifts in Ephesians 4 are to that end, "until we all arrive at the unity of the faith". That is to say, that there should be no divergence in the teaching.

Ques. Would you open that out a little more?

J.T. Well, it is just that one sees in this chapter that the Lord has the twelve in His mind, and in sending them out He calls them together; the teaching, the ministry, should not be on independent lines; it is really based as much on unity as the church is. Indeed, if the ministry be not that, there will be cleavage and partisan feeling among the saints.

Rem. So that there is no divergence, they are all on the same lines.

J.T. That is right. You see how it worked out at Corinth; one said, "I am of Paul", and another, "I of Apollos". There was no divergence between these ministers; Paul and Apollos were on the same line, but the apostle is not really referring to himself and Apollos, but to local persons -- persons at Corinth; there were different schools there. He had transferred the thing to himself and Apollos for their sakes.

Ques. And even there, would you say, the planter and the waterer are one -- is this the unity to which you referred?

J.T. Yes, that is right; it emphasises what I was remarking, Paul plants and Apollos waters, but God gives the increase; (1 Corinthians 3:7,8).

Rem. It would be wrong for us to think, like Martha, that we are left to serve alone.

J.T. We are not left to serve alone -- there are many serving, and the Lord would call them together.

Rem. Psalm 133 would indicate the unity of the Spirit -- the brethren dwelling together in unity; and then, in the next psalm we have, "all ye servants of Jehovah"; there is unity connected with the thought of service, dependent on Christ having His right place as in Psalm 132.

J.T. Just so. And then you will find that in Psalm 135 the house of Levi is called in -- there is the principle of service. In Psalm 134 it says, "Behold, bless Jehovah, all ye servants of Jehovah"; and then in the next psalm, "house of Aaron, bless ye Jehovah; house of Levi, bless ye Jehovah". The varied branches of the service are called upon to the same employ, showing that all are called into the unity expressed in praise.

Ques. Is it illustrated in the history of so-called 'brethren' -- Satan divided them? He knew what power there would be if they remained united.

J.T. Yes. You see in the public history of the church how it was broken up into the Eastern and Western branches, besides minor sections in Asia and Africa; and then in our own times into numberless branches.

Ques. Is the thought in "One is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren" (Matthew 23:8) and "See that ye fall not out by the way"?

J.T. Quite so; and the Lord's service in the last supper has that in view, that we should serve one another in love -- the servants particularly are in view. It is not for nothing that the Spirit tells us here that the Lord calls them together. They had been with Him, and in the boat with Him, now He calls them together; they are sent out together, as immediately under His call and influence.

Ques. Would the table of shewbread illustrate it at all -- the twelve loaves on the table?

J.T. I think so. As we were remarking yesterday, 'the twelve' suggests material for the Lord's use, that He can manipulate to the best advantage. In order to be thus available to Christ, love must underlie our relations with one another; we must have no personal motives or ambitions, but be just at the Lord's bidding.

Ques. I suppose Psalm 133 would bring that out beautifully?

J.T. Yes; brethren dwelling together.

Rem. If one may refer to what we had elsewhere with regard to Aaron going to find Moses -- both sides are necessary. That is, the levite is connected with the sanctuary and all the service of God. And then, there is Moses, a man who has been under discipline in the wilderness; these two working together are able to gather the saints together, and convey the mind of God to them; as at Antioch, Saul and Barnabas go together. The christian takes character from the ministry he receives.

Ques. Did the twelve go out together, and return together?

J.T. We know that elsewhere it says that He sent them out "by two and two". They might go anywhere, as the Lord directed, but they would be in accord with one another.

Ques. A spiritual combination in relation to divine things -- was that the Lord's thought?

J.T. Yes. There is a needs-be for being called together. In the beginning of Numbers the heads of the tribes were such as were summoned on all occasions. Moses would always summon them when necessary, and they were supposed to be available, so that their names are given. The princes of the congregation are called in due course, for the altar is to be dedicated; their offerings indicate perfect

unity, they are perfectly united in their minds and affections; each one offered as the others. And then, all the offerings combined are there -- a standing witness to the unity of the leaders. It was a real unity; (Numbers 7).

Ques. Does that verse in Philippians 2:4 apply, "Look not every man on his own things, but every-man also on the things of others"?

J.T. Yes; "If there be therefore any consolation in Christ ... if any fellowship of the Spirit", (verse 1), then they are to think the same thing -- "thinking one thing". The Lord is graciously providing ministers to serve the saints -- we ought to be most thankful for it; for the variety of ministry and energy that there is -- but it is important that it should be borne in mind that the ministry is under the Lord; He called them together, and then gave them power and authority -- it was all at one time. And the furnishings imply "authority over all demons"; whatever variety of demons there might be, they had authority over them; "and to heal diseases", another thing that is important; and "to proclaim the kingdom of God and to heal the sick". We see, therefore, that the Lord intends those who minister to be marked by power and authority. Of course, this is apostolic, but notwithstanding these days of brokenness, the principle holds good that the ministry should be marked by "power and authority". And there is power and authority over all demons; whatever form evil may take, the ministers do not run away from it. You may say, It is not my affair; but then you do not run away from it. Wherever evil lifts up its head, there ought to be ability to deal with it.

Ques. Why do demons come first?

J.T. I think you can see that Satan has his emissaries, and the servants have to contend with them; they are sure to have to contend with them. Demons are emissaries of Satan. As the Lord has His representatives,

so Satan has his. You see in the earlier chapters how seven of them had gone out of Mary Magdalene, and the legion out of the man. We see how things happened, and it is very solemn in the case of the latter that the Lord acceded to the wish of the demons to go into the swine. That is to say, we have to reckon on divine allowances of evil. It is not that He sent them, He allowed them. It is humbling, for there is some cause for it underneath.

Then, the next thing is whether the power given is effective, whether there is the ability to deal with evil in every form of it -- all demons. It says "all demons" here, not simply 'demons'; there is no form of evil that may arise that cannot be met, as the ministers are subject to Christ.

Ques. Is not that one of the features of the kingdom?

J.T. Just so, only that here it is a question not of that, but of the ministers -- their power. What can you do with all demons when you see them working? And then diseases? We have to distinguish between these and 'the sick'. A disease is a thing that may be prevalent.

Ques. An exercise, for instance, that spreads out for a long time?

J.T. Yes; involving many -- all affected by the same thing. Whereas 'the sick' may have diverse ailments.

Rem. The sick are marked as being without strength.

J.T. Yes; whatever disease they suffer from, they are sick; whereas disease is something that affects many, the same thing.

Ques. It was physical then, was it not?

J.T. Oh, yes! Now it is spiritual diseases.

Ques. There are those who claim that they have power to heal; why is it that you view it spiritually,

in that way; is it because the dispensation is in faith?

J.T. Because it is a time of soul salvation -- not body salvation. Body salvation implies the resurrection. If what they hold is true, we could not die. The time of body salvation is future -- not that the Lord does not help our bodies, I am sure He does, for they are the temple of the Spirit. But then, to make the body the prominent thing instead of the soul is quite wrong. It is the salvation of our souls -- the spiritual side -- now.

Ques. Is the dealing with the demons actual now -- there is authority over them?

J.T. Yes, because they affect us spiritually.

Rem. Saints are often given back through our prayers when things are hopeless.

Ques. "If I with the finger of God cast out devils" (Luke 11:20) -- is that the line?

J.T. Yes; things are done by the Spirit. I am saved in my soul, it is a time of soul salvation; God is dealing with our souls. He cares for the body, of course.

Ques. The Lord gives them authority, why is that?

J.T. That is the point -- authority, as it says, to heal diseases, and to heal the sick. It is much more important that any spiritual disease that may prevail should be dealt with. It is not, as I said, that God does not help the saints physically, He provides food for our bodies, and all that.

Rem. What is needed in these cases is correct diagnosis.

J.T. I think so. The ministers should not assume that the sick should be left to the local people; it comes within the range of all serving. But great wisdom has to be used by anyone who would help in a locality not his own. On the other hand, to refuse help because the person is not of the locality is pure independency.

Ques. Do you suggest that ministers should have power to meet disease in a locality?

J.T. Yes; not interfering, but they certainly should not turn their backs on the trouble. They ought to have ability to meet it. They have wide experience -- they ought to have wide experience. Gift is general, not local. They have great experience, and any local disease, surely, should be a matter for them to think over, whether they can help it. It is remarkable how these things do spread in localities and in districts -- certain spiritual diseases. And, besides that, there are individuals who are 'sick', this may be from other causes.

Ques. Is power and authority given to the company, although it comes out in individuals in connection with unity?

J.T. Here it is the ministers who are in view; we shall see elsewhere how authority is given to the church, but I think here it is simply the ministers. Of course, it is apostolic, we have to bear that in mind.

Rem. The apostle says to the Corinthians, "many are weak and sickly among you", (1 Corinthians 11:30). He had their spiritual interests at heart.

J.T. He had diagnosed the case -- it was that they were behaving badly in regard to the Lord's supper.

Ques. Is it the thought of the Lord that there should be a healing ministry amongst us today? Would healing be characteristic of the ministry today?

J.T. Quite so; "let it rather be healed", (Hebrews 12:13). But you want to get at the root of the thing. The apostle got at the root of the thing at Corinth, they were behaving badly in regard to the Lord's supper, and other things, and sickness followed.