Pages 1-219 -- "Christ Assembling with His Own", U.S.A. and Canada, 1940-41 (Volume 154).

CHRIST ASSEMBLING WITH HIS OWN (1)

Acts 1:21,22; Matthew 3:13-17; Matthew 5:1-12

J.T. It is said in Acts 1, in view of the appointment of an apostle, that he should be from those who assembled with the disciples during all the time in which the Lord Jesus came in and went out among them, beginning from the baptism of John until Jesus was received up. It is thought that the Lord would help us to consider in Matthew's gospel, what feature of the truth entered into certain occasions in which He came in among the disciples and went out as indicated there.

Our consideration of this subject should familiarise us with divine activities as seen in Christ in assembly service; whether it be the assembly meeting for the Lord's supper, and all that enters into that, or the meeting for prayer, meetings such as this for scriptural inquiry, or for prophetic ministry, or even for gospel testimony. We shall, in this way, become familiarised with the thought of the Lord's movements, not as on earth, but by the Spirit now; nevertheless, His movements. How varied the truth is; how each occasion of His coming in implies something distinctive, for in coming in He has confidence in us. It may be, however, to rebuke or to reprove us, as we shall see in these meetings of the disciples. In going out, He would leave us with the understanding that we are to carry on during the period of His absence. The fact that an apostle was required to have that experience shows how important it is.

Christianity is not a dead religion, but is marked by activity and intelligence; firstly divine activity, and then our activity, levitical and priestly, and especially in authoritative service. Unless service in some measure takes on authority, it has no effect. We have no formal

authority, but there is to be moral weight, and apostleship implies that. The period selected by the Spirit here begins with the baptism of John; not from John's birth, nor from the Incarnation, but the period when Christ's public ministry began until it finished; as it is said in the verses in Acts, "until the day in which he was taken up"; right up to that day His service went on.

We may see in the baptism of John, the beginning of a period. There was the announcement from heaven of sonship; and, as in Christ, how pleasing it was to heaven. He had come under God's eye for the previous thirty years, and the accumulated delight of heaven was expressed there. Then, as He is about to go up, He presents Himself to the disciples living. It is clear on the one hand that heaven is engaged with Christ in the testimony; and, as it saw Him here at thirty years. We too are to be engaged with Him as He would have us see Him. He was seen of the disciples as He presented Himself; meaning that He took up a particular attitude in which He would have them view Him.

H.H. Would 1 Timothy 3:16 fit in with that a little? "God has been manifested in flesh, has been justified in the Spirit, has appeared to angels, has been preached among the nations, has been believed on in the world, has been received up in glory". Would that cover the period from the baptism of John until the time of His going up?

J.T. I think it would. It is the mystery of piety connected with the assembly which is the pillar and base of the truth. Timothy was to know how one ought to behave oneself in it.

C. Would you say there was great power in the authority of the word that came from heaven, saying, "This is my beloved Son"?

J.T. That is what I thought we might get clear about to begin with; how the Person of Christ comes before us; then His movements as coming in and going out. It says, "All the time in which the Lord

Jesus came in and went out among us". We have first heaven's testimony; then Christ's movements in the period mentioned; and finally His presentation of Himself to them living before He went up.

C. There were those at that moment who could appreciate the voice from heaven.

J.T. Well, one would hope that there are those now, ready to listen to what heaven has to say about Christ, as also to appreciate His own presentation of Himself to us, as in the Lord's supper.

E.P. Peter says, "It is necessary therefore, that one of these should be a witness".

J.T. The word ' necessary ' there is important. It was not a mere idea that came into their minds. The horrible death of Judas is spoken of, and we know how far away he was in his ways from the ways of Christ. We are to be warned by his ways. It is said he "became guide to those who took Jesus; for he was numbered amongst us, and had received a part in this service". Then we are told of the kind of death he met with, and the Psalms are brought in to testify. "Let his homestead become desolate, and let there be no dweller in it; and, Let another take his overseership" (verse 20). There is a vacancy, and the Spirit of God stresses why there is a vacancy. Persons dropping out of the testimony leave places to be filled, and hence the necessity of this matter. "It is necessary therefore, that of the men who have assembled with us all the time in which the Lord Jesus came in and went out among us, ... one of these should be a witness with us of his resurrection." That there should be no more such vacancies, each of us should stand true in his place.

H.H. The Holy Spirit would have regard for what is here now. It is not a lower level in principle than what came out in Christ.

J.T. That is what I was thinking. Matthew 4:16 connects the light with Christ here below; it sprang tip; it is not spoken of as shining down from

heaven. Christ was the centre of everything whether in heaven or on earth; and so it is a question now of what He was. "In him was life, and the life was the light of men" (John 1:4). The light of life was in Capernaum where He dwelt, and that runs through. His coming in and going out would all bear on that, the kind of life that was there; that life of movement and of light.

J.W.D. Do you mean that the testimony of christianity, as the result of life in the saints, corresponds with the testimony in Christ personally?

J.T. That is it exactly. What is happening now in the world is to bring out what is in the saints. God knows what is in us. We have had a good deal of light in an objective way; for one hundred years it has been shining. I believe the present pressure is to bring out the life. The life was the light. It is not simply what we hold in the way of doctrine, but what we are, and that is seen in the way in which we come in and go out amongst the saints; each one. The subject of eternal life had a great place some years back, and I believe it was for this very purpose; that there should be substance; not only doctrine, but substance. "In him was life", John says; that is the idea of substance, and that becomes light. It was light in Christ, and it is to be light in us. So John speaks of that which "is true in him and in you". "I write no new commandment to you, but an old commandment, which ye have had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye heard. Again, I write a new commandment to you, which thing is true in him and in you" (1 John 2:7,8). The old commandment would be that which is in Christ -- substance; the new commandment is in the saints. Hence it is a question with us of what each one is.

S.P. Would you link the word in 1 Samuel 18:13 with this? It is said of David that "he went out and came in before the people". The people had ascribed

a great place and power to David in saying, "Saul hath smitten his thousands, and David his ten thousands". Then in verse 13, we read, "And Saul removed him from him, and made him his captain over a thousand; and he went out and came in before the people". Would you connect that with love in the saints?

J.T. Quite so. David "went out and came in" before them. Christ "came in and went out". It is also said of David that "thou wast he that leddest out and broughtest in Israel" (2 Samuel 5:2). He went out and came in. Many have gone out and never come back. Saul did not come back, he was head and shoulders above all; a commendable young man when anointed, but he took his own way and never, as it were, came back. As following my own will, I do not come back. David took the people out and brought them back; he completed the matter. Samuel too; his circuit (1 Samuel 7:16) means that he always came back to the point at which he began.

H.H. We need the subjective side in our souls in order to rightly take account of the objective.

J.T. Well, the truth is never verified in us until it can be said, "which thing is true in him and in you". The truth is never truly held in a mere intellectual sense -- it is to be true in us. John's epistle is to bring out this very point; hence he begins with the tangibleness of what came in in Christ -- it was substantial. Christianity is no mere theoretical religion, such as the Eastern religions, or even judaism. It is Christ, and expressed here below; "which thing is true in him and in you".

J.R.H. What Peter says, in Acts 1, "It is necessary therefore, that of the men who have assembled with us all the time in which the Lord Jesus came in and went out among us", would give greater importance to our meetings if we look at them in this light.

J.T. That is good. The footnote to verse 21 reads, "or ' at every time that '." Each time would have its

own distinctiveness and we shall see, from the facts that will come before us in Matthew, that it was so. There was always something distinctive when the Lord was among the disciples.

A.E.H. To refer back to 1 Timothy 3, would you say that the secret of the mystery of piety is spirituality?

J.T. Yes. It is real. The mystery of piety involves what is substantial. God was manifest in the flesh. It is not a mere theory. John says, "Which we have seen with our eyes; that which we contemplated, and our hands handled, concerning the word of life" (1 John 1:1). It was all real. Their hands handled Him. He was not an austere religious leader, holding his followers at a distance. He allowed them to be familiar with Him, one of them lying on His bosom, showing the liberty that the Lord afforded to His own as coming in and going out amongst them. Peter might enquire from Matthias, Were you at such and such a meeting? Peter could say I was in each of the meetings. "The lot fell on Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles" (Acts 1:26). That is, he was the twelfth. Peter could easily question him as to whether he was at a particular meeting. Had he been careless in attending occasions in which the Lord was, he would not qualify for apostleship. That brings out the importance of attending all the meetings now. We miss so much because we fail to attend. Take the first great thought, the baptism of John. Were you there that day? No? Well, it was one of the most wonderful of all the days. The Lord came from Galilee to John to be baptised, and the heavens opened and said of him, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight". Who would not say, I wish I had been there; I am sorry I missed it?

J.P. I was wondering if the question of having assembled all the time, would help us in the matter of formation and acquiring substance? Here it is the men who have assembled. Manhood would be developed.

J.T. Yes. The idea of man here is important. It enters into the position of the apostles peculiarly. The Lord uses it in speaking to His Father, after the discourses with them in John 13 to 17. In chapter 17:6 He says, "I have manifested thy name to the men whom thou gavest me out of the world". Not simply persons, but men. Manhood certainly underlay the apostolic position.

J.T.Jr. Did Moses have this in mind when making his request in Numbers 27:17, "Set a man over the assembly, who may go out before them, and who may come in before them, and who may lead them out, and who may bring them in, that the assembly of Jehovah be not as sheep that have no shepherd"?

J.T. Yes. It confirms what we have been saying about continuing. What is needed now is men, but of course that in principle includes sisters, as well as brothers, because the first word for man covers both. "Let us make man in our image" (Genesis 1:26); that was the order of being. But manhood in the sense of distinction is to appear in all of us. He "called their name Adam, in the day when they were created" (Genesis 5:2), implies this. The appointment of an apostle is a test to bring out this point of what is necessary in service, involving authority. It is acquaintance with the Lord Jesus as coming in and going out amongst them.

H.H. It is not what is optional -- it is necessary. Some of us have made requirements optional.

J.T. I think the way meetings are attended indicates that, that I may come, or not come, without any feeling of delinquency; but at Pentecost all the saints were there -- they were all present. The Holy Spirit coming in at that point would mean that He recognised and honoured that. The crowd of names would mean that each person was distinguished in life. The name arises from what one is, and as being living. The experience of going through that period with the Lord developed maturity; it should mark every one within; otherwise you have

complaints and questionings. There is a tendency in young people to enquire complainingly -- Why is God allowing this or that? What is needed is bowing to the will of God in the exercise of patience, and that flows from manhood.

S.P. These features would safeguard life in the fellowship, over against the man in the preceding verses, whose bowels gushed out, whose feelings were entirely out of control.

J.T. Quite so. Judas was utterly wanting in right affections and compassions.

E.P. These men had no official status, had they? "Assembled with us", Peter says. Would the Lord's coming up out of the waters of baptism suggest a similar thought; coming up in that lowly way?

J.T. That is worthy of our consideration. We have had before us what Judas was, and the sorrowful end -- the field of blood. He gave the name to the field. "Let his homestead become desolate, and let there be no dweller in it" (Acts 1:20). It is a striking condemnation of the person who had dwelt there. Now in Christ, as presented in Matthew we have righteousness. It is one of the first things. Jesus comes from Galilee to the Jordan to John to be baptised of him. Others came from distinguished places. "Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the country round the Jordan, and were baptised by him in the Jordan, confessing their sins" (Matthew 3:5,6). They came from Jerusalem, but that did not prove that they were right. Jesus, we are told, came from Galilee -- that is a place of no account religiously. What would be commendable in Him was not from any place here; it was what was in Him; what He was. "Altogether that which I say unto you." It is what He was. He came "from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptised of him; but John urgently forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptised of thee"; John was right there, I suppose, but persisted in maintaining that attitude. The Lord answered,

"Suffer it now; for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness". That is a very important point in our inquiry.

A.E.H. Since this is the first occasion that may be included in the period Peter mentioned, would you say that the first and outstanding feature of manhood is the ability to go out of sight, so there may be room for God. Is that the fulfilling of all righteousness?

J.T. Just so. The Lord does not say that He alone was fulfilling all righteousness; He would bring John to see the importance of righteousness, all righteousness is stressed. The Lord says it becometh us. Hence everyone in each meeting is in this. It would preclude all complaint as to what this one and that one is doing. What am I doing? Paul urges the Corinthians to "do what is right", whatever they thought of him (2 Corinthians 13:7). Everyone must do what is right -- "it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness". The assembly is the home of all righteousness, every phase of it.

H.H. It would be righteousness on our part to own at the outset that we are unrighteous; and so we accept baptism and disappear in that way.

J.T. That is so. The gospel proposes righteousness from God, but then there is the fulfilling of it: "the righteous requirement of the law should be fulfilled in us". It is where God formally asserted His rights. They were perfectly answered to in Christ. They are answered to now in those who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit (Romans 8:4). It is by the Spirit, not by legal effort, that the righteous requirement of the law is fulfilled in us.

H.H. Christians accept the idea that we have no righteousness of our own. We all stand in relation to Christ. Is that so?

J.T. Faith is reckoned to us as righteousness. That came out in Abraham. The Holy Spirit, however, enables us to fulfil all righteousness. The Holy Spirit maintains in believers what is in keeping with the cross;

that is practical righteousness. "If ye know that he is righteous, know that every one who practises righteousness is begotten of him" (1 John 2:29).

J.T.Jr. Peter's word in 1 Peter 3:12 helps us, "because the eyes of the Lord are on the righteous, and his ears towards their supplications".

J.T. The righteous are also pleasing to God, so that the word is, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight". It does not say all My delight here, as it is often misquoted. I think the word "all" is left out so as to make room for the righteous, those who are after Christ; they come under the divine eye as He does. What is true in Him is true in us, and it is pleasing in us even as in Christ. Room is allowed for the extension of what came out in Christ at the Jordan, making room for what was to come out by the Spirit in the saints; the body of Christ must be what is in accord with Christ.

J.S.T. Does that connect with the statement in Ephesians 4:24 that "the new man, which according to God is created in truthful righteousness and holiness"?

J.T. It links on, but there it is the new man, which is a creation. Christ is never said to be that, but it corresponds with Christ. The creation refers to us only, and that we are constituted in accord with Christ. It includes all that which is effected by the Spirit from Pentecost to the end of the dispensation. There is only one new man. In Colossians, it is freshness, but in Ephesians it is newness in the sense of being different from anything that has ever been.

J.W.D. We cannot get beyond what is in Christ. Everything in the saints is an extension of what is in Him.

J.T. The extension is made room for in what was uttered by the voice from heaven. It implied that room is left for increase. The divine ideal was met in Christ, and we are brought to that. All was perfect

at the beginning. John in his first epistle begins with this: "That which was from the beginning".

W.W. Would the extension be seen in the last chapter of Romans?

J.T. There are about twenty persons saluted, and the comments show the variety of that which is of Christ. What a wonderful thing that was in Rome; the extension of what came out in Christ, seen in the Roman capital! In this gospel when the women came to the sepulchre they were adjusted, the angel telling them to go to the disciples and say to them that the Lord was risen and that they should see Him in Galilee. They went immediately, and the Lord met them and said, "Hail". They were moving in subjection. No one will be saluted from heaven unless they are moving in the light of heaven. The Lord said, "Hail", and He uses the word ' brethren ', it implied elevation from the word ' disciples '.

This matter of righteousness should be taken hold of -- all righteousness; the assembly requires it; it is the home of it. If I question anyone in the assembly, I must see that all righteousness applies to me. It is an all-round matter.

H.B. Are the disciples being governed by righteousness in their coming to Jesus?

J.T. Yes. That is the next thing, in order that we may see the significance of the baptism of John, because that is the beginning of the period alluded to in Matthew 3:15. In answer to the Lord's word, John took a lowly place in obedience though he was a little wrong in so urgently forbidding the Lord. If the Lord says anything, submission is the first point. When His mother speaks to Him about the wine, she accepts adjustment, and says, "Whatever he may say to you, do".

Of John we read "then he suffers him. And Jesus, having been baptised, went up straightway from the water, and lo, the heavens were opened to him". The Lord is getting approval in this course of righteousness.

It is one of the most precious things, the sense of heaven's approval. They opened to Him, "and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him: and behold, a voice out of the heavens saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight". The Lord was Himself given to know heaven's interest in and approval of Him. That may be carried on to each of us as corresponding to Christ. Heaven makes known its approval of us in the fulfilment of righteousness, especially if I am doing something to put myself out of sight.

J.W.D. What form would heaven's approval take?

J.T.. Heaven would find a way. Of course everything is now by the Spirit, but sometimes He may use brethren to express His view of you. Heaven is concerned about Paul going to Jerusalem, and in every city, it is said, the Spirit witnessed to him that bonds and afflictions awaited him. The Spirit would undoubtedly witness through the brethren in each city, and we know how Agabus portrayed before Paul's own eyes what would happen to him at Jerusalem; that was according to heaven's thoughts. So the brethren may be used of God to give me to understand that I am approved there. They may lay their hands on me, or the like. Then again I would be before God in prayer, and I may get an inkling of it there. Heaven has its own way of giving us to understand its mind about us.

J.W.D. Why do you say heaven rather than God?

J.T. Well, it is a general form of expression. If we say that London or Washington says so and so, we mean the persons of authority in these places. In the gospel we read as here, "Lo, the heavens were opened to him". I only speak in that general way, but the Voice is what we ought to notice. It is substantial. It conveys the thought of the person who speaks, but it is the Voice. It is like handwriting.

J.T.Jr. Would the book of Daniel help? Nebuchadnezzar had to recognise that the heavens rule (Daniel 4:26).

We have to recognise in regard to the present pressure that heaven is ruling in spite of what happens down here.

J.T. Just so. That is the determining factor. Heaven is asserting its rights and we have to recognise it. That is how the matter stands. Christ in heaven makes all heaven aglow. Christ on earth draws out heaven's delight, "This is my beloved Son".

T.M. Would this be a certain fulfilment of what is recorded in Isaiah 64:1, "Oh, that thou wouldest rend the heavens, that thou wouldest come down, -- that the mountains might flow down at thy presence"?

J.T. There the prophet is urging Jehovah to come down in a judicial way. Here the Father is addressing the supreme Object of His affection. In the epistles, inclusive of the Acts, heaven is asserting itself in regard of what Christ is up there. "Received up in glory". It is the sound from heaven in Acts 2 and the Spirit coming in, laying hold of certain persons in relation to what is up there; with a view to testimony down here. Then the light from heaven in chapter 9, brighter than the sun; that is, it is the excellence, the superiority of it, the shining out of Christ, being up there; and finally the vessel from heaven which came down and finally went up and stayed there.

A.B. The heavens were opened to Him, but in Matthew the voice apparently is to others; not to Himself. "This is my beloved Son", as if setting the Lord forth in an exemplary way.

J.T. Yes, to call attention to Him. In Mark and Luke it is, "Thou art my beloved Son".

H.H. Does that cover all the thirty years of the Lord's life up to this time?

J.T. I should say so. "In whom I have found my delight". It would take in the whole life of Christ from the beginning.

H.B. Why does Matthew use the words "lo" and "behold" so much?

J.T. Well, they express feeling. You want to be feeling in the testimony. Interjections are generally expressive of feeling.

In chapter 5 we have, "But seeing the crowds, he went up into the mountain, and having sat down, his disciples came to him; and, having opened his mouth, he taught them, saying". He went up into the mountain. Matthew's way of presenting the record seems to indicate that things are difficult in a way; because it is a question of testing out what is in us, whether we are genuine. The Lord does not ask the disciples to come to Him. He goes up, and "his disciples came to him". Matthew presents the disciples as corresponding with Christ here. This is the first instance. They come to Him on a mountain. He went up, and they went up; they did not express any difficulty about going to Him. We are apt to express difficulties, and make excuses when absent from the seasons in which the Lord comes in amongst us, but here they had none. They came to Him on the mountain. The point in the whole section, chapters 5 to 7, is to bring out the legislative features of the new system. It is important to understand the principles of legislation in the divine system. The Lord here is legislating for the kingdom, and the disciples were with Him. The disciples came to Jesus. This is one of the great features of the comings in and goings out of the Lord; what He says is authoritative. Fourteen times in chapters 5 and 6, He says, "I say unto you".

E.P. These blessings cannot be gainsaid. They stand.

J.T. It is very striking that in the legislative branch, so to speak, exacting as it is, and authoritative, the idea of blessing comes to light. Blessed are certain ones. It is mentioned in the abstract, first; "Blessed are the poor in spirit ... Blessed they that mourn ... Blessed the meek ... Blessed they who hunger and thirst after righteousness ... Blessed the merciful ... Blessed the pure in heart ... Blessed the peace-makers ...

Blessed they who are persecuted on account of righteousness"; and finally, "Blessed are ye". We want to come into that. The Lord is opening up a wide range of blessings, but He does not say ' ye ' until He comes to speak of suffering. "Blessed are ye when they may reproach and persecute you, and say every wicked thing against you, lying, for my sake". Well, I can put myself in there, but it means I must accept persecution. "As it is written, For thy sake we are put to death all the day long; we have been reckoned as sheep for slaughter" (Romans 8:36). That is the attitude. So you are not surprised as you take up that attitude, and there is blessing attached to it.

W.G.T. Matthew 5 seems to be what you may term acceptable legislation; that which is an advantage to the disciples.

J.T. Yes. We begin with blessing. You come into the kingdom as a sufferer, and if it becomes hard, as it will, you are not surprised. Peter says afterwards, "Beloved, take not as strange the fire of persecution which has taken place amongst you for your trial, as if a strange thing was happening to you" (1 Peter 4:12). It is not to be regarded as strange.

J.W.D. This feature is the door to the kingdom.

J.T. I think so. The Lord is calling attention, in the abstract, to certain persons who are blessed, and He does not say ' ye ' until He comes to the matter of suffering. We can begin there anyway.

J.W.D. These blessings are in relation to the kingdom.

J.T. They are seen here as merited. It is not as Ephesians, where it is stated that God has "blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenlies in Christ" (chapter 1:3). Those are sovereign. These in our chapter are merited. God begins in that way. The Lord does not address the disciples personally, until it comes to persecution, and everyone may take up that attitude. The ye, as indicating those who suffer, corresponds with the poor

in spirit, and those that mourn; those that are meek; those that hunger and thirst after righteousness; those pure in heart; those who make peace. I accept the attitude of a sufferer as seeing that it means blessing, and that is how Paul is viewed when he was converted. The Lord said, "For I will shew to him how much he must suffer for my name" (Acts 9:16). The suffering attitude is the way out; it avoids all complaint and resistance.

A.H.P. Would this show the way by which we are brought under the principles of righteousness? We are told that the kingdom of God is righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.

J.T. Yes. They are blessed who hunger and thirst after righteousness.

Rem. These things would mark one who had been with the Lord through His ministry, as referred to in Acts 1.

J.T. These chapters in Matthew describe one of the occasions or seasons when He came in and went out. In after days, a disciple who missed it, would be sorry that he had not been there; one might have said the mountain was too high and my heart was too weak. You know how often such things are said as mere excuses. Well, those who thus speak miss this wonderful instruction.

J.A.T. The suffering, as spoken of here, would be connected with the apostles. The Lord had passed through the same suffering.

J.T. Yes. In addressing them He said, Ye. "Blessed are ye when they may reproach and persecute you, and say every wicked thing against you, lying, for my sake. Rejoice and exult, for your reward is great in the heavens; for thus have they persecuted the prophets who were before you". He goes on to say after that, "Ye are the salt of the earth".

J.W.D. What do you mean by the way out is by suffering?

J.T. The way out of the sphere of complaint and resistance is to accept suffering. Therefore, the apostle says, "In all these things we more than conquer through him that has loved us" (Romans 8:37).

V.D.S. "If ye are reproached in the name of Christ, blessed are ye; for the Spirit of glory and the Spirit of God rests upon you" (1 Peter 4:14).

J.T. Quite so. Peter follows up this matter of the kingdom in his epistles, and suffering has a great place in them. He says, "That the proving of your faith, much more precious than of gold which perishes, though it be proved by fire, be found to praise and glory and honour in the revelation of Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 1:7).

J.R.H. Are you emphasising that at this first season at the Jordan, the Person of the Christ comes into view, and in the second season on the mountain, it is a question of His commandments?

J.T. Yes, He is owned from heaven -- He is authorised, so to speak. The position occupied by the Lord here is one of delegated authority, and the voice from heaven made a basis for that. In chapters 5 to 7, He is using the authority; it is conveyed in the words, "I say unto you". He was representing heaven really in this way of authority. Matthew presents the kingdom, the authority of heaven vested in Christ.

CHRIST ASSEMBLING WITH HIS OWN (2)

Matthew 8:14,15; Matthew 9:1-8; Matthew 10:1-6

J.T. We have alluded to the light springing up in Capernaum (Matthew 4:16). It was there to be seen; it sprang up, meaning that it issued from Christ, not as in heaven, but as here. Life is not stressed as to heaven, but as to what is on earth. "In him was life, and the life was the light of men" (John 1:4). The statement in chapter 4 conveys what was in Christ as on earth. The voice from heaven, recognised Him not simply as having life on earth, and the source of it too, but as the Son -- sonship in Him is owned as here on earth. It came out through His own words, according to Luke, when He was twelve years of age. He spoke about His Father's business, which implied His own sonship. There are two thoughts as to Him here; the life, and the light consequent upon it; and then the voice proclaiming His sonship and how He afforded pleasure to the Father, whose infinite delight in Him was made known.

Matthew 4 contemplates the far-reaching testimony of our Lord. "And Jesus went round the whole of Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the glad tidings of the kingdom, and healing every disease and every bodily weakness among the people" (verse 23). We have a summary of His service there, preceding, though doubtless going beyond, as to date, what we have in chapter 5. It is to bring out the effect of the light shining from Him, the light of life. That lays the basis for chapter 5, which is legislative, as we said this morning. The disciples came up to Him as on the mountain. "Great crowds followed him in chapter 4:25, but in chapter 5 His disciples came to Him; that is the principle of discipleship; it was there actively. In chapter 5, the Lord says, "But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do

good to those who hate you, and pray for those who insult you and persecute you, that ye may be the sons of your Father who is in the heavens; for he makes his sun rise on evil and good, and sends rain on just and unjust. For if ye should love those who love you, what reward have ye? Do not also the tax-gatherers the same? And if ye should salute your brethren only, what do ye extraordinary? Do not also the Gentiles the same? Be ye therefore perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect" (verses 44-48). The Lord is bringing out the character of the kingdom in speaking of the kind of persons who are of it; you might say who are "it". They reflect their heavenly Father. As He says, "Sons of your Father who is in the heavens". Substantial quality is what is stressed in the disciples as reflecting their Father, but all learnt in what Jesus was as coming in and going out among them.

H.H. The Lord comes down in chapter 8 with His disciples having that instruction in mind.

J.T. Chapter 8 brings out a further thought as to discipleship, which is stressed in this gospel. We learn in verse 23 that He went on board ship, and His disciples followed Him. He is perfecting the disciples in this chapter. "A scribe came up and said to him, Teacher, I will follow thee whithersoever thou mayest go. And Jesus says to him, The foxes have holes, and the birds of the heaven roosting-places; but the Son of man has not where he may lay his head. But another of his disciples said to him, Lord, suffer me first to go away and bury my father. But Jesus said to him, Follow me, and leave the dead to bury their own dead. And he went on board ship and his disciples followed him" (verses 19-23). Following Him is of greater importance than any natural claim. The disciple is to understand that he is not offered anything at all to gratify the flesh; "the Son of man has not where he may lay his head". These are all important facts as to our inquiry at this time. What is before us now is what marks households

in this gospel, and leading up to the appointment and naming of the apostles.

Chapter 10 says, "Having called to him his twelve disciples, he gave them power over unclean spirits, so that they should cast them out, and heal every disease and every bodily weakness". The disciples received power from Him. The second verse says, "Now the names of the twelve apostles are these". It would look as though they were already apostles before they are named. It would show that names are attached to us according to what we are. We do well to take note of what is said about discipleship, and how the quality here is seen in their moving as He moved.

W.J.C. In chapter 5 we read of the disciples coming to Him, and now in chapter 8 they followed Him. Would the following be the moral result of having come to Him?

J.T. I should say that. They were distinguished from the crowd, as you will observe at the end of chapter 4. "Great crowds followed him ... But seeing the crowds, he went up". He withdraws from the crowds to the mountain, and there His disciples came to Him. They are in keeping with His movements and are ready for instruction. "Having opened his mouth, he taught them". In chapter 8 He is challenging them in following Him, pointing out that there is nothing for the flesh in such a course. Nevertheless, He went on board ship and His disciples followed Him. Presently they are tested again, because "the water became very agitated on the sea, so that the ship was covered by the waves; but he slept". They are further tested.

H.H. Do you mean that in coming to the Lord we are committed to discipleship?

J.T. I think so. Discipleship is coming to Him. They tax themselves to do so, for they have to go up to the mountain. It means elevation, and makes a demand on our strength. In chapter 11:28, He says,

"Come to me". He is urging us to do so, because of certain advantages. True discipleship is marked off by movements that are regulated by His, whatever the consequences. What is in mind is to call attention to the households of the servants; all of course, but the servants particularly. In Matthew 8:14,15, He observed what was in Peter's house. He saw "his mother-in-law laid down and in a fever".

H.B. Would you say why this condition calls for a personal touch from the Lord? On a previous occasion He seems to heal at a distance.

J.T. The personal touch is always to leave an impression. He laid His hands on the little children, meaning He committed Himself to them. The impression was there potentially, but the touch is more. The touch means the impartation of sensation from one to another. It is intended to affect later service.

J.H-t.Jr. It says, "He touched her hand". Is there discrimination in that? He touched her in view of service. It says, "She arose and served him".

J.T. The hand symbolises the power of service. That is what is meant. He intended her to serve as healed; whereas she was laid down in a fever. In this state you could expect nothing from her in the way of service; she needed to be served. It alludes to the servant's house -- that He should have one there ready to serve, serving because the Lord had touched her hand and the fever left her. Luke goes further and says, "And standing over her, he rebuked the fever" (Luke 4:39). That would be to impress her with Himself as having authority over her; in Matthew it is simply that He touched her hand. Verse 14 says, "And when Jesus had come to Peter's house"; it would seem to bring out that whatever brought Him there, He noticed the condition in the house. That is the idea, I think. The servant is to see that the Lord takes account of what is in his house and deals with it.

W.J.C. Does the Lord's touch here as in other places imply impartation of something of Himself to the person?

J.T. That is the thought. It is a sensation anyway. It brings out what is in Him. The woman in Luke 8 touched Him; touched the hem of His garment and drew out healing virtue. Here the touch is from His side. It characterises the kingdom in Matthew. He touched her so that the fever left her.

J.T.Jr. Is there a connection between the first part of chapter 8, the leper coming to Him, and Peter's house? The leper comes evidently of himself. Would there be a link with the leper, in the servant recognising what he is in the flesh?

J.T. Well, quite so. "And when he had come down from the mountain, great crowds followed him. And behold, a leper came up to him and did him homage, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou art able to cleanse me. And he stretched out his hand and touched him, saying, I will; be cleansed. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed" (Matthew 8:1-3). It does not say it left him; he was cleansed. The man had a sense of uncleanness, and it was a question whether the Lord's disposition was toward him. He says, "Lord, if thou wilt, thou art able to cleanse me. And he stretched out his hand". He does more than He does for the woman in the house. He stretched out His hand and touched him.

H.H. How would you apply the fever? Is it activities out of proper focus?

J.T. I think whatever causes the fever comes into this matter. What would occasion this malady? She is said to be Peter's mother-in-law -- the house was Peter's. Our attention is called to irregular conditions in the household. The word says, "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and cleave to his wife" (Genesis 2:24). Here we have the mother-in-law adversely affecting the house; irregular conditions in the household occasioning such things.

S.J.H. Is there something in the fact that He sees this? In Luke they called the Lord's attention to it.

J.T. Yes, I think Peter is in mind in Luke, in regard of the miracle in his house. He is not called Peter in Luke until chapter 5, when he says to the Lord, "Depart from me, for I am a sinful man". Up to that he is called Simon only. Luke helps us in showing that Peter had not been making headway. There is no change of name until he makes his confession of being a sinful man. In Luke 4:38,39, we read that "rising up out of the synagogue, he entered into the house of Simon. But Simon's mother-in-law was suffering under a bad fever; and they asked him for her. And standing over her, he rebuked the fever, and it left her; and forthwith standing up she served them". I think Peter's responsibility enters into this matter, especially as Luke gives it. He had not been making headway; he had opportunity to do it, but his name not being changed indicates lack of advance. The Lord comes into his house out of the synagogue where there had been another difficulty; that is, the unclean spirit. In Luke the Lord comes from dealing with the religious position to the household position, and apparently Peter was not affected even then. It is in the fishing scene in chapter 5 that he is affected, and the name Peter added to him. Here we have the name, but Matthew does not appear to make much of this. The Lord observed the condition in Peter's house, and asserts His supremacy. In Luke He does it by standing over her and rebuking the fever.

S.J.H. How, as the Lord is brought into the home, are these matters met by Him?

J.T. If the head of the house in a general way is right, the Lord may take account of things that he may not have noticed, but the Lord does things for us without hesitation. If He has to rebuke a thing, that would mean there had been delinquency on the part of the head of the house. He should have done the rebuking.

A.B. In chapter 4 the Lord says to Peter and Andrew, "Come after me, and I will make you fishers of men".

J.T. As Matthew presents Peter, his account is more favourable; not so much dealing with Peter's condition. In chapter 10:2 He says, "First, Simon, who was called Peter". He supports Peter as the leading apostle, and the Lord in calling him puts no responsibility for his qualification on another. He said, "I will make you fishers of men". The Lord undertakes to do whatever was needed to be done with them, and in going into his house the same principle applies. Peter was there, the first apostle, and the Lord Himself undertakes to see that he was really first. The Lord considers for His servant. He would support a man in accordance with what he is to be, and make him what He intended he should be; make him what is needed. That is the point of view in Matthew. The Lord is doing the thing Himself, and His great servant is not to be discredited. The condition of his house is not right. The Lord would say, I will see to that -- His servants must not be discredited.

J.W.D. Peter speaks of "the grace of life" (1 Peter 3:7). Would the touch not impress him with the oneness needed in the house?

J.T. This touch would bring the mother-in-law into the grace that belonged to the household, because she "served him". Peter dealing with the husband and wife says, "as also fellow-heirs of the grace of life" (1 Peter 3:7). It would be unsuitable to the servant to have anything else there. That is where light shines; life is light. "He that follows me ... shall have the light of life" (John 8:12). The grace of life would be life in the christian household. This is a most touching act of the Lord, because it was to make Peter's house what it ought to be as the house of a great servant.

E.P. Do you think we suffer because things are not dealt with and met in this way?

J.T. Very much. We all feel it. Fathers and mothers who have brought up children would recognise the great disadvantage, where there is a condition of this kind in the house. The Lord feels it more than any, and in Peter's house He deals with it Himself, without anyone asking Him to do it, according to Matthew's account.

A.E.H. What do you have in mind in speaking of this irregularity?

J.T. There is nothing in the marriage contract to provide for the mother-in-law. The word at the beginning was (this comes down the ages) as Eve was brought to Adam, "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and cleave to his wife; and they shall become one flesh" (Genesis 2:24). Moses in writing the book of Genesis put that in, the Spirit directing him. It seems that he got on wonderfully well with his father-in-law, Jethro. When Jethro comes to him in the wilderness there were the happiest relations between him and Moses, but there was a very humbling experience about the circumcision, as Moses was leaving Midian. Evidently Zipporah did not want it. She did not want to go the whole way. This is very often the case with wives. If the husband is spiritual, he is too much so in the wife's eyes. The Lord sought to slay Moses because of this matter, requiring that he should circumcise the children (Exodus 4:24). It was Moses' desire, but Zipporah did not want it. "A bloody husband indeed art thou to me!" she said, as if in complaint.

H.H. The gospel has the assembly in view. Taking care of the household is important, in view of the testimony in the assembly.

J.T. Natural ties must not be allowed to influence the position. They would thus discredit the spiritual.

E.P. Paul refers to Cephas leading about a sister as wife (1 Corinthians 9:5). It would seem he had kept free, evidently not hampered by his wife in his service.

J.T. He took her around in his service; he did not leave her at home. Paul says, "Have we not a right to take round a sister as wife, as also the other apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?" It was not too much for him to take a wife in his journeys. No doubt, he would always remember that the Lord touched his mother-in-law, and as a result she served. The important thing is the Lord's touch in our houses. Peter speaks of the "grace of life", heirs together of it, that "prayers be not hindered" (1 Peter 3:7).

J.W.D. Complications would cease as Peter's wife's mother served.

J.T. Yes. Luke says, "She served them", including the Lord.

J.T.Jr. In Matthew 7 we have an allusion to the house of a prudent man. It was built on a rock. Would that not help in regard to this matter, what is at the bottom?

J.T. Just so, the foundation of the house. Genesis 2 enters into this. "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and cleave to his wife; and they shall become one flesh." Peter speaks of husband and wife as "heirs together of the grace of life", urging that prayer should not be hindered. We cannot serve without prayer. Peter would be supported by his wife as he led her about.

S.P. Better household conditions are seen in Acts in the three households that Peter had to do with particularly. In chapter 9 the household of Dorcas; in chapter 10 he lodged with a certain Simon, a tanner. It was there that he went up to pray. Then Cornelius and his household were waiting for him -- affording further liberty for service.

J.T. That is very interesting and instructive; and we may add the house in which Aeneas was; there Peter tells him to rise up and make his own bed.

W.J.C. What do you understand by the husband dwelling with the wife "according to knowledge"?

J.T. That is according to the knowledge that God affords as to that relation. "Fellow-heirs of the grace of life" is a beautiful expression. It is grace shining in that house, not natural light but "grace". That is the first thought. In Matthew 9 we have the house of the ruler Jairus in which his daughter was raised up. There are more households in this chapter. There is that in which the two blind men had their eyes opened. The first is this house in Capernaum in Matthew 9:1. It is to be noted it is in "his own city". Mark says "he was at the house" -- at home (Mark 2:1-4). I mention Mark to bring out that it evidently was where the Lord dwelt. He was at home in contrast to being on a journey (see J.N.D.'s note to word "house"). There was liberty there for any who were evangelical or interested in the souls of men. They even go up to the roof and dig through, and the Lord makes no complaint. It would bring out how a spiritual household is open and affords liberty to those who are interested in an evangelical way. He had been away at a distance; the sea denotes distance and separation. The Lord had been away in His service; He was universal in this. Now He has come home by ship, but He is not seeking repose or a quiet time. He is serving yet, as actively, in His own house, as He was elsewhere.

W.G.T. He would prefer to be in a home rather than a synagogue.

J.T. Yes, and if these four men came to Peter's house while his mother-in-law was ill and they took the liberty they did in the house in which the Lord was, no doubt there would be an objection. They opened up the roof and there is no complaint at all where the Lord was. There is great liberty there for persons engaged in His service.

H.H. You would ask a brother's permission before arranging a meeting in his house.

J.T. Certainly I would. The allusion to persons who have assemblies in their houses, would bear on this. If I open my house for the brethren to meet in it, they have a certain right of way.

W.L. Would this suggest that the servant has as much liberty and power in his home surroundings as when he is away?

J.T. I think so. According to Mark's record there is a report that He was at the house, and then "straightway many were gathered together"; people took advantage of the fact He was there. "So that there was no longer any room, not even at the door; and he spoke the word to them" (Mark 2:2). He is not questioning the liberty taken, crowding into His doors. He carries on the service, and then we have, "And there come to him men bringing a paralytic, borne by four; and, not being able to get near to him on account of the crowd, they uncovered the roof where he was, and having dug it up, they let down the couch on which the paralytic lay". It is a big operation; the couch a large affair, and the hole in the roof, but there is no complaint. The Lord meets the action with grace, "Jesus, seeing their faith, says to the paralytic, Child, thy sins are forgiven thee" (verse 5). He includes him in the family of God at once. That is wonderful grace. He calls the person, who might be an intruder, a child; connecting him with the family of faith.

J.T.Jr. Paul in his house in Acts 28:30 was in accord with this. "And he remained two whole years in his own hired lodging, and received all who came to him, preaching the kingdom of God.

J.T. I had thought of that. It is a reflection of this, "receiving" all that came to him. I suppose the word receiving there would mean more than a polite word at the door. He received them; uninvited persons coming to your house, especially if you are fatigued, are not always acceptable. The Lord had been on a

journey, and under these circumstances we would say, You ought to have let me know you were coming. There is no question about it in the Lord's case.

J.T.Jr. The position in Rome -- Paul and his open house -- would be in contrast to what is in that city today at the Vatican.

J.T. You would not get much of a reception there. It is very suggestive. How great a difference between the house the Lord was in, and the house at Rome now! The occupant is called Peter's successor!

A.H.P. Apollos being taken by Priscilla and Aquila and taught the way of God more exactly, would that correspond with the service of the Lord here?

J.T. Yes. They "took him to them" (Acts 18:26).

H.H. Would you take forgiveness here to include what is governmental?

J.T. It is governmental. There was some cause for the palsy, and the Lord goes to the root of it in saying, "Child, thy sins are forgiven thee". That is the moral side of the matter, showing that there was cause for the state this man was in. The Lord comes in in power and grace calling him, not Sinner, but Child. If the paralytic did not have a conscience about his sins he should have, for he needed forgiveness. The Lord knew there was something wrong. This is one of the things that an apostle would have to learn; how to be in his own house, and in dealing with paralytics to know what to say to them. He would recall how the Lord spoke about the moral question, first, before the physical. James says, for instance, and no doubt he learnt from these meetings with the Lord, "Is any sick among you? let him call to him the elders of the assembly, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith shall heal the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he be one who has committed sins, it shall be forgiven him" (James 5:14,15).

W.L. Can we look for alleviation of what is governmental?

J.T. They are not always final, some of them may be. John says, "If any one see his brother sinning a sin not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life, for those that do not sin unto death. There is a sin to death: I do not say of that that he should make a request" (1 John 5:16). Something has happened, and it is going on to death. John says, I do not say of that that he should make a request. We should be able to discern whether to pray or not.

S.J.H. "Go to thy house." What impressions he would take back!

J.T. He would say to his wife and children, I have been in a wonderful house; the owner of that house is the Lord Jesus. He did not mind when they took up the roof. The man's bed would be seen first, a very unsightly thing to push into the house of another person. The Lord Jesus made no complaint about that; He recognised the man as in the family at once. He sees the faith of the four, and recognises this beautiful feature in the place; general feeling of sympathy is suggested. He saw their faith.

W.J.C. Do you think there was some exercise of soul on the part of the paralytic to be thus brought, so the Lord could also see he had the faith!

J.T. The four had faith. The Lord, I think, is raising the moral question with the man. He refers immediately to his sins, that they were forgiven.

J.W.D. There must be a very happy affinity between the household and the saints, to meet the requirements of James 5:14,15.

J.T. James says to the sick man, You should send for them. They are available, and they should be.

T.S. We must be prepared to face any exposure that might be necessary in sending for the elders?

J.T. Yes. It is the moral side. That is always important. With so-called faith-healers, it is a question

if they ever raise a moral issue. The moral issue is the first thing to raise in these actions. The Lord deals with that at once in this man's case.

S.P. The man would be feeling the position he was in.

J.T. Clearly: "Is any sick among you?" James tells the sick man what he should do. The epistles all carry that sort of instruction for us. James is stressing the importance of the assembly, and what the elders were. They are to pray for the sick and to anoint him with oil. That is important as a typical suggestion; it means that if this man is to be raised up he is to be henceforth for the testimony. Otherwise, it is better that he should not be raised up. "On this account many among you are weak and infirm, and a good many are fallen asleep" (1 Corinthians 11:30). This is a merciful provision that James brings in; "and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith shall heal the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he be one who has committed sins, it shall be forgiven him". It is the prayer of faith that heals the sick. Faith brings God in; and the Lord sees their faith. There would be nothing in all this great movement if the Lord did not see something. He knew things divinely, but then there is what He sees. Peter says to Him in John 21:17, "Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I am attached to thee". That word know is subjective in the first two cases, implying that Peter says to the Lord, You know divinely that I love you. That is not enough, and the Lord wishes to see something in us to draw out His love. And so Peter uses another word which is objective. "Thou knowest that I love thee", implying that the Lord could see this in him. That is the point here. The Lord saw their faith. There is no value in bringing up the question of confidence unless there is something to see. If I have created a feeling of lack of confidence among my brethren, I must not claim that they should

have confidence; there should be something about me to show that I deserve their confidence.

J.W.D. Would that include something in the paralytic, too? Faith must be evident, not only by believing in Christ, but by something discernible in the one who has it.

J.T. That is so generally, as illustrated in the lame man of Lystra (Acts 14:8); but it does not seem so here. The pronoun their refers to the four that carried him. "Jesus, seeing their faith, says to the paralytic". The faith is in the four, and the Lord now is dealing with the man himself on moral lines. He says, "thy sins,,.

D.G. Matthew 17:20,21 helps. The disciples ask Jesus why they could not cast the demon out of the boy, and He says to them, "Because of your unbelief; for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say to this mountain, Be transported hence there, and it shall transport itself; and nothing shall be impossible to you. But this kind does not go out but by prayer and fasting".

J.T. It seems that Mark gives a clearer view of that instance than Matthew, though Matthew calls him a lunatic. In Mark, the father of the child has a greater place. He says to the Lord, "If thou couldst do anything ... help us". In His answer the Lord implies, Do not apply if to Me, apply it to yourself; "If thou couldst believe". The basis of all these matters must lie in faith, whether in the person to be helped, or persons acting for him. The boy had no faith as far as the scripture shows, it was a question of the father of the boy. The father says to the Lord, "I believe, help mine unbelief" (Mark 9:24). The Lord immediately helped him, and the demon was cast out. In Matthew 9 the Lord honours the four who had faith. It is clear, however, that there was something in the man, because the Lord calls him ' child ', as we have seen.

E.P. As to the local position suggested in Capernaum, is there a suggestion in the letters to the assemblies, of the need to recognise the Lord's proprietary rights in coming "to his own city"? The city and the house are claimed by Him.

J.T. The local position is in mind; it is remarkable it should be so. He left Nazareth and went to Capernaum and dwelt there. So Capernaum had a great opportunity; great light shone there, and He says later, "Thou, Capernaum, who hast been raised up to heaven, shall be brought down even to hades. For if the works of power which have taken place in thee, had taken place in Sodom, it had remained until this day" (Matthew 11:23). Localities where the saints of God are, or have been, are more responsible.

J.W. What is in your mind in regard to the anointing with oil?

J.T. Anointing is in view of testimony. You never get it save in relation to the service of the testimony. We are anointed for the testimony (see Mark 6:13). Christ was anointed here on earth. God anointed Jesus of Nazareth, who went about doing good (Acts 10:38). That is the idea of testimony. If a man is to be raised up he is to continue in the meeting and be useful in it, otherwise he might as well die.

H.B. In Leviticus 14, the cleansed leper is anointed on the ear, the thumb and great toe.

J.T. Yes. He is made fit for the testimony.

H.H. The thought of the oil is priestly. It is not an actual bottle of oil. We ought to have a moral idea in mind. In praying for a person we ought to be priestly. We should know what we are praying about. A person might be under the influence of some evil if he were suffering under the government of God.

J.T. The word oil in James 5 should, I believe, be taken up in a spiritual way. It alludes to the Spirit. The man raised up is to be in spiritual power from henceforth.

As regards our subject, household conditions bear on the service. Matthew makes a great deal of what is done in houses. Chapter 9:23 says, "And when Jesus was come to the house of the ruler, and saw the flute-players and the crowd making a tumult, he said, Withdraw, for the damsel is not dead, but sleeps. And they derided him. But when the crowd had been put out, he went in and took her hand; and the damsel rose up. And the fame of it went out into all that land". Here we see how the house is to be cleansed, or cleared of elements that would interfere with spiritual power. He said, Withdraw. And when the crowd had been put out the damsel was raised up; spiritual power became effective. That is another thing, flute-players and that sort of thing are inimical to all spiritual activities in a household. Matthew mentions flute-players and the crowd making a tumult. Jairus is a man to be respected, but he did not see the incongruity in having all this in his house. Mark and Luke tell us that the Lord suffered no one in the house, but Peter, James, and John, and the father and mother of the child.

H.B. The element of criticism runs along with this -- they are deriding the Lord.

J.T. It is what goes with looseness. The flesh regards flute-playing and people weeping in such circumstances as desirable and suitable, but those who carry on like that are ever ready to deride the Lord. He is not respected. This condition might be acceptable to the natural mind, but when tested out is not subject to Christ.

J.W.D. If we allow flute-players and other such things in our houses our local meetings will be affected.

J.T. All this bears on chapter 10 -- an important one. The passage selected suggests the idea of the Lord coming in and going out. We are to learn through what happened while He was there. "Having called to him his twelve disciples, he gave them power over unclean spirits, so that they should cast them out,

and heal every disease and every bodily weakness." Then the names of the apostles are given, and following that we are told that "These twelve Jesus sent out when he had charged them, saying, Go not off into the way of the nations, and into a city of Samaritans enter ye not; but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel". This shows that the early part of Matthew is distinctive as confining the ministry to the Jews, the house of Israel, and brings out another lesson in our service. Paul was restricted, and was directed to go to certain places. It was so as to Macedonia in Acts 16.

H.H. Some of the twelve apostles were not very prominent.

J.T. We get all their names here and in the heavenly city, in the foundation of the wall of the heavenly city; so that they must all have had their part in the service of laying the foundation. The city has twelve foundations and the names of all are seen there.

H.H. No doubt they had their work and did it well. The cutting and polishing of the stones to garnish the Holy City would suggest much in the way of suffering.

W.J.C. The Lord was not sent, but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. How would the Syrophenician woman get blessing, if not through Him as the Sent One?

J.T. Well it was a question of her taking her right place as a dog of the gentiles; then she got the blessing. She called Christ the Son of David, but she had no claim on Him whatever under that designation. What the Lord said was to adjust her position; as Son of David He was sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. As Saviour of the world He is for all of us.

W.J.C. She owned Him as Lord, and she got the blessing.

J.T. She took her true place; she says, "Even the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from the table of their masters".

J.W.D. You spoke about Paul being restricted in his service; he was forbidden to go to a certain place. Would that be through circumstances now; perhaps through our employment?

J.T. There are limitations. I only alluded to it as showing that we have to observe limitations today. Suppose a believer says, I want to be a missionary in China, or Africa. Is the Lord calling you there? Are there no limitations? I am only alluding to it in that way. We have to recognise limitations in our service in general. The apostles according to Matthew 28 were sent to baptise all the nations; the Lord as risen sends them out to all nations. In Luke repentance and remission of sins were to be preached to all the nations. That is general, but then each servant has to ask the Lord for guidance, as to where he is to serve. I must get to the Lord as to the work I am to do. Each has his own work (Mark 13:34).

W.L. So there is no such thing as a free lance.

T.H. Why were the names introduced here in detail?

J.T. They are first called "twelve disciples" and as such, Christ "gave them power over unclean spirits, so that they should cast them out, and heal every disease and every bodily weakness". As in possession of that power they are qualified and called "twelve apostles"; then they are named.

In Mark 3, the Lord "goes up into the mountain, and calls whom he himself would, and they went to him". He selects twelve "that they might be with him, and that he might send them to preach"; meaning that they are on the elevated ground of companionship with Him. In Matthew they are given the power so as to be potentially equal to the position in which He sets them, and their names are given. It brings out that one is what he is, and his name conveys that.

CHRIST ASSEMBLING WITH HIS OWN (3)

Matthew 12:46-50; Matthew 13:36-50

J.T. Hitherto we have been largely engaged with authority in Christ; the kingdom of the heavens up to chapter 10. Chapter 11:1 says, "And it came to pass when Jesus had finished commanding his twelve disciples, he departed thence to teach and preach in their cities". Evidently a complete course was finished, that is, authoritative instruction; then it is said of the Lord, that "he departed thence to teach and preach in their cities", as if to exemplify in Himself the instruction He had been imparting to them. Chapter 11 brings out this feature in Christ; that He is a model for us, and at the end of this chapter He says, "Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am meek and lowly in heart; and ye shall find rest to your souls". He is the model for us. He instructs us in authority, but He exemplifies the instruction.

Chapter 11 indicates the break between Him and the Jews. He is rejected; His ministry is rejected; His signs are rejected; so that we are told in verse 20, "Then began he to reproach the cities in which most of his works of power had taken place, because they had not repented". At such a time He turns to His Father, and says, "I praise thee, Father, Lord of the heaven and of the earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them to babes" (verse 25). The things He had been teaching had been revealed to babes, in spite of the rejection by the Jews; so that, we have a complete break, and a new order of things introduced; a new beginning, leading to the assembly and christianity. In chapter 10:5, He had said that they were not to go in the way of the gentiles; "These twelve Jesus sent out when he had charged them, saying, Go not off into the way of the nations, and into a city of Samaritans enter ye not". Now from chapter 12 onwards the universal gospel is in mind, as we shall see,

and what is to be noticed particularly is the circle of the brethren, introduced in the first passage read, as the basis for what follows.

It is characteristic of what we are saying, the Lord Jesus coming in and going out among the disciples. This passage indicates that He had been saying things in an inner circle; for although He was speaking to the crowds, it is said that "his mother and his brethren stood without, seeking to speak to him". They were outside and He was inside, nor does He bring them in; He rather remains where He was in the midst of those to be known henceforth as His disciples, and His true brethren. He says, "Whosoever shall do the will of my Father who is in the heavens, he is my brother, and sister, and mother". Our consideration at this time will be of brethren from Matthew's point of view, and the teaching of chapter 13 based on it; the truth of the assembly brought out. The brethren are introduced into the secrets of His parabolic ministry, which hides the truth from certain who had been under it; they are not to understand; as to them the ministry is judicial in character. There are those who do understand; they are instructed in the house. "Then, having dismissed the crowds, he went into the house; and his disciples came to him, saying, Expound to us the parable of the darnel of the field". We get the mystery of the kingdom opened up to us in the house; we are distinctly in an inside position in this section, leading up to the assembly.

In this section of the gospel the assembly is in view, but presented in a parabolic way among the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven. Only those who are initiated understand parabolic ministry; others are excluded judicially (verses 10-15).

H.H. Previously He had been working miracles, but now He is teaching by parables.

J.T. Yes, we are entering on the parables; there are seven of them in chapter 13, but it is important to

get the position of the brethren indicated as the basis of the instruction; they belong to the inner circle. Mark's account makes it a circle; "And looking around in a circuit at those that were sitting around him, he says, Behold my mother and my brethren" (Mark 3:34).

J.T.Jr. The circle would involve the recognition of the Spirit. In chapter 12, the Holy Spirit is referred to as being the divine Person that is here sinned against (verses. 31,32). The recognition of Him would make way for the inner circle.

J.T. That is right. The Spirit was already operating in Christ. He says, "But if I by the Spirit of God cast out demons, then indeed the kingdom of God is come upon you" (Matthew 12:28). The circle of the brethren makes way for the Spirit, as the Acts will show; they received the Holy Spirit from Christ as ascended. In a way nothing is more important in relation to our subject than the position of the brethren as seen here in Matthew. All the evangelists speak of the brethren; Matthew, Mark and Luke place the subject on a moral basis, that is, "whosoever shall do the will of my Father who is in the heavens, he is my brother, and sister, and mother". Mark 3:35 says, "whosoever shall do the will of God". Luke 11:28 says, "blessed are they who hear the word of God and keep it". John 20:17 shows that the idea of brethren is on the basis of counsel; "go to my brethren and say to them, I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God".

H.H. Would the Lord's appeal in Matthew 11:28 help us to come into this inner circle? "Come to me, all ye who labour and are burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am meek and lowly in heart; and ye shall find rest to your souls; for my yoke is easy, and my burden is light".

J.T. Well, it does clearly; it comes in after the Lord's word to His Father, saying "All things have been delivered to me by my Father, and no one knows

the Son but the Father, nor does anyone know the Father, but the Son, and he to whom the Son may be pleased to reveal him". For this revelation we need to be free from burden. "Come to me, all ye who labour and are burdened, and I will give you rest." Present conditions in the world certainly are burdensome; they tax us very much, and are likely to hinder us in entering into this great thought of revelation. The Lord would bring us into rest; it is as we take His yoke upon us and learn from Him. He says, "My yoke is easy, and my burden is light". It is relief from burdens arising from conditions here, so that one should enter into the revelation.

J.H-t. The opening words of chapter 13 say, "And that same day Jesus went out from the house and sat down by the sea". He dissociates Himself from Israel?

J.T. Yes, He leaves one house, and verse 36 shows Him entering another, "Then, having dismissed the crowds, he went into the house". In this house He opens up the ministry of what He had been giving in the parables. The idea of ' house ' in Matthew is very instructive; it fits in generally with the subject before us where the Lord Jesus came in and went out.

E.P. Chapter 12:43,44 says "But when the unclean spirit has gone out of the man, he goes through dry places, seeking rest, and does not find it. Then he says, I will return to my house whence I came out". Do you think that stands in contrast to coming to the Lord and finding rest, and being taught as in chapter 13?

J.T. Yes, they did not find rest. The world does not afford any rest. The unclean spirit goes back to the house whence he came out, "and having come, he finds it unoccupied, swept, and adorned". That is very much like christendom. The passage alludes to the unregenerate Jewish condition in the last days.

E.P. The Lord makes everything clear and distinct; in Matthew 5 the mountain position is in contrast to

the plain, and here in chapter 12, His brethren are seen in contrast to all else.

J.T. Matthew draws sharp contrasts. There is a severity in the way in which he presents the truth dealing with persons. In ministering the truth Luke is much more gracious; which is right in its place. The gospel is in mind in Luke, but Matthew has the kingdom and the assembly in mind, and there must be no compromise in that relation. His severity is mainly against the Jewish system.

H.H. We are to find rest for our souls.

J.T. It is not yet rest of body. Peter enlarges on this matter of souls. He says, "Receiving the end of your faith, the salvation of your souls" (1 Peter 1:9). The subject runs through Peter's first epistle as over against body salvation, and relief. It is the rest of soul that is needed.

Chapter 11 comes in very instructively as following a finished course of instruction. The Lord finishes one course at the end of chapter 10, bringing out the importance of a righteous man, and a drink of cold water given in the name of a disciple. He finishes that instruction, and then John comes into view as having sent a message to Him, and the Lord says to the crowds in verse 7, "What went ye out into the wilderness to see?" He is challenging us as to what we went out for. Christendom has largely come, either from judaism, or heathendom. Well, why have we come out? Why did our forefathers leave heathendom? He is challenging us as to the position we take up, and He pursues that instruction until the end of verse 19, saying, "wisdom has been justified by her children". The children of wisdom come into view in chapter 11, and they justify wisdom in what they do. We must keep our eyes on the children of wisdom; we see wisdom exemplified in them. The Lord brings Himself into the position as an example at the end of the chapter. It is all most instructive, especially because it is a critical period. The Jews had

rejected Him and He was about to introduce another order of things. All the instruction of chapter 11 is to prepare us for a new order of things, and He is Himself the model of it.

J.P. Would there be a link with the latter part of Psalm 132? "For Jehovah hath chosen Zion; he hath desired it for his dwelling."

J.T. Well, Zion is coming into view now. It is a question of sovereign selection and Christ addresses the Father as universal Lord, and praises Him because He had selected the babes to reveal these things to them. Then the quality of things, comparative qualities, comes out in chapter 12; we have come to greater things.

R.A. The queen of the south came to hear the wisdom of Solomon.

J.T. Yes. She is one whom the Lord mentions in order to condemn the Jews in rejecting Him. The queen of the south and the men of Nineveh in the judgment will stand up against the generation to whom Christ testified, and shall condemn it. So that we may say we are in the presence of the judgment seat of God in these chapters. No doubt each of us in his place will be called upon to witness in the day of judgment. It will be a wonderful time, the judgment day, when those who reject the truth and those who accept it are there; the latter to testify against the former.

W.J.C. The only ones whom the Lord recognised as His brethren are those who do the will of His Father who is in the heavens. They have learned from Him to do that will.

J.T. That comes out at the end of chapter 12, which is marked by comparison in greatness, "behold, more than Jonas is here ... and behold, more than Solomon is here" (verses 41,42). The most vicious evil is contemplated. In verse 24 the Lord Himself is charged with acting in the power of Beelzebub. So that He brings up this matter of the sin against the Holy

Spirit; it is very little understood, but it comes into this chapter opportunely, because it is not only a question of what Christ is doing personally, but the Spirit by which He is carrying on God's service of grace.

E.P. Is that why the Lord says, "more than Jonas is here" ... "more than Solomon is here"? He does not say "a greater" than Solomon.

J.T. Yes. It is not so much that He was greater, but what was greater, involving the Spirit as well, for He was acting in the power of the Spirit. The kingdom is implied. The greatest of all testimonies was operative.

A.M. Those that are linked with Him as taking His yoke upon them develop in moral qualities, in the sphere of His brethren.

J.T. It is those who come to Him. He relieves you of your burden, but gives you His yoke, which I would assume to be included in what He was as a Man before His Father; that yoke is easy and that burden is light. It is a delightful burden, a delightful yoke. It is not a yoke of bondage, and hence in the beginning of chapter 12 we have the incident of the Lord going through the cornfields; the Lord sets for us an example of how to be in liberty, for we cannot reach the idea of brethren unless we are in liberty; no hard legal requirements expressed by the Pharisees. "At that time Jesus went on the sabbath through the cornfields; and his disciples were hungry, and began to pluck the ears and to eat. But the Pharisees, seeing it, said to him, Behold, thy disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on sabbath" (Matthew 12:1,2). They did not say anything about His going through the cornfields, but what He did led the disciples to pluck the corn. He did not pluck the corn, but they did. They went beyond what He did. It is to convey the idea of liberty; not that they would go beyond what the Lord would do, but He indicates the way of liberty and they take it. They did not ask Him if they should pluck the corn and eat it.

A.E.H. Would you say that is a suggestion in connection with service in the assembly?

J.T. In assembly young brethren very often hold back and fail to take part until the older ones have done so; in prayer meetings too. In a certain sense it is right, but if it is carried beyond that sense it is legal and hinders, because the priests are always at liberty. It is a question of sonship, sons are free. "Jesus said to him, Then are the sons free" (Matthew 17:26). Not any particular son but the sons.

A.M. Things are to be done in the same spirit in which Christ would do them -- the spirit of Christ.

E.P. Referring to the Lord coming in and going out amongst them, would not the disciples get the gain of the new position by the example the Lord gave in going into the cornfields?

J.T. They would see the Lord indicating the way. "At that time Jesus went on the sabbath through the cornfields"; the passage does not say, He and the disciples. They went further, that is exactly what He had in mind. That is the liberty of christianity. It is the liberty in which Christ has set us free. He "has set us free in freedom" (Galatians 5:1).

J.S.T. Does His yoke in chapter 11, and the will of the Father in the end of chapter 12, link on with this liberty?

J.T. Yes. This paragraph ending at verse 8 is to inculcate spiritual liberty; to familiarise us with it. The Lord indicates the way, but He does not say, You must pluck the corn. That is what He had in mind, and He defends them as having done it. They were doing it on their own initiative, as a result of the lead given by the Lord. He selected the sabbath for it. They did more; they plucked the corn and ate it, and He justified their action.

W.L. Does the attitude of the Pharisees here obtain today in the religious systems? They do not induce spiritual liberty.

J.T. They do not. A man-made religious system cannot contain true liberty. This is found in the assembly, where the Spirit of God is. The Lord must have scope, but He has none in a mere religious system. He had scope here and used it: "At that time Jesus went on the sabbath through the cornfields".

A.B. "Wisdom has been justified by her children" (Matthew 11:19).

J.T. That is the point; the disciples here are her children.

A.B. "But I say unto you, that there is here what is greater than the temple" (chapter 12:6); this would be in relation to the light that had sprung up.

J.T. Quite so; the Lord is bringing out the greatness of the new position and that the children of wisdom were in it; not only wisdom itself being there in Him, but her children are now present and they justify wisdom. That is, wisdom's children justified it, because it afforded them something to eat. If the legalist has his way they will die of hunger rather than they should eat on the sabbath. And he will not allow a man to be healed on the sabbath.

J.S.T. The Lord says, "Ye would not have condemned the guiltless" (chapter 12:7).

J.T. Quite so; the disciples were guiltless.

W.G.T. He refers to David who introduced something additional in the service of God.

J.T. He said to them, "Have ye not read what David did when he was hungry, and they that were with him?" (chapter 12:3). The disciples were hungry; you could die of hunger as far as the legalists are concerned. Legality will not help; they will see to legal principles rather than satisfy the hunger of the children of wisdom. He says, "Have ye not read what David did when he was hungry, and they that were with him?" He is virtually saying, If David were here he would do the same thing; "he entered into the house of God, and ate the shewbread, which it was not lawful for him

to eat, nor for those with him, but for the priests only? Or have ye not read in the law that on the sabbaths the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?" (chapter 12:4,5). He is bringing forward Old Testament examples to show that what the disciples were doing was right, and that brings out how the Old Testament is to be used. It is not to be used in a legal way to bind people hands and feet, and make them die of hunger. The spirit of the Old Testament is liberty. David exemplified it.

E.P. It is like "the letter kills, but the Spirit quickens" (2 Corinthians 3:6). Do you think it is suggested that God was pleased with David entering into His house? The Lord says, "How he entered into the house of God, and ate the shewbread".

J.T. The Lord justifies it here. According to Mark He says, "Have ye never read what David did when he had need and hungered, he and those with him, how he entered into the house of God, in the section of Abiathar the high priest, and ate the shew-bread, which it is not lawful unless for the priests to eat, and gave even to those that were with him?" (Mark 2:25,26). The Lord says, "in the section of Abiathar the high priest", showing that David moved in the full light of the high priest. Legalism is not priestly at all.

J.S.T. David was fleeing from Saul when he moved in this liberty.

J.T. That is exactly the position here: in the presence of murderers He is setting up the great service of the new order of things. So He says, "But I say unto you, that there is here what is greater than the temple" (chapter 12:6); that is, the temple in that literal sense. It is worth while to get clear as to these items, so as to see the significance of the word in the end of Matthew 12. The Lord there says, "Who is my mother, and who are my brethren?" What are the features of the family relation? It is a question of the will of God.

E.P. Could you bring these relationships through to the present moment? "My brother, and sister, and mother."

J.T. Yes; we have them all alluded to in the epistles, have we not? Even to the word mother: "the Jerusalem above is free, which is our mother" (Galatians 4:26). This teaching shows how christianity liberates; the assembly is marked by liberty, she comes down from God out of heaven; that is based on sonship. Here the Lord mentions three relationships, "my brother, and sister, and mother".

H.H. The man with the withered hand would be suffering from disability. You do not want that brought forward into the family circle. The Lord would deal with that, would He not?

J.T. The service requires full manhood in activity. The hands are symbolical of our doings. We need our members in exercise in accord with the liberty of sonship.

W.L. Are we not hindered, more than anything else, by what is religious, and by our natural relationships?

J.T. They are usually linked together in local matters. Natural inclination is so often supported by some legal suggestion. The natural relationships are seen as outside in the end of Matthew 12"his mother and his brethren stood without, seeking to speak to him". Then one says to Him, "Behold, thy mother and thy brethren are standing without, seeking to speak to thee". Evidently some person in the crowd would bring forward the importance of the natural relationships. The Lord, of course, knew they were there, but this person would be one in sympathy with them; though in the crowd listening to Christ, he is evidently in sympathy with those outside.

J.S.T. Those outside wanted to be heard -- "seeking to speak to thee". They should be listening to Him!

J.T. Yes. What He is saying should be supreme. Those standing around are interested, and particularly His disciples, who are now replacing Israel. Thus Jesus "answering said to him that spoke to him, Who is my mother, and who are my brethren?" That particular man is singled out, a sort of fifth column man to discredit what is going on. He would divert the Lord from what He was engaged with, and yet he appeared to be a sympathetic person, but his aim is to divert the Lord. It is often found in assembly matters; a diversion from the real things is introduced. This tendency is to be refused.

W.G.T. In John 7 His brethren were suggesting He should go up to Jerusalem to the feast; they did not believe on Him; they were not sympathetic with His ministry.

J.T. In John 2 the Lord's mother said to the Lord, "They have no wine"; and He answers saying, "What have I to do with thee, woman? mine hour has not yet come". She says to the servants, "Whatever he may say to you, do". She is adjusted; and verse 12 says, "After this he descended to Capernaum, he and his mother and his brethren and his disciples; and there they abode not many days". The brethren are coming into view again there, the natural relations of Christ, that is, the Jews; and the Lord is taking them on; this is on the ground of adjustment. Any Jew or Jewess can be taken on as adjusted; as submitting to the authority of Christ, but here in Matthew 12 it is not that at all. Why do not they come inside? They are standing outside. They want the Lord to go out there, whereas He is inside, and He must determine everything. The position is distinctly marked in Matthew. This man would have the Lord go out, but He is not going out. This man would break up the whole spiritual position here; the real brethren would not have been mentioned if he had his way. We want to go on with what the Lord is doing; every word He utters is pure

gold, but this man did not mind this at all, he said, "Behold, thy mother and thy brethren are standing without, seeking to speak to thee". He implied that the Lord should stop speaking and listen to them. That man must be adjusted. The Lord "answering said to him that spoke to him, Who is my mother, and who are my brethren?" Could that man tell the Lord? No! he had no idea of brethren; he was on natural lines. There are some that call themselves brethren, who cannot define the idea of the word at all.

E.P. Do you think it is important that these things should be met when and where they arise? A diversion should be met at the moment it arises? Why should a reading meeting, or any of our meetings, be affected in this way? Do you not think it is important that these things should be met immediately?

J.T. The Lord spoke direct to this man. "He answering said to him that spoke to him, Who is my mother, and who are my brethren?" This man is in His mind; he would break up the meeting, for he is making as much of those outside as of those inside, and more.

W.G.T. Is the Lord's "stretching out his hand to his disciples" an act of power?

J.T. It shows how definitely they were in His mind. The Lord leaves the house, we are told in chapter 13:1. "And that same day Jesus went out from the house and sat down by the sea". That is, He went out from the house of natural relationships. We have to leave that house in order to come into the house of spiritual relationships, and as leaving we get these parables. We are told in verses 34 and 35, "All these things Jesus spoke to the crowds in parables, and without a parable he did not speak to them, so that that should be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things hidden from the world's foundation". In verse 36 there is another house. It is another incoming of

Christ, involving another outgoing of Christ, and what have we learnt in it? We have the idea of brethren in chapter 12, and now we are to learn something of the assembly before it is formally stated by name.

W.G.T. The inquiry of the disciples within the house is marked by intelligence.

J.T. Yes, the disciples are progressing. He had dismissed the crowds, and going into the house, the disciples came to Him saying, "Expound to us the parable of the darnel of the field" (verse 36). They are now wanting to know. It is a fine opportunity for the Lord when you want to ask Him questions inside. They did not stand outside as His mother and brethren did; they came to Him and asked Him questions.

W.L. We should learn to distinguish between the outside and inside.

J.T. That is what I thought we might see here. In chapter 12 we have the inside and outside, and now we have definitely reached the house and the Lord in it; and the disciples coming in. They have liberty to do that, they came into the house and asked Him questions.

T.H. I was wondering if the idea of speaking with the Lord was His great objective here, culminating in the highest thought as suggested in the thought of Moses and Elias talking with Him.

J.T. In chapter 5, they went up on the mountain. They did not ask Him questions, He opened His mouth and began to teach them; and later He went on board ship and they followed Him (chapter 8:23). Chapter 13:36 tells us that they asked questions. It is most important to ask questions. The young people especially should ask the Lord about things: "for the Lord will give thee understanding in all things" (2 Timothy 2:7). In our chapter the mysteries of the kingdom are in mind, and we must ask questions, because we shall not understand otherwise.

H.B. Why do they particularly ask in relation to the parable of the darnel of the field?

J.T. Well, they wanted it expounded, they want to understand it. "He that sows the good seed is the Son of man, and the field is the world; and the good seed, these are the sons of the kingdom, but the darnel are the sons of the evil one; and the enemy who has sowed it is the devil; and the harvest is the completion of the age, and the harvestmen are angels" (verses 37-39). The Lord explains it fully. It is the public position that He is explaining to us. He instructs them not to pull up the darnel, because in doing so, they would damage the wheat. We cannot adjust christendom, but we must walk righteously and soberly, as the apostle says, "But youthful lusts flee, and pursue righteousness, faith, love, peace, with those that call upon the Lord out of a pure heart" (2 Timothy 2:22). We cannot deal with the "tares", we have to leave them. It is important to see the general condition of christendom; the Lord does not ask His saints to correct that. The devil has sown the tares and it is beyond our power to deal with them, they have to stay there until the end of the age. Then they shall be cast into the furnace of fire (verse 42).

J.S.T. Would you link the tares with one being like an angel of light and the work he does an imitation? The sons of the kingdom would be like Christ.

J.T. Yes. It is not like the seed of the first parable. In the first parable the seed is the word of God, but the seed here that the Lord Jesus sows, is persons. That is, converted persons are set in the kingdom, and the tares are persons too, as the Lord says, "But the darnel are the sons of the evil one; and the enemy who has sowed it is the devil" (verses 38,39). So that we have to deal with persons in the public history of christendom, and we cannot overcome this sowing of the devil, the sowing of persons, they are just to be left. It is not an assembly matter; when we come to that side of the truth, fellowship, association, is involved; we deal with persons "inside" who are evil, as in Corinth they put them away or, as in our times, we

withdraw from them, but in this parable we have simply the public profession composed of wheat and tares -- individuals; fellowship is not contemplated.

W.L. I was wondering if verse 36 would enable us to be more on positive lines. His disciples came into the house.

J.T. Yes, that verse may be connected with the assembly, with what is within. This is not an assembly matter. It is not an ecclesiastical matter, this parable speaks of persons sown in a public sense by the Lord on the one hand, and sown by the devil on the other.

W.L. In spite of such conditions in christendom we would seek to follow the Lord; is that your thought?

J.T. Quite so, we can work out assembly principles in spite of these tares. John takes them up as the children of God and the children of the devil.

W.J.C. The sons of the kingdom should be able to discern the darnel.

J.T. Well, they do too, but then you do not destroy the darnel. Rome, in the Middle Ages, tried to destroy them, viewing christians as the darnel. They did their best to destroy heretics as they regarded them, but that was violating the principle the Lord lays down here.

Rem. In 2 John 10 we read, "If any one come to you and bring not this doctrine, do not receive him into the house".

J.T. That is an ecclesiastical matter. This in Matthew 13 refers to the public history of christendom; persons sown by the devil, and persons sown by the Son of man; the sons of the kingdom and the sons of the evil one. It is what happened soon after the introduction of christianity; the position must remain "unto the harvest". On the other hand ecclesiastical principles have not failed. 1 Corinthians shows us what to do in regard to persons in the fellowship, we deal with them if they are evil.

R.A. It says, "While men slept, his enemy came and sowed darnel amongst the wheat, and went away" (verse 25). It is through weakness they are allowed to be sown.

J.T. Yes, the negligence of those responsible in christianity. It came in very early. The apostle Paul contemplates that there were some at Corinth; he says, "If any one love not the Lord Jesus Christ let him be Anathema Maranatha" (1 Corinthians 16:22). He also says, "Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light. It is no great thing therefore if his ministers also transform themselves as ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works" (2 Corinthians 11:14,15). In Galatia, too, conditions had made a way for them to get in, and the apostle says, "If any one announce to you as glad tidings anything besides what ye have received, let him be accursed" (Galatians 1:9). He does not wait for the Lord's coming to pronounce the anathema upon him, it is so serious.

J.T.Jr. This judgment is final, whereas assembly discipline has recovery in view in the person.

J.T. A person that is withdrawn from in view of recovery, is not a child of the wicked one; we do not regard him in that way. The man put away at Corinth was not that.

C.M. He said to them, "A man that is an enemy has done this" (verse 28). In verse 39 when expounding the parable the Lord says "the enemy ... is the devil".

J.T. The Lord goes to the bottom of the thing in the exposition. Well, that is the first thing in this new position in the house; the exposition of parables and the opening up of mysteries. In verse 44 we have another view of the kingdom of the heavens, and this is spoken in the house. "The kingdom of the heavens is like a treasure hid in the field, which a man having found has hid, and for the joy of it goes and sells all whatever he has, and buys that field." That is a positive thing -- the treasure found in the field.

Then in verses 45 and 46, "Again, the kingdom of the heavens is like a merchant seeking beautiful pearls; and having found one pearl of great value, he went and sold all whatever he had and bought it".

Then verses 47-50, "Again, the kingdom of the heavens is like a seine which has been cast into the sea, and which has gathered together of every kind, which, when it has been filled, having drawn up on the shore and sat down, they gathered the good into vessels and cast the worthless out. Thus shall it be in the completion of the age: the angels shall go forth and sever the wicked from the midst of the just, and shall cast them into the furnace of fire; there shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth". The weeping and gnashing of teeth is connected with the exposition in verse 42; and now it is seen in the parable of the fish. This shows that Matthew has in mind the full thought of divine wrath in dealing with christendom.

H.H. It is remarkable that these references to judgment come from the lips of the Lord Jesus Himself. It is not second-hand.

S.J.H. Why does the matter of having ears to hear come in between these sections?

J.T. That is a formula in connection with parabolic or such ministry. Judicial ministry, as in the book of the Revelation in the addresses to the assemblies, has the same character as these parables, and you have that expression in each one. "He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the assemblies". It means that there are those who have ears, and those who have not. It is a judicial reference. Why should not each have an ear to hear? The absence of it is judicial, God has not given it to all. Isaiah speaks of this and his words are quoted in this chapter, verse 15; "for the heart of this people has grown fat, and they have heard heavily with their ears, and they have closed their eyes as asleep, lest they should see with the eyes, and hear with the

ears, and understand with the heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them".

J.R.H. In this inside position in the house, we are encouraged, as His brethren, to look for more precious truths, as well as the exposition of the public side of things.

J.T. I think so. These parables cover the ministry during the last one hundred years. It stands in relation to those that have turned away from the other houses, the houses of denominationalism in christendom, and who have entered into this house to ask the Lord questions. They did not rely on catechisms, theological books, or orthodoxy. By the Spirit, they got things directly from Christ, the Head of the assembly, they recognised the house of God. They turned aside from man's organisation. The movement started in Dublin in a quiet way, and the truth opened up to them and became richer and richer. The inquiry as to prophetic ministry, that marked those days, helped greatly. The whole position of christendom was made clear. The service of gathering the good fish into vessels and casting the worthless out, was definitely entered on. This is seen in the last parable in our chapter. They enquired and the Holy Spirit opened up the truth to them.

W.L. Where the Lord is the Centre there is no limit to what we may expect in the way of opening up the truth.

J.T. Yes. The net, or seine, is the gospel net cast into the sea of nations. "Again, the kingdom of the heavens is like a seine which has been cast into the sea, and which has gathered together of every kind, which, when it has been filled, having drawn up on the shore and sat down, they gathered the good into vessels and cast the worthless out". It brings out that there is discrimination. The brethren have learnt that, to refuse what is spurious, and to secure in vessels what is good. Our care meetings are for that purpose, to

determine who is right or wrong. There is deliberation, they sat down to it. So that Paul says, "Lay hands quickly on no man, nor partake in others' sins" (1 Timothy 5:22). Deliberation is most important, discernment entering into it. David says to Abigail, "Blessed be thy discernment" (1 Samuel 25:33).

W.G.T. It follows the parable of the "one pearl". As we lay hold of the truth of the assembly, discriminatory action follows.

J.T. First, it is the thing found, the treasure hid in a field, a man having found it; then secondly, a merchant is seeking a definite commodity -- "beautiful pearls"; as a merchant, he knows their value. Then the seine cast into the sea.

There is one thing I think we should have before us in closing -- verses 51 and 52: "Jesus says to them, Have ye understood all these things? They say to him, Yea, Lord. And he said to them, For this reason every scribe discipled to the kingdom of the heavens is like a man that is a householder who brings out of his treasure things new and old". The teaching of Matthew stands largely in relation to houses and householders. A disciple, a scribe, "discipled to the kingdom of the heavens is like a man that is a householder who brings out of his treasure things new and old". A very interesting man!

A.B. Does Psalm 78:2-4 bear upon that? It says, "I will open my mouth in a parable; I will utter riddles from of old, which we have heard and known, and our fathers have told us: we will not hide them from their sons, shewing forth to the generation to come the praises of Jehovah, and his strength, and his marvellous works which he hath done".

J.T. That is quoted here in verse 35. I think we should all aspire to be scribes discipled into the kingdom of the heavens. The word ' discipled ' meaning one taught under the rules of education, and he has a treasury in

which he has things new and old. He does not reject or underrate the Old Testament, he understands it. He has the old, but he brings out what is new as well. He has beautiful antiques, but also what is new.

Rem. The pearl is not a mechanically made thing.

J.T. It is a formed thing; a secret matter.

CHRIST ASSEMBLING WITH HIS OWN (4)

Matthew 16:13-20; Matthew 17:24-27; Matthew 18:15-20

J.T. It is necessary to link these scriptures with what we closed with yesterday in chapter 13. We observed that in the house the Lord expounded to the disciples, at their own request, the parable of the wheat and tares. He enlarged on His teaching beyond what they could have thought of, because He introduced the assembly there, not under its own name, but in a parabolic sense; under the heading of the treasure and the pearl of great price. It is also in view in the parable of the net cast into the sea. They drew it to shore, and the good fish were put into vessels for further use. The further use is opened up in the scriptures now under consideration.

The Lord enquired of the disciples in chapter 13:51: "Have ye understood all these things?" We reached the end of a previous section in chapter 10. In chapter 11:1 we read, "it came to pass when Jesus had made an end of commanding his twelve disciples". He finished a certain course of instruction involving His authority. He is not always commanding. The Lord would also instruct us. The scribe discipled into the kingdom of the heavens would not need to be constantly reminded of the Lord's authority over him.

Now we are challenged as to whether we understand this teaching: "Have ye understood all these things?" (verse 51). Not only, are we subject, but do we understand? The Lord answered the disciples when they said they did understand, by saying that "every scribe discipled to the kingdom of the heavens is like a man that is a householder". The Lord thus brings in a very great thought based on their assertion that they understood what He was saying. He used the word scribe, meaning that we are not to understand things in a general way, but in a critical way; to be like the Bereans who searched

the Scriptures daily to see if the things Paul taught were right. We are not to be critical in an adverse way, but to be sure that what we are taking in is right. The Lord used the word ' scribe ', I think, as a suggestion of an accurate person; a person who writes. What we say at such meetings as these, as taken down in notes, is sometimes incoherent, and that is not always the fault of the note-taker. When we undertake to publish them, the idea of the scribe must come in; there must be accuracy. ' Householder ' is another figure which the Lord uses, it has a great place in Matthew, both the words, ' house ' and ' householder '. "For this reason every scribe discipled to the kingdom of the heavens is like a man that is a householder who brings out of his treasure things new and old". That is, they are proved things. Like Mary, he keeps them in his mind, pondering them in his heart (Luke 2:19). Thus he has treasure out of which he brings things new and old. He is a spiritually educated man; educated on right principles, as Enoch was educated -- on the principle of discipline.

It is not optional whether we read the Bible or not -- or spiritual ministry. It is a question of understanding, and being obligated to the Lord for it, too; for He will have to say to us as to what He furnishes for the blessing of His people -- whether we value and appropriate it. In Bible readings we can bring out "things new and old". A scribe discipled into the kingdom of the heavens is not speculative; he is an accurate man; he has tested the things by Scripture, and he knows what he is speaking about. I thought we should note, before we proceed, the words, ' scribe ', ' discipled ', and ' householder '. "A man a householder". He is a man, but he is a householder. That is really what is needed for stabilisation among the brethren in our localities -- following up Bible readings, ministry, and the like in the light of verses 51 and 52.

H.H. I feel how very important it is to get things accurately into our souls. Perhaps we are clear about

the pearl being the assembly, but what about the treasure?

J.T. "The kingdom of the heavens is like a treasure hid in the field, which a man having found has hid, and for the joy of it goes and sells all whatever he has, and buys that field" (verse 44). The Lord's exposition of the parable of the wheat and tares tells us that the field is the world. The assembly is largely secured in cities; it is remarkable how much is made of cities in relation to the assembly economy: but here it is not the cities, but the field -- a wide thought. The Lord pictures Himself as having found it, which, I suppose, would mean that He found it in His disciples. In Matthew 10, in relation to the Jewish economy, He told them not to go elsewhere, but "to the lost sheep of the house of Israel". Now, He finds something wider than that; He finds this "treasure", as if He was not looking for it, but had been occupied with something else. He finds this, that the disciples were developing assembly qualities in their intelligence and affections, and so He is minded to buy the field. It is not now the land of Israel, but the whole world; the wide field in which the gospel was to be preached (Mark 16:15). He sees the treasure there potentially. Similarly, when Paul came to Corinth, a gentile position, the Lord said to him, "No one shall set upon thee to injure thee; because I have much people in this city" (Acts 18:10). He had them there potentially, though not yet secured. So here, the treasure is said to be found, and He hides it. "Which a man having found has hid." It would be, I think, the saints viewed as affording the Lord more joy than He had found in the Jewish setting.

A.E.H. Do you think chapter 13:44 should be carried forward to our present scripture? The Lord, in chapter 16, names the revelation to Peter. In chapter 13 He found the treasure, but what it is, is not stated.

J.T. That is what I thought we might see. He names it in chapter 16, consequent upon the revelation

the Father had made to Peter, because Peter was thus constituted actual material for the assembly. Chapter 13 does not go that far. It is simply treasure. So far the Lord was only dealing with the Jewish disciples, but now He takes a wider outlook. He has bought the whole field in order to secure this treasure; it is going on yet, including America. He is securing it out of the whole world through the gospel, but then He hides it. It is not yet a public thing. It is a mystery, the mystery of the gospel.

J.R.H. In Ephesians 3:15 the apostle addresses God as "the Father ..., of whom every family in the heavens and on earth is named". There are other families beside the assembly, but would they be comprised in the treasure?

J.T. I think not. It is the assembly. The way it is spoken of would plainly indicate this. He enlarges on it in the next parable, which is another phase of the same thing. We have two other accounts; one in verses 45 and 46, and one in verses 47 to 50; the three together would form a group referring to the same thing, only in different phases. The pearl is a greater thought than the treasure, and it is something being sought by one who would know its value. He was seeking goodly pearls, and found one that was exceptional and secured it.

A.E.H. Going back to this question of hiding the treasure, does that develop in chapter 16, in connection with the various opinions that are abroad, and to which the Lord calls attention in His question? Is the secret or mystery of it seen in what is alluded to as in the soul of Peter?

J.T. Just so. The acquiring of the knowledge of Christ's sonship in chapter 16 is not by signs, as in chapter 14, where He is recognised as the Son of God, because of what is seen objectively in Him. That is not the foundation of the assembly; this in chapter 16 is what He is as revealed by the Father, and Peter as having that revelation is constituted actual material

for the building. These verses in chapter 13, therefore, as was remarked, are linked on with chapter 16, where the assembly is formally named, when the Father reveals to Peter who Christ is.

This section of chapter 16 is strikingly illustrative of our whole subject, because it is the Lord coming in among them. "When Jesus was come into the parts of Caesarea-Philippi, he demanded of his disciples, saying, Who do men say that I the Son of man am?" It is a meeting, a private meeting, you may say, with the disciples, and in His incoming the Lord's mind is engaged with something. What are men saying about Him? That has a great place today. What are men saying about Jesus?

A.E.H. This would be an outstanding feature in Peter's education for his service later.

J.T. He would certainly need to get the good of this meeting, because in his service he would find people enquiring about Jesus; some too giving their opinion as to who He is, and it would be very important to be able to answer questions of that kind, and to insist on the truth. The Lord has helped us in late years as to this great matter, and we should all understand the truth of the Son of God.

W.J.C. Is the mystery bound up in Peter's answer to the Lord's question?

J.T. It is bound up in the Lord's word to Peter, as given in verse 18.

W.J.C. Would you say that Deity is involved in it -- Deity in manhood?

J.T. That is right. First of all, what are men saying? The Lord is enquiring as to what others are saying, and in service we are bound to come into contact with these varied views as to Christ. Christendom is full of them now. It was not that they meant to be derogatory, but what they are saying was derogatory to Him. "Who do men say that I the Son of man am?"

To say that He was John the baptist was belittling Him: to say that He was Elias or Jeremiah was belittling Him. Then one who would say that He was "one of the prophets", was very vague and uncertain in his mind. So that what is needed now in meeting all these views is definiteness as to the Person of Christ. This definiteness is the outcome of the clear knowledge of Him by the Spirit.

J.T.Jr. In Deuteronomy 33, Moses has a place in the affections of the Israelites -- "king in Jeshurun". Would that link on with our present thoughts? Moses was the one who had given commandments, but finally, the people give him his true place -- king in Jeshurun.

J.T. That was when the heads of the people and the tribes of Israel were gathered together. Men who knew Moses would honour him. A great concentration of spiritual wealth is contemplated in Deuteronomy 33, and Moses was king in Jeshurun -- an upright people. Well, that is the point now. Am I upright in what I am saying about Christ? Where do I get my thoughts? Am I a scribe discipled into the kingdom of the heavens, endeavouring to be accurate? The Lord, we may say, is coming to the upright people; the taught people, in Matthew 16:13. He says to them, "But ye (' Ye ' is emphatic) who do ye say that I am?" They are different from the generality of persons who were speaking about the Lord Jesus. The ye means persons who understood what He had already taught them, upright men. What good are we if we are not upright? King in Jeshurun means king among an upright people, and such a people would be accurate. They would not be speculative, but reverential in regard of Christ.

H.H. The word Thou is emphatic as to Christ: "Thou art the Christ"; and lower down as to Peter: "thou art Peter".

J.T. Personality is in mind. The same suggestion as in "But ye, who do ye say that I am?" The first "ye" is emphatic. We get one of the greatest

thoughts -- a revelation of the Father to one of those persons; it was not simply what Peter saw in Him objectively, as in chapter 14, but what the Father revealed to Peter.

W.G.T. Do you link this scripture with John 6:69?

J.T. The authorised version is misleading there. According to the New Translation, Peter says, "We have believed and known that thou art the holy one of God". It was not a revelation, but rather what the disciples learned by experience; "we have believed and known" refers to past history. Peter and the others believed and knew, not that He was the Son of God, but "the holy one of God". It is a question of His priesthood, He is the Minister of the sanctuary. Peter is stating what he and his fellow disciples already knew. It is a settled matter. It is his own experience. "Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast words of life eternal." Others were drifting away. The feeding of the multitude in John 6 corresponds with Matthew 14, and this incident in Matthew 16 is later.

J.W.D. The revelation would bring about in Peter an affinity with Christ. The thought he expressed was interwoven in his spiritual being. He was subjectively part of the system that is headed up in the Christ. I am thinking of 1 Corinthians 12:12.

J.T. "So also is the Christ." Peter was included in that. And the word stone bears out the affinity you mention; the ideas of stone and rock being akin; so the affinity is striking both as to material and anointing. "The Christ" is connected with the anointing; and in 1 Corinthians 12:12 it refers to the saints.

A.B. Would "one of the prophets" suggest limitations in regard to the Lord in that sense?

J.T. Quite so. Some were saying He was John the baptist; a great man. Another says, Elias; a great man too. Then another says Jeremiah, coming down in the scale a bit; and then one of the prophets. Well, that would include the minor prophets. You can see

the man who says "one of the prophets" is very vague and very careless. There was no idea of guarding the Person of Christ, but that is so characteristic of what men are saying today about Jesus.

E.P. Do these parts of Caesarea-Philippi suggest the region of the speculative mind of man? Is it over against the Colossian truth -- the greatness of Christ, and the greatness of what was introduced in Him?

J.T. Yes. I think too the idea of territory is involved. He is in the vicinity of the nations. The gentile world is in mind. The Lord deliberately raised this question there. Territory or locality has a great deal to do with the assembly.

E.P. Do you think it is an imposing kind of thing, the idea of Caesarea-Philippi, the greatness of man in his own realm?

J.T. It is as to name. It denoted too that the Lord was going wider in His thoughts; going out into the gentile world. Peter opened the door to Cornelius, when Cornelius was an officer in the Roman army, and head of the band called "Italic"; Peter's action went out to the Roman world. God was working with Cornelius in view of the assembly, in view of the great thought of God indicated in the vessel coming down from heaven (Acts 10:11). All the beasts were there; all the fowls of the air, and the creeping things: God was cleansing them, for He had in mind to go out to the gentile world. Peter did not preach the Son of God to Cornelius; he preached Christ. Paul brings in the Son of God in the testimony of the gospel. Peter knew that truth by revelation, but you do not get it in his ministry unless in the second epistle, where he speaks of the Son of God, announced from heaven (chapter 1:17). The truth of the Son of God is brought in by Paul, in whom God revealed Him, that he might preach Him as glad tidings among the nations (Galatians 1:16). Paul could tell the whole truth of the Son of God in the gentile world.

E.P. Paul speaks about the gospel preached in the whole creation under heaven. Does that fit in with your thought?

J.T. Yes. In Colossians he greatly enlarges on the truth of the Son of God.

J.T.Jr. Is the thought of government in Matthew connected with "the Christ"?

J.T. Yes; the facts in the opening chapters indicate He is "called Christ", and the "generations in chapter 1 end in "the Christ". Government or rule is clearly in view. The magi ask for "the king of the Jews". Then "the Christ" is the one who does things for God. That is the point Peter makes -- Jesus of Nazareth, anointed of God -- "who went through all quarters doing good ... because God was with him" (Acts 10:38). He was doing things for God, and God was with Him in what He was doing; but the Son of God is what Paul stresses as to Corinth. "The Son of God", he says, "Jesus Christ, he who has been preached by us among you (by me and Silvanus and Timotheus)" (2 Corinthians 1:19). The two brothers with him preached the Son of God. It was a threefold testimony to this great truth, and significantly so in Corinth, where the foundation was. "Other foundation can no man lay besides that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ" (1 Corinthians 3:11). He does not say Son of God, but the Son of God was involved. He says Jesus Christ was the foundation he laid; no doubt because of the state of things in Corinth, and of course it enters into the general thought, but the Son of God is the great foundational thought. Jesus Christ is the moral side of the truth, what He was as Man down here.

H.H. Christ dwelling in your hearts by faith (Ephesians 3:17), would that correspond with what has been before us?

J.T. Yes. It is a question of the great divine Operator, the Christ. The Holy Spirit operates subjectively, but He works under Christ. The Christ is the Messiah, but the appellation is taken up in christianity

with a deeper and fuller significance than it had in Israel. "That the Christ may dwell, through faith, in your hearts." The great divine Operator is to dwell in our hearts.

J.S.T. Is there something to be gained by the thought of territory, in Saul being enlightened on the road to Damascus, and then the epistle just referred to, coming out of the Roman prison?

J.T. I think territory has a great deal to do with the testimony -- places God selects in which to witness to certain things. The Lord does not reveal Himself to Saul of Tarsus in Jewish territory, He waits till he gets into Syrian territory; and later He tells him to leave Jerusalem. The Lord says, "Go, for I will send thee to the nations afar off" (Acts 22:21).

W.W. Paul wrote, "marked out Son of God in power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by resurrection of the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord" (Romans 1:4).

J.T. That brings up another thing. If we preach Him we must consider as to what phase of the truth of the Son of God we should present. The first announcement is, "The holy thing also which shall be born shall be called Son of God" (Luke 1:35). At Christ's baptism, the Father's voice proclaimed Him as Son, "Thou art my beloved Son" (Luke 3:22). When we come to Paul's foundational epistle, Romans, he refers to the Lord being "marked out Son of God in power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by resurrection of the dead" (Romans 1:4). It is not His own resurrection that is in view exactly, but that He could raise the dead; however many there were, He could raise them all. That is what is needed in the gospel. The Son of God "has annulled death, and brought to light life and incorruptibility by the glad tidings".

H.H. The gospel extends to us on these lines, so one does not preach a full gospel if he leaves sonship out.

J.T. I think Romans would link the thought of the Son of God with Machpelah, the place where those who died in faith were buried. The Lord would take all those out of death. He is marked out Son of God in power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by resurrection of the dead. The word "dead" there is plural. No matter how long a man may be dead, Christ will raise him. The more you think of it the more wonderful it is to you.

W.G.T. "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God", would imply that the Lord would have to do with the resurrection world.

J.T. Quite so. It is also an allusion to the deadness of judaism at that time, and of course has great force, as bearing on the deadness of christianity today; it is not simply Son of God, but the Son of the Living God.

S.J.H. These different ways of speaking of the Son of God indicate what the scribe would understand -- he would know when to bring out a particular feature.

J.T. That is right. The different phases of sonship that the Scriptures open up to us are remarkable. Gabriel announced, He "shall be called the Son of God"; the voice from heaven addressed Him, "My beloved Son"; and John says, "We have contemplated his glory, a glory as of an only-begotten with a father" (John 1:14); and again, "the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father" (John 1:18). It is not who was, but who is in the bosom of the Father. In the number of further instances, we have phases of this great truth as to the Person of the Son of God.

J.W.D. Why does the Lord say My assembly, and not God's assembly?

J.T. I suppose to confirm the truth of His Person as revealed to Peter. I would connect it especially with Him as the Christ, because it is a question of what He has now, His rights as Son of David being denied by the Jews. That He builds and possesses the assembly is a great testimony to His Person. Hebrews 3:3-6

shows that the deity of Christ is involved in His building the house of God and being over it as Son. Here He says, "My assembly", which points to His deity. He says, "I also"; the Father had spoken to Peter and now the Son speaks to him -- speaks as a divine Person. The assembly would be His, and He would use it in His administrative service in the economy with which He was entrusted; the Father giving all things into His hands. So the assembly has a special place in the service of God. The Lord's supper is peculiarly His own matter; it is celebrated in His assembly, but He does not confine assembly service to the celebration of the Supper. He proceeds to the Father, to God; and finally to His Father and our Father, and to His God and our God. The Supper is initiatory to the great thought. The Lord's supper is His own supper, but as the Minister of the sanctuary, He proceeds from it to fill out the full service of God.

W.L. Would you say the thought of My assembly follows on chapter 13, and is connected with the treasure and the pearl?

J.T. Yes. He finds both.

A.B. He sold all whatever He had, in order to secure both the treasure and the pearl.

J.T. Yes, it is the cost to Himself, and this enters into His ownership of the assembly. It is, nevertheless, God's assembly in a wider sense. It comes down from God out of heaven as the heavenly city, but it also comes down adorned as a bride for her husband, so it belongs to Christ as the Bridegroom, and at the same time it is alluded to as the tabernacle of God (Revelation 21:1-3). The ideas connected with the treasure and the pearl run together, but the pearl would point to Paul's work. The Lord's word to Peter, "Thou art Peter", asserts that he was material for it.

D.G. The woman at Sychar could say, "Come, see a man who told me all things I had ever done:

is not he the Christ?" (John 4:29). Is that material for the assembly?

J.T. The great truth brought out in her was that she discerned she was a vessel for service. She left her water pot and went her way to the city, meaning she had been secured as a vessel rather than as material for the assembly. She had been a polluted vessel, but now she is a purified one, and she comes to the men of the city, and says, "Come, see a man who told me all things I had ever done: is not he the Christ?". The Christ -- the One who does things and she is now ready to do things.

H.H. She had something in her vessel, "I perceive that thou art a prophet", and she has living water too.

J.T. It is a very important side of the truth, that we are secured as vessels. Immediately we are enlightened we become part of the service; and so the woman of Samaria immediately secures men for the Lord.

W.G.T. Would there be any suggestion here that there is the transfer of authority from judaism to heaven, in the reference to the Father in the heavens? Peter was to obtain the keys of the kingdom of the heavens. Judaism is no longer owned.

J.T. Yes. That is seen in Peter's service in Acts 10. It is a movement of heaven, the vessel comes down out of heaven.

E.P. Do you think this thought of revelation should prepare us for something fresh? Heaven has the right to communicate its own mind in regard to matters at any moment.

J.T. It is wonderful; a new thing altogether, beginning with the Father. It is an extension of the Lord's remark in chapter 11:25, where He says, "I thank thee, O Father ... thou ... hast revealed them unto babes". Peter, however, is not viewed as a babe here. He has progressed in the truth. The Father reveals

this great truth to him; and as Peter makes the confession, the Lord acts on that.

S.P. Manhood is seen here in Peter over against manhood according to men in the area of Caesarea-Philippi.

J.T. Yes. Caesar and Philip were great names in the gentile world. Philip and Andrew came to tell the Lord that the Greeks said, "Sir, we would see Jesus". They thought it was important that the Lord should know that such people had come to find out about Jesus. The Lord immediately says, "Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone" (John 12:24). The greatest of these men is of no account at all in the new world. All that is for God must be on the principle of death and resurrection.

E.P. Paul closes the epistle to the Romans with an allusion to the mystery.

J.T. Yes; he has laid the basis for it, and that would be the next thing for the Romans to understand -- the mystery of God. We have it here, and the Father is moving; so that we are in the full economy of God here. The Father reveals to Peter who Christ was. The Son reveals the Father, but the Father reveals the Son so far as the Son may be revealed. The Lord says, "No one knows the Son but the Father" (Matthew 11:27), He does not say the Father reveals Him, but that the Son reveals the Father; so that the revelation here does not refer to the inscrutableness of Christ, but to what He was as Man before Peter's eyes and the eyes of others. That is what is in mind, even as in Ephesians 4:13, where ministry is used for the perfecting of the saints, "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". We are to know Him in that way.

W.J.C. In what way then does the Father make the Son known?

J.T. By revelation. That is the point here: "flesh and blood has not revealed it to thee", meaning that Peter could not have learned it from any mere human source. It was the Father's revelation, the Father calling attention to the Person about whom the people were so puzzled; none called Him by the right name. The Father reveals Him to Peter, who calls Him by His right name; "the Christ, the Son of the living God". This is the basis of all that follows. If the Father draws attention to Christ, it is on this ground. We are all to be in the knowledge of Him as thus made known. It is a greater transaction in Peter's case than with ourselves, because it is foundational. Believers now are brought into this by spiritual means. Paul says, "God ... was pleased to reveal his Son in me, that I may announce him as glad tidings among the nations" (Galatians 1:16). Peter did not get the revelation for that purpose, but for a foundation of the assembly. Peter's name means stone; he is material for the assembly, but the revelation to Paul was for preaching. He preached the Son of God at Corinth.

H.H. In his first epistle Peter speaks of Christ as a Living Stone disallowed of men, but chosen of God and precious.

J.T. Yes. We also are living stones built up a spiritual house, as coming to Christ in this light. There is thus the working out of the truth of this chapter in Peter's ministry.

Ques. Do we see the work of God in the blind man when Christ asked him the question, "Thou, dost thou believe on the Son of God? He answered and said, And who is he, Lord, that I may believe on him?" The Lord told him. "And he said, I believe, Lord: and he did him homage" (John 9:35-38).

J.T. That is another view of what we are speaking of, the Lord Himself declaring that He is the Son of God. It was to a man that had been cast out. It is another point of view which is most important. He

says to him thou, addressing him personally, "Thou, dost thou believe on the Son of God?" And Jesus said to him, "Thou hast both seen him, and he that speaks with thee is he". He is thoroughly secured as a worshipper of the Son of God.

W.G.T. The public matter, what men were saying, is left unadjusted here, whereas the private matter is adjusted and then kept secret.

J.T. It was not to be added to the public profession. I think christendom corresponds in the different views of Christ that exist in it; but this great matter was to be a secret. "Then he enjoined on his disciples that they should say to no man that he was the Christ." That subject is finished.

In chapter 17, we have the question raised of sonship in the brethren. The personnel of the assembly now is in mind, not from the standpoint of material, but from the standpoint of dignity, personal dignity. So the question arises in Capernaum, Does your Master pay the tax? and Peter, without thinking of accuracy, says, Yes. Peter did not understand sonship. He had been up in the mountain with the Lord and heard God proclaim Him as Son, and now he tells some questioner that the Lord is just like anyone else, and is subject to the temple tax. The temple belonged to God, and God had just proclaimed Christ as Son, and hence why should He be taxed? "When he came into the house, Jesus anticipated him." This is another session in "the house", as in chapter 13:36. The Lord opens up the truth of sonship in its application both to Himself and to Peter; a very important item in our subject.

J.T.Jr. Does Peter represent therefore in a general way how the truth proceeds in our souls; that is, the revelation first, before the Lord tells them what is going to happen to Him in Jerusalem? Peter rebukes Him -- he fails; and then he fails again in this chapter. Is that the way we usually learn this great subject -- through our failures?

J.T. Largely it is so. The correction is intended to help us. Peter would not forget this. Possibly he raised the question with Matthias, if he remembered this incident as to how the Lord brought out sonship; how it applied to Christ and the saints; it is not a question of fitness for heaven here, but that I am immune from the taxation. It is a question of the temple tax, and God does not put me under tribute in His house. Sons are free in the assembly. We are all to learn this in the assembly, that we are free.

H.H. Sonship in relation to Christ would have Deity behind it. Sonship, of course, for us would not.

J.T. Quite so, we are adopted. We have the same Spirit, the Spirit of God's Son.

E.P. This house would be a place of increased light, in all this teaching as to sonship. Peter coming into this house gets a fresh touch as to what is proper to the new system.

J.T. Yes. If it were the house the Lord lived in at Capernaum, which is probable, it would give it all the more significance. Capernaum is called "his own city". I think the Lord brings out this truth of sonship, not so much now in relation to our heavenly calling, but as in the testimony, to set aside legal claims that might be imposed upon us in the assembly. We are apt to impose these claims, but if we understand the sonship of Christ, and that we have the Spirit of sonship, we can see there is no tributary claim to be made upon us.

E.P. Would this be felt in the care meeting in Acts 15? Peter's word as to the matter of circumcision seems to result from this.

J.T. It is just what came out there. It was a question of sonship. The judaisers were endeavouring to bring the gentiles into bondage.

E.P. "It seemed good to the apostles and to the elders, with the whole assembly, to send chosen men from among them with Paul and Barnabas to Antioch,

Judas called Barsabas and Silas, leading men among the brethren" (Acts 15:22). The whole position was in keeping with it.

J.T. Just so. Bringing out how the spirit of liberty was still in the assembly at Jerusalem. So that the Me and thee in Matthew 17:27 is beautiful. He says, "Take that and give it to them for me and thee". We are not obligated by God to do it, but lest we should be an offence we do it; but maintain the truth all the same. If men asked us to do something that others do, we are careful that the truth is not compromised by it. That is the point the Lord makes. He establishes the truth of sonship and then pays the tribute.

W.G.T. This is a matter that ordinarily would have been handled by Judas, who "had the bag", but it seems as if the Lord took it out of his hands.

J.T. The Lord did not enquire if Peter had something in the bag to meet the demand. The Lord's creative position is brought into this. The sea is His; He knew it; He made it. The fishes of the sea were His; He knew where they were, and here is one fish, and Peter was to get that fish, and it has in its mouth just what is needed and no more. The stater is enough to pay the tax for two persons, and the Creator provides it, which brings in another side of the Lord's position here.

E.P. It is really Psalm 8:6-9 in principle -- "Thou hast made him to rule over the works of thy hands; thou hast put everything under his feet: sheep and oxen, all of them, and also the beasts of the field; the fowl of the heavens, and the fishes of the sea, whatever passeth through the paths of the seas. Jehovah our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth!"

J.R.H. There seems to be a certain concession on the part of the Lord in paying this tax. Paul speaks of not giving place for one hour in this great matter that the truth might continue.

J.T. In relation to all governmental requirements, you go a long way; the demand was by an established authority. The temple tax was an established matter; there were those responsible for its collection, but the Lord makes the position of Himself and the disciples clear, before they paid it, so that the truth is maintained. That is what came up at Jerusalem. Paul and Barnabas maintain the truth at all cost. The letter written to "the brethren who are from among the nations" was very limited, but it contained what was needed to meet the emergency. It did not assert the truth of sonship. In the epistle to the Galatians where he refers to this very meeting at Jerusalem, Paul enlarges on the truth of sonship and the liberty that it implies. The letter sent out from Jerusalem did not go nearly as far as that. It was, however, supported by the Holy Spirit and carried the authority of the apostles at Jerusalem, which was needed to silence the judaisers. Paul carried and delivered it to the brethren, showing he was a son and ready to acquiesce with anything that was right and that furthered the prosperity and unity of the saints.

A.H.P. While the Lord provides this tax and pays it, the following chapters indicate that the dignity of sonship should characterise the assembly.

J.T. Yes. It is a heavenly people that compose the assembly down here. They belong to heaven and they are sons. Chapter 18 carries this forward, showing that we deal with assembly matters on this line of sonship. It says, "if thy brother" -- all is to be in the spirit of sonship. There is no exacting -- it is to gain thy brother.

S.P. Is the teaching of these chapters drawing closer to that which is inside; in the previous chapters we had externals?

J.T. Yes, I think we are getting nearer. Scripture says of David that he built inward. The gospels are all on that line, John particularly, although, of course,

they deal also with what is public, but I think sonship is what is in mind as the great inner thought linking us with heaven. Heavenly dignity and liberty are implied. All assembly discipline is to be carried on in that spirit. So the passage in chapter 17 bears on chapter 18.

CHRIST ASSEMBLING WITH HIS OWN (5)

Matthew 26:26-40; Matthew 28:16-20; Acts 1:1-9

J.T. Some further remarks are called for on the passages read this morning in chapter 18, following on chapter 17 where sonship is introduced, linking up the saints with the Lord in it. In the word about the piece of money, the Lord says, "Take that and give it to them for me and thee". Then we have a meeting contemplated in chapter 18. The disciples came to Him saying, "Who then is greatest in the kingdom of the heavens? And Jesus having called a little child to him, set it in their midst, and said, Verily I say to you, Unless ye are converted and become as little children, ye will not at all enter into the kingdom of the heavens. Whoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of the heavens" (verses 1-4). Their inquiry here indicated that they needed correction; indeed, they needed to be converted, an important item in our instruction; for those engaged in the service, this coming in and going out of the Lord involves instruction as to their aspirations. Their minds were on the idea of greatness in the kingdom of the heavens, and the Lord shows the way of it in a little child. "And Jesus having called a little child to him, set it in their midst." Verse 15 brings up the question of a brother sinning against another, and that the adjustment of the matter must include the spirit of sonship. The Lord says "If he hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother." It is a family matter.

A.B. Would you say more in regard of the incident at the close of chapter 17 as bearing upon chapter 18?.

J.T. Sonship belongs to heaven properly, but we are sons down here, and the spirit of sonship is to be seen in our relations with men. That is the point. It was in the town where the Lord resided, where He was known personally, and some enquirer said to Peter,

"Does your teacher not pay the didrachmas?" Peter answered, "Yes", without asking the Lord. He did not understand the bearing of sonship. He did not carry down from the mount of Transfiguration the full thought conveyed there. The Lord Jesus, being the Son, could not be tributary to any one. The tax was not obligatory on Him; but Peter assumed that it was -- it means that he did not understand the Lord's sonship. When he came into the house, Jesus anticipated him; that is, the Lord knew what had happened. Peter had not said anything to Him as yet, but the Lord knew what had happened, and He would adjust Peter as to it by bringing out these facts. He calls upon Peter to tell Him about the kings of the earth, meaning that the Lord expects us to understand such matters as that. He says, "The kings of the earth, from whom do they receive custom or tribute? from their own sons or from strangers? Peter says to him, From strangers". He knew that, but he did not learn the great lesson on the Mount of Transfiguration as to the Person of Christ.

A.B. He had been told that "there is here what is greater than the temple" (Matthew 12:6).

J.T. Yes. He ought to remember that too.

J.H.Jr. Would the spirit of sonship provide a bulwark against the gates of hades? not only from the outside in chapter 17, but from the inside in chapter 18.

J.T. The outside is important because it is said, "Let your gentleness be known of all men" (Philippians 4:5). We are not set against what the ministers of the government may require; we are ready to agree to do anything that does not compromise the rights of God. The Lord said to Saul of Tarsus, "Saul, Saul, why dost thou persecute me?" (Acts 9:4). Saul and his fellow persecutors had met the spirit of Christ in the houses of christians in Jerusalem. James says later, "Ye have condemned, ye have killed the just; he does not resist you" (James 5:6). That is the attitude of the spirit of sonship, the spirit of Christ in the saints; a very important

one, when special demands are being made upon us by the military, customs and immigration departments. We are to take up this attitude, "But that we may not be an offence to them", the Lord says, "take that and give it to them for me and thee".

W.L. Chapter 18:14 helps us as to our attitude as sons in a practical way. The Lord had said of the little ones, that "their angels in the heavens continually behold the face of my Father who is in the heavens" (verse 10). Then in verse 14, "It is not the will of your Father who is in the heavens that one of these little ones should perish".

J.T. The whole passage contemplates the little ones as inoffensive, unpretentious and outwardly unprotected. Paul says, "For thy sake we are put to death all the day long; we have been reckoned as sheep for slaughter" (Romans 8:36). That is the suffering attitude.

J.T.Jr. This gospel brings out at the beginning the little Child under divine protection; I suppose that is carried through.

J.T. Yes. Jesus is called the little Child several times. In the second chapter He is very exposed. The spirit of Rachel enters into this gospel: "Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not" (verse 18). Herod had murdered them. It is the bitter opposition of the enemy against the little children. The Lord is not here called a babe, but "the little child", and always put before His mother; His personal dignity is maintained, but He is still exposed to attack. Almost the whole of chapter 2 is devoted to the protection of the little Child. In chapter 18 it is unseen interest in the "little ones": "their angels in the heavens continually behold the face of my Father who is in the heavens". It means that they are represented up there and come in for the protection of God.

H.H. Is the protection connected now with the kingdom of the heavens?

J.T. The kingdom is provision for us in that sense. It is a bulwark, it is called usually the kingdom of the heavens in this gospel, to bring out the attitude of heaven. The Voice from heaven proclaiming the Father's delight in the Lord Jesus would show that we may look up there for the protection of what is lovable to heaven, the continuation of Christ here in the saints; they are lovable to the Father; "their angels ... continually behold the face of my Father who is in the heavens". It is a beautiful touch.

E.P. Would they discern correspondence in the little ones to the face they beheld in heaven?

J.T. I suppose so, reflection here; as in christians it is the continuation of Christ in a spiritual sense. It is very remarkable, the place children have in this gospel, beginning with the second chapter; the weeping of Rachel, the spirit of Christ we may say, because they are murdered; it came down through Jeremiah from Genesis, Rachel weeping for her children. Now in this chapter we have a little child amenable to the call of the Lord. In chapter 11:25, it is babes, the very smallest conception of human beings. The Lord says to His Father, "I praise thee, Father, Lord of the heaven and of the earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them to babes". So that the work of God is built up from the bottom in the little ones. It is seen in this little child available to the Lord; He can set him down in the midst of the disciples. Then in chapter 21 we have the children singing in the temple; taking up a note which began with the blind men in chapter 20:30; they addressed the Lord Jesus as "Son of David". In the beginning of chapter 21 we have the quotation from Zechariah 9:9, "Behold thy King cometh to thee, meek, and mounted upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass". The crowds say, "Hosanna to the Son of David", a salutation carried forward, as we may say, from the blind men in chapter 20. It is maintained,

and carried forward in increased power among the crowd. Then in the temple, verses 15 and 16, "when the chief priests and the scribes saw the wonders which he wrought, and the children crying in the temple and saying, Hosanna to the Son of David, they were indignant, and said to him, Hearest thou what these say? And Jesus says to them, Yea; have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise?" It seems to me that the thought of children is greatly enlarged on in Matthew, as typical of christians; the note of praise is carried forward, and maintained by them in the temple, the Lord Jesus justifying it against attacks.

A.M. It is most important that we should learn this lesson so that right relations might be maintained with our brethren prior to moving on in assembly service.

J.T. That is right. Chapter 18:15, "But if thy brother sin against thee, go, reprove him between thee and him alone". We are to remember he is our brother, "If he hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother". It is clear that the offended one has the spirit of Christ, the spirit of sonship. You can see the thought of it in chapter 12. Jesus walked through the cornfields on the sabbath, establishing liberty. In chapter 17 He anticipated what was in Peter's mind. If you were there, the Lord would impress you with the fact that He is Son and you are one with Him. He is associating you with Him in sonship before the world, it is not before the Father here, but before the world.

J.R.H. How do you distinguish between before the world and before the Father?

J.T. Matthew 17 refers to what I am in my daily life; the way I treat other people; the officials of the government and the like; I am subject; not self-assertive. The Lord as ill-treated was "as a sheep dumb before her shearers, and he opened not his mouth"; that is the wonderful testimony of Isaiah 53, and Romans 8:36,37

connects it with the saints; "For thy sake we are put to death all the day long; we have been reckoned as sheep for slaughter. But in all these things we more than conquer through him that has loved us".

H.B. The Lord gives quite a long answer to the question of the disciples in chapter 18.

J.T. You see how important it is that we should have this long answer, and then the long object lesson too in the little child as to who is greatest in the kingdom.

W.J.C. Does this cover anything more than personal trespass?

J.T. The Lord is dealing with the family, carrying the thought forward, it is the family, especially the brother. "If thy brother sin against thee." He is worth something, he belongs to the family. "If he hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he do not hear thee, take with thee one or two besides, that every matter may stand upon the word of two witnesses or of three. But if he will not listen to them, tell it to the assembly; and if also he will not listen to the assembly, let him be to thee as one of the nations and a tax-gatherer" (Matthew 18:15-17). The state of the offender is in mind, for he goes forward in evil if he refuses to listen to the assembly.

W.J.C. Does the instruction apply to anything that might be known amongst the saints that has to be taken up?

J.T. The principle taught is wide; applying especially to discipline resulting from refusal to hear the assembly. That might arise in any case of discipline. You may not be able to prove wickedness against a person although you feel it is there, but the attitude the person takes up will in time tell. If he is insubject, if he refuses first one brother, and then two or perhaps three, and then finally refuses to hear the assembly, his will is at work; the principle of will being at work is lawlessness. That is a great matter in cases of

discipline -- how does the person involved regard the brethren?

H.H. How does it get to the assembly? Does the care meeting come in there?

J.T. I think so. That is where the witnesses are heard.

A.M. Is it important to see that it primarily should be kept in the smallest possible compass, the one brother first of all. "But if thy brother sin against thee, go, reprove him between thee and him alone."

J.T. That is quite clear there. You keep it within the smallest possible compass. There are some things that can be dealt with without bringing them to the assembly if the offending one is amenable to his brother. If he is not and thus disregards the possible loss of his brother he is void of the spirit of sonship.

W.G.T. "Unless ye are converted and become as little children, ye will not at all enter into the kingdom of the heavens" (verse 3). Would that not be of help to the brethren generally? We would have to be in that attitude to be of any use in dealing with such a case; we need to be priestly.

S.J.H. I judge if one were to go to a brother in the spirit of sonship, you might go once or twice before bringing others, so as to avoid legalism.

J.T. Yes, we are to preclude the legal element at all times. The apostle said to the Corinthians, "For this reason I have sent to you Timotheus, who is my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, who shall put you in mind of my ways as they are in Christ, according as I teach everywhere in every assembly" (1 Corinthians 4:17). As Paul's child, he was available. Paul would call him and send him to Corinth, a "beloved and faithful child in the Lord". Perhaps that is the combination that is needed! Childship is derived from Paul; Paul begetting through the gospel and personal influence, which you might say was the influence of Christ. Then the child is beloved, that is, a lovable person. Of

course, I must be faithful and bring the truth clearly before the offending one, but I want lovableness too. I may be wanting in the beloved character.

J.W.D. "Tell it to the assembly", did you say the care meeting was equivalent to that? It has been suggested that the assembly may be convened so that the excess of grace which is in it may be brought to bear on an offender before a meeting for formal discipline is called.

J.T. That grace marks the assembly is established in Luke 24:33,34. It is said, "They found the eleven, and those with them, gathered together, saying, The Lord is indeed risen and has appeared to Simon". That is, this whole company is occupied with this point of grace. The Lord appeared to Simon, the offending one, the one who denied Him. That ought to pervade care meetings; if it is really a care meeting, love is acting. "How shall he take care of the assembly of God?" (1 Timothy 3:5). In the meeting called the care meeting, we are taking care of the assembly of God, and I think brethren together in that way are normally an expression of grace; we ought to be expressive of grace. There should be the greatest consideration for the offender because he is our brother. But in cases of discipline the assembly should be convened only for executive service, not for investigation or deliberation.

R.A. Do you think the Me and thee enters into this -- the Lord moving on that occasion that He might not offend?

J.T. Yes. You do not want to lose the brother. The Lord would preserve Peter, "And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold Satan has demanded to have you, to sift you as wheat; but I have besought for thee that thy faith fail not" (Luke 22:31,32). The Lord would secure Peter, and so as risen He appeared to him on the first day; that is grace. The whole company was occupied with this one point -- "the Lord is

indeed risen and has appeared to Simon". Paul says, "For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that for your sakes he, being rich, became poor, in order that ye by his poverty might be enriched" (2 Corinthians 8:9). It is a question of the grace of Christ, and this is witnessed in the restoration of Peter. When the cock crew He turned to Peter, He paid attention to the hour. He turned round and looked at Peter. Peter saw it and went out and wept bitterly. The Lord had prayed for him; had looked at him at the right time and brought conviction. All this enters into Matthew 18.

Then the passage brings out the greatness of the assembly in an authoritative sense; for "if also he will not listen to the assembly, let him be to thee as one of the nations and a tax-gatherer" (Matthew 18:17). That does not mean that the assembly is taking action; it is what he is to the person who is offended; "let him be to thee". The next thing is how heaven regards what is done in such cases. "Whatsoever ye shall bind on the earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever ye shall loose on the earth shall be loosed in heaven" (verse 18). It is to bring out the greatness and dignity of the assembly administratively, as representative of the Lord here.

H.B. What would you say about the change from the word ' thee ' to ' ye '?

J.T. That word "ye" stands in relation to those who form the assembly. Something must be done if the brother refuses to listen, and he is to be regarded as a heathen; something must be done. It is to bring out that the assembly cannot be quiescent in the presence of that.

E.P. We are responsible to maintain what is due to the position in that way as indicated in the Lord's instructions here in verses 15 to 18.

J.T. Clearly so. What the Lord requires here contemplates manhood in every one. If the offended

one, it is a question of whether I am a man; the assembly is composed of such in a spiritual sense. This matter needs adjustment, and I must go the whole way with it, take it to the assembly. The instruction given is to bring out how things are solved. Matthew is the only gospel which furnishes us with this instruction. It is very needful that we should have it, because there is in the assembly the means for the solution of every difficulty.

E.P. The Lord goes on to speak of our being conscious that He is with us.

J.T. He tells us later He is with us. You can understand how important for Matthias, who was about to be appointed as an apostle, to have all this instruction before him. As an apostle he would have to do with these things in his ministry. Then when the assembly fails, it might be said, what are we to do now? Thus we have, "Again I say to you, that if two of you shall agree on the earth concerning any matter, whatsoever it may be that they shall ask, it shall come to them from my Father who is in the heavens". And again, "For where two or three are gathered together unto my name, there am I in the midst of them" (verses 19,20). So that even in remnant times, there is provision made for solving matters; everything is solved. The assembly should not carry forward unsolved difficulties.

Rem. In 1 John 10, we read that Diotrephes "casts them out of the assembly".

J.T. That is the reverse of all this. That is not assembly action at all. It is a man arrogating power to himself to cast out of it.

Now in chapter 26 we should see how the Lord's supper enters into this subject. It is a very important feature of our subject. Matthew says, "as they were eating", the eating was going on before He brings in the Supper. "And as they were eating, Jesus, having taken the bread and blessed, broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat: this is my body.

And having taken the cup and given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it. For this is my blood, that of the new covenant, that shed for many for remission of sins. But I say to you, that I will not at all drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in the kingdom of my Father. And having sung a hymn, they went out to the mount of Olives". That is Matthew's account of the Lord's supper; the institution of it; and perhaps what is needed to be brought home to us at this time is the idea of eating attached to it. They were already eating when He brought in the Supper, showing that the thing itself, what enters into the assembly, requires constitution in us. It is not a prayer book service, but something that needs constitution in us in order to carry through what belongs to the assembly.

A.E.H. Am I right in thinking as to eating, that it is the passover?

J.T. That is what they were eating.

A.E.H. Would that enter into what we have had before us in the previous meetings? To take these things on we need an assembly constitution.

J.T. Yes. I think the application to us would be that we are eating what is needful for assembly service, for taking on the Lord's supper. In 1 Corinthians, the passover is brought in in chapter 5, the Lord's supper in chapter 11. "Let us celebrate the feast", the idea of carrying forward the passover is made plain there.

T.H. Why are the words, "this do in remembrance of me", omitted here?

J.T. They are omitted here and in Mark. They are only found in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24,25. I suppose Matthew and Mark have in mind the great pressure that attaches to the service of God in the assembly, and we need to eat; Luke is thinking of the absence of Christ, and would have us not to forget that. We are in danger of turning to idolatry if we

ignore His absence. In Exodus 32:1 we read, "this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him!" They turned to idolatry, they forgot him, they did not carry him forward in their affections.

W.G.T. In 1 Corinthians 5, the thought is the keeping of the feast. Is it the continuance of the thing that is in mind?

J.T. It is kept "with unleavened bread of sincerity and truth". That is the significance of this eating; the feast is kept with that kind of bread.

W.L. The Lord says in Matthew, that He is with us "all the days, until the completion of the age".

J.T. Yes. Matthew contemplates that side of His service. Luke contemplates Him gone into heaven. Luke makes a great deal of His going into heaven; as early as chapter 9:51, he says, "When the days of his receiving up were fulfilled".

There is not only eating but drinking; "And having taken the cup and given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it". That is, every one of us, every disciple ought to drink it.

A.H.P. Why "for remission of sins"? Do you regard it as characteristic of the assembly, as well as what Paul "received from the Lord" (1 Corinthians 11:23)?

J.T. The Lord does not include that in the word to Paul, for he says, "I received from the Lord, that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus, in the night in which he was delivered up, took bread, and having given thanks broke it, and said, This is my body, which is for you: this do in remembrance of me. In like manner also the cup, after having supped, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye shall drink it, in remembrance of me" (verses 23-25). It does not seem to be a memorial in Matthew at all; it grows out from the passover, carrying with it forgiveness, stressing the covenant as including the remission of sins.

J.T.Jr. In Numbers 11 we have the children of Israel getting tired of the manna; they asked for flesh to eat. The government of God comes in. I think that there is a great deal of that amongst us, getting tired of divinely appointed food, getting tired of the meetings, lusting after the world.

J.T. So that the eating must go on. If we are only Sunday christians we shall soon cease to be christians at all, because there must be the weekly experience. In going through experience in a contrary scene, partaking of suitable food, we develop a constitution fitted for the service of God in the assembly. Hence, "let a man prove himself, and thus eat of the bread, and drink of the cup" (1 Corinthians 11:28). Do not cease eating. If there is anything on your conscience, judge it, but keep on eating. "Let a man prove himself, and thus eat", do not cease to eat. Why should I cease to eat? Of course, if the brethren have imposed discipline that is another matter. I am speaking of how a brother or sister should proceed normally. This chapter provides me with the means of cleansing so that I can go on eating. In Matthew, as we have noted, there is no memorial, but in Matthew and Mark we have the mount of Olives to which they went after the hymn, which Luke does not give us. Going to the mount of Olives would imply that we have strength to move out on to a higher level. That is the point with these two evangelists. Eating enables us to move on to a higher spiritual level.

E.P. These are strenuous chapters, are they not, these closing chapters of Matthew's gospel? It seems like, "But in all these things we more than conquer through him that has loved us" (Romans 8:37).

J.T. Yes. The word strenuous is good. Matthew is severe, the matter is urgent; he has divine representation in mind both in the apostles and in the assembly.

A.E.H. In moving on to the higher level in the service of God we are often hampered by unsuitable contributions. Could you help us in regard to how we may meet that? I suppose the constitution helps.

J.T. It does. The hymn was sung in the city, and the breaking of bread was in the city, Jerusalem. The movement to the higher level would be as we come to recognise the Spirit as the only power for service; but a spiritual constitution in each of us is necessary if the Spirit is to use us. The woman of John 4 represents this thought, what the vessel is, what she was when she left her waterpot and went away to the city. In principle the living water was in her and would support her, it was springing up. All this is most essential for assembly service. It shows what we are constitutionally, and whether the Spirit can take us on and use us. There is not only the eating, but also the drinking, as we have seen. In Luke 22 and 1 Corinthians 11 the word ' supped ' in "after having supped", refers to the passover supper. After that, He gave them the cup and said, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye shall drink it, in remembrance of me" (1 Corinthians 11:25). He speaks of the cup, and also says, "in remembrance of me".

W.J.C. Does sonship indicate the kind of constitution?

J.T. It does; but food for a suitable constitution is most important. The Lord says, "Have ye anything here to eat?" (Luke 24:41). What we are speaking of now refers to eating before the Lord's supper. It underlies the movement from "glory to glory". I look upon it this way: the dwellings of Jacob are glorious, and from these we move out as coming to the assembly; they are not so glorious as the assembly, but they are glorious. In the assembly, as we sit down to the Lord's supper, there is glory; the glory attached to the bread and the cup; and then the Lord apprehended; it is Himself, the glory radiating, and He proceeds from

that on to other glories. The question is, Can I follow in all these glories? If I am not accustomed to eat suitable food, which builds up the constitution, I shall not be equal to the great occasion.

D.G. The Lord's supper is very testing to us. The Lord says, "Unless ye shall have eaten the flesh of the Son of man, and drunk his blood, ye have no life in yourselves" (John 6:53).

J.T. That is flesh. It is not flesh here, but the body -- the word is important. This gospel has the assembly in mind -- you are built up in relation to the assembly, what I am to my brethren, what they are to me. The apostle says, in 1 Corinthians 10:16, "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; for we all partake of that one loaf". The thought of the Lord's body leads me into the spiritual body composed of all the saints. John 6:53 does not refer to that; it is not His body, it is His flesh; it is incarnation, human condition there. The point here is the body with which He did the will of God.

T.H. Eating and drinking are emphasised in 1 Corinthians 10.

J.T. Yes.

J.W.D. There are various ways in which we can eat. In Matthew 26 it builds us up constitutionally, leading to the mount of Olives and singing the hymn.

J.T. There was evidently power to go to the mount of Olives. The hymn is sung mutually. They did it. The Lord is not specially mentioned as doing it. He would be included no doubt, but it is what they did; it is a mutual thing. The brethren are together in a mutual way having power to go to the mount of Olives. The mount of Olives suggests exercise; you leave the position of Jerusalem; you no longer move in a local orbit, but into the spiritual side now. That is where Matthew and Mark serve us well, suggesting the idea

of eating that we may enter the spiritual realm, which requires power in ourselves.

H.H. A brother on Lord's day morning gives out the notices; from that point of view, we are not thinking of going to heaven; we have in mind to attend the different meetings notified.

J.T. All these meetings are public testimony, that is quite in keeping with the beginning of our meeting for assembly service; but going to the mount of Olives is not that side, but our entering the spiritual realm; there are no limits there; it is "from glory to glory". We have "the Father of glory" too; ' thought beyond all ' thought, as the hymn puts it.

E.P. It says in Zechariah 14:4, "And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem toward the east". Is that the outlook? Heaven is to be introduced into assembly service.

J.T. Yes. At night He went to the mount of Olives, we are told in Luke 21. That would be His retreat; you could not find Him in Jerusalem; He would be with the Father. He taught in the temple during the day. When the day's work was done He retired to the Father. In the nights He was not in Jerusalem, He goes, as it were, outside that realm. He is in Jerusalem only to serve and to suffer.

J.T.Jr. Our being told that the Lord went to the mount of Olives Himself, would indicate where we too may go individually during the week. That would add to the thought in chapter 26, when they all went.

J.T. Yes. That furnishes you with the strength you need; it makes you spiritual. Constitution is what is in mind. Eating builds you up, so that you are able to leave the city position, the public position, for the spiritual position, where there is no limit. The Lord went up, according to the Acts; His ascension links the position in the assembly with Him up there.

So our next scripture (Acts 1), leads upward. The spiritual side of our position is suggested here. In considering this last meeting of our Lord with the disciples our subject leads us to that point, "until ... he was taken up". The final meeting therefore involves the forty days between His resurrection and His ascension, so that we are now to be prepared for heavenly things. Luke summarises first by saying, "To whom also he presented himself living, after he had suffered, with many proofs; being seen by them during forty days, and speaking of the things which concern the kingdom of God; and, being assembled with them, commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to await the promise of the Father, which said he ye have heard of me". He uses the word assembled there; then in verse 6, "They therefore, being come together, asked him saying, Lord, is it at this time that thou restorest the kingdom to Israel?" We have the words assembled and come together so that we have here a very formal reference to our subject, "the time in which the Lord Jesus came in and went out among us" (verse 21). What were the lessons learned? All connected with spirituality; really the explanation and fulness of the idea of the mount of Olives.

D.G. As conscious of reaching the spiritual sphere, or the Father's sphere, should we dwell on the thoughts of the Father as known, or should we say, "God and Father"?

J.T. God is the great End in divine appellations; "that God may be all in all" (1 Corinthians 15:28). It is not the Father all in all, but "that God may be all in all". That is final, so that we should go on from Father to God in that sense. Of course, God is connected with the covenant and other matters, but here it is God in the fullest sense. God is the great End of all testimony and in assembly service: not the Father, but God.

A.B. Is the great result of revelation secured in the thought, "that God may be all in all"?

J.T. Yes. It is not "all and in all", but "all in all". He is all as in us, as God, filling us, and yet of course the Supreme. There is correspondence with Genesis 1, "God" there is a plural word; plural in the sense of emphasis, the Supreme, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth", but you do not there get "God all in all". As He comes into the garden He is not in Adam and Eve, the devil is in them. The great thought of redemption comes in so that God might secure His place in men, which involves sonship; "all in all", that stands eternally.

J.W.D. Do you think that where the apostle speaks of God and Father the thought of God being supreme enhances the blessedness of the name of Father?

J.T. The Lord Jesus Himself limits the name "Father" in John 5:22. He says, "Neither does the Father judge any one"; whereas God judges; every divine attribute and function must find a place in God. God includes them all, judgment and all else, but the Father is more limited, more precious in a sense, as conveying the family thought. The order in the Lord's words is, "My Father and your Father, and to my God and your God" (John 20:17).

H.H. He is the Father of all families.

J.T. Father is a family title, whereas God is much wider; it stands related to creation too. He is Supreme.

D.G. In John 17 He prayed to the Father; not mentioning the title God. In the sense of family relationship we address Him as Father; when we address Him as God and Father we are taking in the creatorial setting in relation to Him who brings all into being.

J.T. In John 20 He says, "My Father and your Father, my God and your God", and in the address to Philadelphia He says, "My God", several times. As we are alongside of the Lord by the Spirit we really get the full thought of God, in so far as creatures may get it; we apprehend Him as Christ's God. As near enough to

Christ to observe His holy emotions and gestures, we would get the idea of what God is to Him. John says, "We have contemplated his glory, a glory as of an only-begotten with a father, full of grace and truth" (John 1:14). That is how they saw Him. They would learn how to speak to God; how to speak to the Father, as seeing how the Lord was with Him, "an only-begotten with a father".

W.G.T. The question raised here in Acts 1 was as to the time the Lord would return, and the Lord answering said that it was a matter the Father had placed within His own authority. He indicates that He as Man regarded the Father as having superior authority in a matter of this kind.

J.T. That is a point of importance. Matthias would have to know what this last meeting was; undoubtedly he was present at that last meeting. What did the Lord say about His coming? They were on kingdom lines; they wanted to know when He would restore the kingdom to Israel, but He puts them off. "It is not yours to know times or seasons, which the Father has placed in his own authority". It is left open, we have to wait. The date of His return is on the Father's calendar. Our business now is with the Spirit. The Lord says, "The Holy Spirit having come upon you, and ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth". The disciples were to be occupied in bearing witness to Christ in the power of the Spirit. It is all left open, but the Spirit is stressed. We are living in the period of the Spirit at the present time; no one can predict when the Lord will come back. The Lord says, "Yea, I come quickly" (Revelation 22:20). That is His purpose and promise. The exact time of it is the Father's matter; even the Son does not know of the day (Mark 13:32).

A.B. Does the economy terminate?

J.T. I think not. We shall enjoy and know divine Persons in eternity on the same principle as we do

now; only, of course, all difficulties or occasions of darkness in us will be removed.

W.J.C. So that God is to be known by us as Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

J.T. Quite so: that is the general position. Each of the divine Persons is seen acting as God, but the Father retains definitely the place of Deity -- "to us there is one God, the Father" (1 Corinthians 8:6).

MANHOOD IN EXODUS (1)

Exodus 1:20-22; Exodus 2:1-14: Exodus 3:11-14: Exodus 4:1-8

J.T. It is believed that the subject of manhood will prove helpful, under the Lord's hand. In Exodus we see manhood, not as allowed to develop as it were without restraint, as in Genesis, but manhood under restraint. In view of what we are, and the influences around us, there is no way of developing what is of God, save as we are under restraint. It was thought this book would yield much. The beginning is to be noted: "And these are the names of the sons of Israel who had come into Egypt; with Jacob had they come, each with his household" (Exodus 1:1). The footnote in the New Translation indicates that literally it reads The man and his house. This is carried forward in the New Testament as Paul says, "Believe on the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved, thou and thy house" (Acts 16:31). The word son should be noted; "sons of Israel", each had come with his father; not only each man and his house, but Jacob is seen as father of his sons and grandchildren, and then they are numbered.

The development of manhood involves suffering. It is said Pharaoh "set over them service-masters to oppress them with their burdens ... But the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and spread; and they were distressed because of the children of Israel" (Exodus 1:11,12). These thoughts offer material to think over. Then there are the directions of the king of Egypt to destroy the male children and how it is frustrated by females. Five females are used for their salvation. Three of them are employed for salvation of one male child, Moses, who is saved and grows into manhood.

E.G.McA. Why do you bring in the female side?

J.T. It is to show how God can take up weak vessels to save the males alive, to build up His world.

A.B. In Genesis 32 Jacob comes with his family; in chapter 33 Esau comes with four hundred men, there is no mention of his family.

J.T. Jacob makes much of the household. He caused his family to pass before Esau in chapter 33. Jacob valued the family side; and when you come to Rachel, Joseph was put before his mother, showing the spiritual element on Jacob's side in family matters. Christ is to be before all.

E.G.McA. In God saying to the serpent, the woman's seed "shall crush thy head", He is taking up for His own work what Satan thought he had spoiled.

J.T. Yes. Satan attacks through the most vulnerable side, he is attacking the young people now in that sense. God takes up some young people, not all, alas! and makes servants out of them. The seed of the woman is used, she was deceived for the moment, but her seed "shall crush thy head", is triumph; it is Christ on man's side.

G.A.T. The male side is attacked through the female.

J.T. It was Satan; the male seed is in view from the outset; that authoritative and administrative element of the human race. Satan knew he could not directly attack Adam, but he employed Eve, because she was weaker. He will have the same difficulty in this new movement of God seen in Exodus. Thus the males must be out of the way, they are more difficult to overcome. It is a question of what the respective sexes represent. The male is the intelligent governing element; the female the subjective, and hence extending to the general state among the saints. This may be reversed literally through divine formation in the sisters. Scripture furnishes many examples of this, as Hannah, Abigail and Manoah's wife.

Ques. God created male and female; is it to bring out the balance there is in creation, they are to have dominion?

J.T. We have the word "Man" in Genesis 1:27, but chapter 2 brings out the detail; that he was made, formed of material already existing. The woman is not created out of the dust, like Adam, she is builded out of the rib. The position is perfectly poised. And God had brought the lower creatures to man to see what he would call them; what he called each, that was its name. In effect, God said of man, There is no one like him; it is not good that he should be alone. He caused a deep sleep to fall upon man, and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its stead. He built this rib that He had taken from man, into a woman and brought her to man, without saying anything as to where she came from; it is to bring out what man was, his intelligence. God just brought her to him, "And Man said, This time it is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh: this shall be called Woman"; this was a new word in his vocabulary. It is the beginning of man as relative to his wife; he called her by name. The name he gave her evidences his intelligence, because he did not see how she had been made; he could see she was himself over again. God says, "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife". The conversation that would go on between Adam and his wife would be delightful to God; there was perfect balance, because he was her origin.

J.D. Piety would always have the maintenance of the male line in view.

J.T. Therefore the salvation of the male children was not a matter of philanthropy; God's rights were involved. The two midwives point to the assembly as caring for the male element in view of the testimony. Pharaoh's edict would cause the Israelites to decrease; besides this the women would be affected by their sufferings. They feared God and He made them houses. There is a standing testimony to what God thinks of such feelings and service.

G.A.T. They were not afraid of the king.

J.T. That is an element of faith, that you do not fear the enemy. The Lord Jesus says, "Fear not them which kill the body" (Matthew 10:28). These women had the fear of God, which is a great feature. Human life is very cheap now in certain parts of the world, but they can do no more than kill you. God can do more than that, the Lord says; He can destroy body and soul in hell, so we must fear Him. The king of Egypt, "who did not know Joseph" is Satan in type; rulers who do not know Christ are ruthless. The world depends on males. The Lord says, "I am not come to destroy men's lives but to save them". A follower of Jesus cannot take the sword to kill a man. The christian says, "For thy sake we are killed all the day long" (Romans 8:36); we are killed, not we shall kill others.

A.E.H. There are young men who do not go into active service in the army, but into munition works of various kinds; would that be damaging?

J.T. Of course people have to work with their hands. Government is good and must have a sword. If the government want you to do work of that kind, you cannot refuse as a christian. If you have to work overtime, God can come in and give you relief. It is wonderful what the Lord's people are able to do in spite of exacting employment. If needing employment I would rather work for the government than anyone else, but not to take life. "All who take the sword shall perish by the sword" (Matthew 26:52). The christian cannot take the sword.

The word "Man" in Genesis 1:27, viewed spiritually, covers sisters as well as brothers; but the feature expressed there is that which in the males is specially to represent God, and these midwives typify an element that has that in mind all the time. The fear of God is brought into it. It is very striking.

These names have come down the centuries to us, and their houses. You could not get a better style of house than what God would make for them, and they

would pass that down to the young people. A young man might say, One of these women saved my life. That element comes down and is an accumulative thought. He would have respect for that sister and her house, and perhaps would like to pattern his own house after hers. This divine strain was to go right down through Israel in the testimony.

G.A.T. It would exercise me as to what I have in my house.

J.T. What is your motive in building a house? This is a challenge to us; God takes into account that He is considered in such a matter -- that a God-fearing person built that house.

E.G.McA. There would be no houses in Egypt like those of these women.

J.T. Pharaoh's house would be nothing compared to them morally.

W.G.T. There is the cry of the man of Macedonia, and then Lydia says, "If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house and abide there" (Acts 16:15). The man of God cannot come into my house if it is worldly.

W.B-w. In the book of Genesis there was more latitude than in this book.

J.T. Yes; take the history of Reuben, Simeon, and Levi; the first represented natural corruption; and Simeon and Levi slew men; their rage was cruel. There was want of restraint, but now God is going to pass them through suffering, placing them under restraint. There was a great want of restraint in Jacob's house.

E.C. With the incoming of the law, restraint takes place. Romans says sin is not put to account until the law (Romans 5:13).

J.T. The service the law renders should be well understood. By it is knowledge of sin (Romans 3:20); it came in, in order that the offence might abound

(Romans 5:20); and "in order that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful" (Romans 7:13).

S.P. Would Ephesians develop manhood, as seen in the exhortations in chapter 5 to husbands and wives, and in chapter 6 to children and servants?

J.T. Yes. Wives come first, then husbands, children and servants. Satan attacks at the weakest point, and this is in persons specially in the place of subjection, such as wives, children and servants. Those under restraint are apt to be irritable and resentful. You can see throughout Scripture how God resents the want of control in households.

W.G.S. Would the family Bible readings help in the way of restraint?

J.T. Very much; you could get up a little earlier to extend it. Making it fit into a minute or two is not much for God; five or ten minutes earlier means sacrifice. God speaks of Himself getting up early to send prophets, and we surely should get up early to hear what the prophets have to say.

H.B. Pharaoh ordered the males to be cast into the river; Moses' mother laid him in the sedge.

J.T. Yes, she hid him first, then laid him in the sedge on the bank of the river. Moses' mother did not cast him in; the casting is Satan's work, that was destruction. In chapter 15 wood is found and cast into the bitter waters. Christ was cast in; He died at the will of another; they "killed the Prince of life". It was positive murder to cast the children in. Moses was laid in the sedge on the bank of the river. It was death as expressed in baptism. As living on here the believer must experience death. That is the thing to see.

J.D. Exodus 1:22 is Pharaoh's charge to all his people, every son is to be cast into the river. Evidently Moses' mother disobeyed that.

J.T. She "did not fear the injunction of the king" (Hebrews 11:23). Still she put the child in the river. She

did it in this way so that he did not drown; he was taken out again by other hands.

G.A.T. There is affection in the exercise gone through in making the "ark of reeds".

J.T. The New Testament comments on this; but what her feelings must have been! There is the gentleness of affection, but the child must go that way -- through death.

J.T.Jr. There is no cruelty in Levi here; there is in Genesis; this is the feeling side, and intelligence in the home.

J.T. Evidently that had been judged before God. We may rightly connect this passage with what is said of Levi in Deuteronomy 33. In Exodus 1 they are "the sons of Israel"; it is a spiritual thought.

Rem. In verse 2 Moses is called "a son", in verse 3 "the child" and in verse 6 "the boy".

J.T. Sonship is family dignity. The first use of the word son in Scripture is in relation to Cain; he called his city after the name of his son. Family dignity in the world is seen in this, but God has taken up the word son to indicate dignity that is opposite to the world. The sons of Israel came each with his household, we are told. In verse 6 Pharaoh's daughter opened the ark "and saw the child, and behold, the boy wept". Child is a general term, it may mean one of either sex. Boy is development -- what Pharaoh's daughter saw would suggest development; he wept; he is going to be a man of feeling, and that for others.

S.P. Herod slew all the boys in Bethlehem.

J.T. Then we have "Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not" (Matthew 2:16-18).

Ques. What is the river?

J.T. It is a figure of death in an active sense. "Death reigned from Adam to Moses" (Romans 5:14). His mother put him in the river; it is baptism. The eunuch asked

"What hinders my being baptised?" No one can question it, the believer accepts death for his child.

E.G.McA. There is much developed in the background here -- this man of the tribe of Levi and a daughter of Levi deliberately setting up a home. It says in Malachi 2:5 "and he feared me, and trembled before my name".

J.T. This ought to enter into all marriages of believers; they should be sons and daughters of Levi. It is a very good thought that is worked out by the Spirit of God in the couple, and the result -- Moses and Aaron -- the great product in the history of Levi. Phinehas shines in the testimony in Numbers 25:6-9. He deals ruthlessly with wickedness and God gives to him the covenant of an everlasting priesthood. We must deal ruthlessly with positive wickedness. We have five women here looking after the male children. Some are risking their lives with no personal consideration in the matter. In the early verses of chapter 2 there are two, Moses' mother and sister, they are serving God and He is honouring them. It is a standing testimony of what women's service may be in this matter.

J.S.T. The boy wept; his later features are indicated in that. Moses was to shine in feelings for God and His people.

J.T. No one felt more in this sense in his day. Because of the killing of the boys by Herod (Matthew 2), we have a wail coming down from Genesis, through Jeremiah, to Matthew -- Rachel weeping.

H.B. The boy indicates his identity: "This is one of the Hebrews' children".

J.T. Yes, it is the reproach of Christ. Moses esteemed the reproach of Christ; as grown, he identified himself with the Hebrews.

J.S.T. With regard to trade unions, there is much suffering to many who cannot join them because of the truth; they are suffering for righteousness. This

should draw out from us all, feelings of sympathy. The Lord said to the Jews, "That all righteous blood shed upon the earth should come upon you, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar" (Matthew 23:35).

J.T. Righteous blood from Abel to Zacharias, it is very touching. God said to Cain, "The voice of thy brother's blood is crying to me from the ground" (Genesis 4:10). All that is done against God's people comes unfailingly into His reckoning.

C.T. What is the thought of God using Pharaoh's daughter as His servant?

J.T. We have to pay attention to any divine trait that we see. Here Pharaoh's daughter is used as Moses' saviour; she names him Moses, meaning drawn out. She is an example of how God uses persons outwardly in the enemy's camp to defeat him. There was an element of good there; she was not cruel like her father. We may always look for something of this. Pilate's wife is an example.

J.T.Jr. Would this chapter lead us to think that a sister might take the lead in the thought of baptism?

J.T. I think so. It is remarkable that Lydia's is the first household said to have been baptised. The mother is nearest to the children, and thus normally would have a peculiar interest in this important matter. Moses' mother did not put him out in the main stream; she put him where he would be preserved from its power; it is the thoughtfulness of affection in her.

J.T.Jr. The child is weeping, being in different circumstances. He was accustomed to being in his mother's arms; this would bring out the great place a mother's affections have.

J.T. Little children having been brought to the Lord that He might touch them, it is said, "having taken them in his arms, having laid his hands on them, he blessed them" (Mark 10:16). In Matthew 19:15,

it is said, "having laid his hands upon them, he departed thence", as much as to say, You must look after them now; putting it on the parents. Moses' mother and father are models for us as to what we see potentially in our children, and show how we are to use every effort to save them. The first thing is to have them baptised. In this we bring them formally and openly to the Lord and own that His death is the only ground of their salvation.

G.A.T. God says of Abraham, "I know him that he will command his children and his household after him" (Genesis 18:19).

S.P. There is a fine touch in Acts 21:5. Luke writes of leaving Tyre with Paul and others and says, "All of them accompanying us, with wives and children, till we were out of the city. And kneeling down upon the shore we prayed". They brought their children under the influence of Paul. That is a very beautiful scene.

A.E.H. Putting him in the sedge shows love's influence thrown around the children, and this, combined with the practical side in making the ark, saved Moses from being carried down the river.

J.T. The force of the current is broken by the sedge; it was something living. It is the life that surrounds the children which holds them. The ark in the river would be death in its application, but in the sense of which we have spoken.

A.B. She bore a son and saw that he was fair; fair to God (Acts 7).

J.T. Son is potential; of course son is a male child, but it involves more; the full thought of God is in mind, and Moses is on the way to it. At the outset God made a man and a woman; "sons of men" (Proverbs 8:31), would mean manhood in the freshness and energy of life in sonship.

Rem. Had Moses' mother not put the child in the ark, the servants of Pharaoh might have discovered

him and cast him into the river; it is moral death for the child that is not baptised.

J.T. The ark represents the element of protection entering into baptism. Death is accepted, but overcome: "In which ye have been also raised with him through faith of the working of God who raised him from among the dead" (Colossians 2:12). The ark was secure against the force of the water. The truth is that while the water of baptism is death, it is robbed of its power, Christ having come out of it. Faith understands this, hence in Colossians baptism implies resurrection: "through faith of the working of God who raised him from among the dead".

J.K. His sister stood afar off to see what happened. Baptism is not enough, living interest must be maintained.

J.T. Yes. In a sister here.

E.McA. A sister could be a resource; we owe a great deal to spiritual sisters.

J.T. She understood nursing; she speaks intelligently, saying, "Shall I go and call thee a wet-nurse of the Hebrew women, that she may nurse the child for thee?" (Exodus 2:7). She is one of the group of three saving this boy; she would take note of the weeping. She was his sister and knew what to say.

W.B-w. When he was grown he came into fellowship.

J.T. The word grown is to be noted, and the growth accompanied by right feelings. Baptism is not a mere religious rite; that is, not from God's point of view. The mother took the child and nursed it, and she gets wages. Another idea of growth is that when he became great, as the New Testament says, he went out and looked on his brethren. We ought to see that growth implies interest in the brethren. I want to see what my brethren are suffering, and I am with them in it. Of Moses it is said, "choosing rather to suffer affliction along with the people of God" (Hebrews 11:25).

Rem. Full dignity in the royal household would be his position in Egypt.

J.T. Yes. He was evidently brought up as a prince.

Ques. Would the mother nursing the child for Pharaoh's daughter bring in right influence?

J.T. She is now a servant and gets wages. She had him until a certain age; it was to his advantage; he came under his mother's influence in time of nursing. This was clearly of God.

J.D. The discipline that God puts Moses through in Midian is in keeping with what is before us.

J.T. Yes. And this results in a change in Moses; a complete change in his humanity. Jehovah enquires of him, "What is that in thy hand?" A staff; no doubt what he had been using in tending the sheep; it was in his hand. God says to him, "Cast it on the ground". It is to demonstrate that humanity had got completely out of hand. Man came under satanic power. The staff became a serpent; that is, what I am capable of. "Take it by the tail", God said, and it became a staff; in that we see humanity brought under control again. The word in Romans 6:11 deals with the matter, "reckon yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus". Man is taken under control through and in Christ -- in a new order of manhood. We are baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus, and to the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit; it is a question of light, privilege and power. We reckon ourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus; I am alive in Christ. I believe that is meant here. Man is taken back -- the divine idea resumed in Christ.

J.T.Jr. There was no restraint when Moses slew the Egyptian, but in his second forty years he sat down by the well. He would say, I slew that Egyptian in my own strength; but now I see I am to use the power of God -- the Spirit. It is man taken up in a new way; God now finding His delight in him.

J.S.T. Paul speaks of "admonishing every man, and teaching every man, in all wisdom, to the end that we may present every man perfect in Christ" (Colossians 1:28).

J.T. Every man perfect in Christ -- what a great thought!

W.B-w. Moses has power over the serpent as he gets hold of it by the tail.

J.T. Yes. There is an immediate change to the primary thoughts. Look at Levi, he was a man marked by evil; instruments of cruelty were in his hand, but now he is another man; the victory is complete in Phinehas as he uses, by his hand, a javelin in ruthlessly dealing with sin (Numbers 25:7,8).

A.E.H. Is it not touching that God gives Moses at the beginning an intimation of what the end of his service would be -- complete deliverance of Israel out of Egypt? "I will be with thee; and this shall be the sign to thee that I have sent thee: when thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain" (Exodus 3:12).

J.T. The sign there is that they should "serve God upon this mountain". The signs in chapter 4 refer to the way God has brought about a change in man, answering to His own thought.

W.B-w. Moses comes into humble circumstances. Is this a reminder to the young men who would serve to be willing to accept reduction?

J.T. Yes. This thought works out in a remarkable way. There was a great disparity in Moses' circumstances in Midian to what he was used to in Egypt. It is said, "Moses consented to remain with the man", not wishing to have something greater. He is serving as a shepherd, and learning all the time, able to take in the divine instruction. He is developing in manhood, and in due time God will take him on. Continuing in the spirit in which he slew the Egyptian, Moses would have damaged the testimony, but he is subdued, and suitable for God's service. God is asserting Himself

and Moses recognised it, and would be in accord with God's way. God would have him experience forty years in humble life; then He takes him up and uses him. Paul was a wild man doing anything he liked against the people of God, but he became like a little child.

The next thing in Moses' experience refers to his bosom -- his affections (Exodus 4:6,7). "Put now thy hand into thy bosom." It became leprous. Man's state had become corrupted. Moses is directed to put his hand in the second time, and it was turned again as his flesh. Paul says, "Put on the new man, which according to God is created in truthful righteousness and holiness" (Ephesians 4:24).

W.B-w. He acquires ability to handle the enemy as he seeks to attack God's people. Paul shakes off the viper in Acts 28:5.

J.T. That refers to the first sign; the staff turned into a serpent. The most advanced of us are liable to come under dark influences. The incident in Acts 28 is remarkable, as showing the power over the enemy which the Lord gives to His servants. He says, "These signs shall follow those that have believed: in my name they shall cast out demons: ... they shall take up serpents; and if they should drink any deadly thing it shall not injure them" (Mark 16:17,18).

And then, as remarked, we have the second sign, which refers to man's inward state. The believer is purified by the gracious work of God through redemption. "But ye have been washed, but ye have been sanctified, but ye have been justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God" (1 Corinthians 6:11). This is included in the new man, as remarked above.

MANHOOD IN EXODUS (2)

Exodus 4:10-17; Exodus 6:20-30; Exodus 7:1,2; Exodus 12:11-20; Exodus 16:4,14

J.T. We finished this morning by commenting on the change of humanity indicated in the instruction to Moses in Exodus 4 -- man taken up again in Christ. Hence in baptism we reckon ourselves "dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus", Romans 6:11. It is man in Christ henceforth, as to his justification, subjection to God, and his inward state. In Romans 5 it is "through our Lord Jesus Christ", and in Romans 6 it is in Christ Jesus". In Romans 7 the inward state of man is rectified; the writer thanks God for his deliverance. Moses put his hand into his bosom and it became leprous; he put it in again and it turned again as his flesh. The inward state of man is corrected -- in keeping with his position in Christ. The Holy Spirit becomes the power henceforth according to Romans 8. Chapter 7 is the light for adjustment; chapter 8 is the power -- the Spirit in the believer.

The next point in regard to our subject is the question of speaking, for we are to speak aright. The Lord, we are told in Mark 7, in dealing with this matter of speech took the man apart from the crowd; "he put his fingers to his ears; and having spit, he touched his tongue; and looking up to heaven he groaned". The result was that "he spoke right". This matter comes up here. Moses says, "I am not eloquent". God brings out the truth as to the power of speech. "Who gave man a mouth? or who maketh dumb, or deaf, or seeing, or blind? have not I, Jehovah? And now go, and I will be with thy mouth, and will teach thee what thou shalt say". God further says to him, "Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know that he can speak well". God's word to Moses brings in another man besides Moses, distinguished in the

service; the want of faith in the servant Moses is thus overruled. God never looks at these matters as accidental. He overrules so that everything is according to His mind. Aaron is brought in, and God says, "I know that he can speak well". He knew him in relation to speaking. God had Aaron ready for this emergency. The work of God is to go on; God is ready for any emergency caused by a defect in any of us, so that the service goes on. In connection with that we have a brother. The person who remedies the difficulty is not going to detract from the position. He is a brother. God said, "And when he seeth thee he will be glad in his heart".

Following on that is the idea of the representation of God in testimony in manhood. In chapter 7 we have representation of God in a system, as we may say. Jehovah says to Moses, "I have made thee God to Pharaoh; and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet". Aaron was to speak to the people, and now he is to speak to Pharaoh. That is what I thought we might consider first.

Then secondly the question of food; this is essential to manhood. What we are given to eat is provided by God (chapters 12 and 16).

E.G.McA. How could a brother coming in help one that is slow of speech?

J.T. I think Aaron here typifies the resourcefulness of God. God never regards anything as an accident; there may be something to be deplored, but it is not irremediable in God's account.

G.A.T. Is it important to see that Jehovah did not set Moses aside when He brought the brother in?

J.T. Yes. God had no thought of setting him aside; his deficiency was to be made up in Aaron.

A.Pf. We do not get any previous history of Aaron. Of Moses we do.

J.T. God had him in reserve, and he is just the man needed, and his qualification is already known to God.

It shows the divine training school is always functioning, and thus needed ones are ready. Such a one will be of use when the time comes; he is just the man.

J.D. What do you think of Jehovah being angry with Moses?

J.T. It is remarkable how much is said of God being angry with Moses. Each of us has to learn that. He is the God of grace, but when it comes to a servant, a man that should know better -- in such cases God is severe. For instance, God met Moses at the inn, and was going to slay him (Exodus 4:24). I think it is to produce seriousness in us, as we are dealing with God in His service. He will not brook our wills. His service is too serious a matter. Christ as His Servant is our example in service. Moses says, typically of Christ, "And Jehovah was angry with me on your account" (Deuteronomy 4:21); that is vicariously. I have to learn that for my own soul. God hid His face from Christ. "Why hast thou forsaken me?" the Lord said.

W.B-w. It is easier to complain than to take on the principle of restraint. "For 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). In the light of Romans 7, and as having the Spirit, we are able to restrain ourselves.

J.T. Yes; "if, by the Spirit, ye put to death the deeds of the body, ye shall live" (Romans 8:1). The severest thing we have to go through is to be "reckoned as sheep for slaughter" (Romans 8:36). The apostle contemplates the saints as in that position. It is very severe. Our brethren are suffering something like that, but where God allows that, He furnishes grace to meet it. Look at what Paul says in 2 Corinthians 11:23-27; he gives a list of things he suffered. "From the Jews five times have I received forty stripes, save one." The alleviation "save one", would indicate that God intervened. What must he have gone through afterwards!

One stripe was deducted because God did not allow the lash to go further than he could bear.

G.A.T. Was God angry with Christ?

J.T. Moses says, speaking typically of the Lord, "Jehovah was angry with me on your account"; it was on Israel's account; he suffered instead of them. It was a vicarious position. It refers to the penalty of sin which could have no application to the Lord save as taking our place on the cross. In this sense Christ suffered for Israel and for us. Personally He was "holy, harmless, undefiled, separated from sinners" (Hebrews 7:26). The exact words of Jesus on the cross are given; "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46). God's wrath was against sin, but it was meted out to Christ as taking our place. He was made sin for us (2 Corinthians 5:21).

Rem. Moses returned to Jethro and requested him to let him go (Exodus 4:18); and Jethro said, "Go in peace". Moses was thus free to take up his service.

J.T. Yes; a serious thing came in afterwards; "Jehovah came upon him, and sought to slay him". This is very remarkable, and shows the severity of God with His servants, when they disregard His word or principles. Moses ought to have known better than to allow his child to be uncircumcised.

J.D. Moses said to God, "I am not eloquent", but in the service it is a question of substance.

J.T. This is strikingly seen in Moses. What a wonderful servant he becomes! Jehovah says, "My servant Moses; he is faithful in all my house. Mouth to mouth do I speak to him openly, and not in riddles; and the form of Jehovah doth he behold"(Numbers 12:7,8). Moses is to be God to Pharaoh, and Aaron is to be his prophet.

N.B. How is this going to work out practically in localities amongst us? Moses and Aaron were outstanding brothers. A brother may not be able to say anything. How would this affect us?

J.T. We may learn from what is before us. The bringing of these two brothers together involves the principles of balancing. Moses is three years younger than Aaron. The principle of balancing must come into the testimony, as in the "balancings of the clouds" (Job 37:16). The idea of system enters into the testimony, especially as seen in Exodus. You must have two or more and so there must be the principle of balance, otherwise there is complaint and rivalry. Aaron was an older man, and he could speak well and Moses could not; moreover he was brotherly, he loved his brother. God said to Moses, "When he seeth thee he will be glad in his heart". Well, there must be in Moses what will balance all that, and there was -- evidently not only gift, but moral qualities. These are what Jehovah alludes to in Numbers 12. Thus whatever one may lack can be made up on moral lines, as the word to Timothy indicates -- "Let no one despise thy youth" (1 Timothy 4:12).

At the outset all was well, for "Moses and Aaron went and gathered all the elders of the children of Israel; and Aaron spoke all the words that Jehovah had spoken to Moses, and did the signs before the eyes of the people. And the people believed. And when they heard that Jehovah had visited the children of Israel, and that he had seen their affliction, then they bowed their heads and worshipped" (Exodus 4:29-31). That is a fine result. You could not get anything better. God's ways are good. The result of the service of these two men working together is that the people believed and they worshipped God.

E.C. The Lord sent out the twelve and the seventy disciples two by two (Matthew 10:2-4, Luke 10:1).

J.T. We have that now. One by one, and two by two as well; but a system is involved -- centred in Christ in heaven. Sometimes it is better to be isolated, ministering to your brethren, but at other times you can get on better with another. That may mean that

you must be able to take second place. You find Peter and John together. Peter is always active, but John is there. He adds to the position, although he may not be active. In certain circumstances in the service of God some possessing ability to serve may be present, but not taking verbal part, but their sympathy and spirituality add greatly to the position.

C.T. It augments worship in the company. These two being found together in ministry effected this in the people.

J.T. Moses has to take first place, but he is not pushing himself. The appointment of God required this.

Rem. "He was mighty in his words and deeds" (Acts 7:22). Here he says he cannot speak.

J.T. He is not relying on his natural education or ability. God had brought him down. He had gone too far in speaking of himself. We may take the attitude of smallness and be unbelieving in it.

A.B. God says to him, "And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe thee, neither hearken to the voice of the first sign, that they will believe the voice of the other sign" (Exodus 4:8). Testimony in two signs and testimony in two men.

J.T. Yes. The Lord brings out that principle in regard to the Father Himself testifying (John 8:17). Aaron brought forward in this way is striking. He completes the position.

A.E.H. In the beginning of Luke we have a priest speaking in unbelief. Zacharias speaks wrong, and then learns to speak right.

J.T. Yes. How one dispensation merges into another is strikingly seen in Zacharias; being a priest according to the law of Moses, he becomes a priest and prophet according to the Spirit. "Zacharias, of the course of Abia, and his wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name Elizabeth" (Luke 1:5). Both were fully accredited, but he has to endure nine months

of dumbness because of unbelief. Then when the time is completed he writes of the promised son, "John is his name" (Luke 1:63). It was the divine word as to John's name. Then his mouth was opened and, as a priest, he blesses God, and being filled with the Holy Spirit he prophesied -- first about Christ, and then to John.

J.D. Is it right to say that the Father and Son were set forth in one Person? The Lord said, "He that has seen me has seen the Father" (John 14:9). Is the Father one witness and Christ another?

J.T. They are, of course, always two Persons. The Lord says, "I am one who bear witness concerning myself, and the Father who has sent me bears witness concerning me" (John 8:18). It is John the evangelist who tells us that "the Father loves the Son and has given all things to be in his hand" (John 3:35). Love is the thing in economic testimony, otherwise there will be rivalry among the servants.

G.H. "Paul, a called apostle of Jesus Christ, by God's will, and Sosthenes the brother" (1 Corinthians 1:1).

J.T. That bears out the thought. He brings a brother in. The Corinthians may say, That is only Paul's word; some, that his speech is contemptible; but he associates others with himself to give force and attractiveness to his service. That is what comes out in Aaron, in whom we have the brotherly element.

W.G.T. Jacob was seeking to avoid his brother Esau in Genesis 32. Though a false brother, Esau would have to be reckoned with.

J.T. I think it was of God that Esau should be appeased. Jacob sends a message, in which he tells Esau of his property, including bondmen and bondwomen (Genesis 32:5). He told him how much he had, but Esau would not be helped by hearing that; he was himself a rich man. Esau came to meet him with four hundred men, which caused Jacob great concern (verses 6,7). He began to pray (verses 9-12); and God met him

and humbled him in a natural sense, but blessed him. Spiritually he drops the idea of being a rich man; he is now a lame man; he is limping, but he has a change of name. His name is now Israel, and he meets Esau as Israel. He is now a spiritual man. He makes Esau a present of some cattle. It is a question of love now. Jacob arranges his wives and children to pass before Esau, and in this Joseph takes priority to his mother. Thus Jacob meets his brother on spiritual lines, and they are able to kiss one another (Genesis 33:4). In this way brotherly conditions prevailed for the moment. In the procedure a testimony was rendered to Esau. It must have liberated Jacob's spirit. In view of the purpose of God as to Jacob, it was of importance that as constituted spiritual, according to chapter 32, he and his household should appear before Esau at this time. Esau was affected for the moment, and this would be used of God later.

A.B. There is a definite change in Jacob in that chapter. He reached Esau's affections so that he took a blessing or gift. There is advancement.

J.T. We are all to be set to affect people in this way.

J.W. "I sent before thee Moses, Aaron, and Miriam" (Micah 6:4).

J.T. What discipline they had been through! All three were far advanced in years as taken into service.

T.S. Has the ability to speak well any relation to our speaking to God?

J.T. Yes. One says, "Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be acceptable in thy sight, O Jehovah" (Psalm 19:14). I suppose God had heard Aaron in this way. As taken up in view of being high priest, there can be no doubt he had been accustomed to pray.

N.B. As to things amongst ourselves, does gift enter into the matter of speaking? Does prophecy as referred to in 1 Corinthians imply good speaking?

J.T. The power of speech refers to the vessel. We have to distinguish between the vessel, and what is in the vessel. The vessel is designed creatively. God has made us all, and He refers to that fact in saying to Moses "Who gave a man a mouth ... have not I, Jehovah?". In giving a gift, God takes account of the man long before he was born. He sees to the circumstances of his birth and education. The vessel is one thing, a spiritual gift is another. The gift is to be the expression of Christ in him. He may be able to speak well about anything, but he is to see that God has taken him up to speak well of Christ. The greatest speaker was, of course, Christ. They marvelled at His manner of speaking (Luke 4:22). You do not want to speak out of accord with Him. Peter and James and John and the other apostles were specially qualified to speak. The twelve spoke in a remarkable way. "Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice and spoke forth to them." The Spirit was in him. And having heard, three thousand were converted. At Iconium, Paul and Barnabas "so spake that a great multitude of both Jews and Greeks believed" (Acts 14:1). All the hundred and twenty might speak of Christ, but it is important to distinguish those who speak formally in testimony as representative of God. Peter and the eleven were such at Pentecost. You do not want a man speaking to Pharaoh that, through want of ability, would discredit what he has to say. Moses would know how to speak to a man like Pharaoh, but while Moses was to speak to him, Jehovah said, "Aaron thy brother shall speak unto Pharaoh, that he let the children of Israel go out of his land". This shows how important the matter of speaking was at that time.

J.McK. John the evangelist remarks, "There was a man sent from God, his name John" (John 1:6). The Baptist could say of himself that he was "the voice of one crying in the wilderness" (John 1:23).

J.T. I think the brethren would do well to consider the difference between the vessel, and what is in the vessel. In Ephesians 4 the vessel is included in the gift; "he has given some apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists, and some shepherds and teachers". He gave them to the assembly. The passage does not say the gift of prophecy, etc. The apostles were given to the assembly, their bodies, their minds; it means all that they were by the grace of God. In the service of God effective speaking is stressed; as remarked of Paul and Barnabas at Iconium they "so spake that a great multitude of both Jews and Greeks believed;" and at Lystra, Paul was regarded as the chief speaker (Acts 14). And yet one at Corinth said, "His presence in the body weak, and his speech naught", (2 Corinthians 10:10).

E.G.McA. Do we get the two in Paul's statement of himself; "God, who set me apart even from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son in me"? (Galatians 1:15).

J.T. Yes. The whole man is there as a gift. In Aaron and Moses you have the whole position as to testimony set out. Moses is not going to Pharaoh alone; he is going in the system God has established; he represents God before Pharaoh. He is to be like God, as it was said to him, "See, I have made thee God to Pharaoh; and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet". This thought deserves great consideration. Was he cowering in Pharaoh's presence? No! He stood up like a man to represent God. You must be a man to represent God -- "Let us make man in our image" (Genesis 1:26).

S.P. Is it seen in the Lord Himself as He speaks as one having authority and not as the scribes?

J.T. Quite so. It is worthy of consideration. In the gospels great men and poor men are seen as in contact with the Lord. He never says a word to Herod, but He speaks to Pilate, and in a most instructive way. Of Paul, the Lord said that he was "to bear my name

before both nations and kings and the sons of Israel" (Acts 9:15). Consider Paul's address before Agrippa. Besides the king, several grandees were sitting on the bench. "Paul, stretching out his hand" said, among many things, "I would to God, both in little and in much, that not only thou, but all who have heard me this day, should become such as I also am, except these bonds" (Acts 26:29) -- "as I also am, except these bonds" -- that is how he finished. What triumph in manhood!

Rem. "I have believed, therefore have I spoken" (2 Corinthians 4:13).

J.T. That shows that speaking in God's service should not be apart from faith. It is a quotation from Psalm 116:10.

W.B-w. In what way does circumcision help Moses into manhood?

J.T. It was Colossian truth he was defective in, as many of us are. Philosophy and vain deceit could only be met by circumcision. Man as in the flesh is no good at all; leprosy is in him. Circumcision is the putting off of the body of flesh (Colossians 2:11). Leprosy in the head is ability used in God's service which is merely natural. Moses was well brought up, taught in the wisdom of Egypt, "and he was mighty in his words and deeds" (Acts 7:22). He stood before the greatest men in Egypt and talked to them. Is he to bring that into the service of God? No. He neglected circumcision, and hence there would be in him the danger, as in the service of Jehovah, of having recourse to what marked him in Egypt.

N.B. Zipporah did not want circumcision.

J.T. Clearly so. Education and the polish that goes with it are apt to deceive us, and may be regarded as adornment in christianity. Circumcision meets this. Moses had evidently neglected circumcision, but he became a type of Christ in enforcing it. The sovereignty of God enters into the selection of His servants, and

we must accept them as He provides them. Zipporah was a Midianite, and as the wife of a great servant of God it was most important that she should bow to the truth of circumcision.

W.G.T. The radio has a social place, especially where men are talking about the things of the day. Moses and Zipporah were at the inn. Hotels cater for men's natural sensibilities. Hence the need of accepting circumcision in view of our public relations.

G.A.T. Would you say the wives are against this truth?

J.T. Well, what is stated of Zipporah has surely a voice for them.

J.D. Paul says of the things of God, "which also we speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, communicating spiritual things by spiritual means" (1 Corinthians 2:13).

J.T. That is a most appropriate word for us all.

E.G.McA. The incident in the inn would show that anyone who does not accept circumcision in his service and testimony will end in death morally.

J.T. God hates the bringing of mere natural ability into His service. Apollos was an eloquent man, mighty in the Scriptures, and God used him. "For he with great force convinced the Jews publicly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus was the Christ" (Acts 18:28).

A.E.H. As regards baptism and circumcision in Colossians: is baptism the application of death to me as in this present world; and circumcision the application of death to me in regard of entrance into another sphere and the things of God?

J.T. Colossians puts circumcision before baptism; then quickening. "Ye have been circumcised with circumcision not done by hand, in the putting off of the body of the flesh, in the circumcision of the Christ" (Colossians 2:11) -- the totality of the flesh, not a shred of it to be left in the service of God. The bearing of baptism is towards the world; I reckon myself dead

indeed unto sin, but alive unto God in Christ Jesus. But in Colossians it involves resurrection: "in which ye have been also raised with him" (Colossians 2:12).

J.T.Jr. There was unbelief in Zipporah in regard to circumcision; refusal of it; hence the complaint against her husband.

J.T. The whole position was in danger by it -- after all that God had done in bringing Moses forward. This position of the two in regard to circumcision was so serious, because Moses was responsible. Thus the severity of God as to him is seen; Jehovah was about to slay Moses.

W.G.T. His wife did the thing.

J.T. Yes, but she bitterly reproached her husband. It was done, however, and hence the Spirit says, "he let him go" (Exodus 4:25).

J.S.T. Abraham enforced it in his household.

J.T. That is where the truth of it comes out and is applied in the most complete way, in Genesis 17. God changes Abram's name there. The extension of the name implied circumcision; the new name was to work out in the power of the Spirit. Clearly the application in such thoroughness in Abraham's house, according to Genesis 17, is the ground of the divine visitation in chapter 18. There Abraham is the friend of God.

W.B-w. Moses enforces the thing here, and God says to Aaron, "Go into the wilderness to meet Moses".

J.T. Yes; the position is thus stabilised. All this is leading up to the testimony to the people by Moses and Aaron; and then the testimony to Pharaoh in Egypt. One thing that comes out is skill in the service as it proceeds.

This chapter is to bring out the levitical line. Amram and Jochebed are the names of Aaron's and Moses' father and mother. Aaron is not mentioned until he is 83, and Miriam is not mentioned by name until she is even older. God is placing qualities before names; now we have the names. "And Aaron

took Elisheba, daughter of Amminadab, sister of Nahshon, as wife; and she bore him Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar". These are important personages. Then we have "Eleazar Aaron's son took one of the daughters of Putiel as wife; and she bore him Phinehas". The end of the genealogy here is in Phinehas; in him we come to genuine priesthood. We have in the priesthood a carefully selected line; no mixed marriages; no unconverted husbands or wives taken into the marriage contract. This is the most difficult thing we have to do with today.

E.G.McA. There should be the endorsement of God in every marriage.

W.G.T. Phinehas was raised up to deal with an ungodly marriage.

J.T. He is figurative of Christ. He has an everlasting priesthood (Numbers 25:13).

G.A.T. How would you deal with ungodly marriages today?

J.T. They are condemned in Scripture. We ought to condemn them and refuse them. It is one of the most baneful things we have. We must deal with it; and in doing this to preserve the fellowship, the Lord will be with us. If those involved refuse to listen to their brethren, they add to their guilt and they must be refused as unfit for the fellowship of Christ's death.

G.A.T. The person not breaking bread may be a christian.

J.T. If he is a christian he ought to be in fellowship, otherwise he is questionable. He does not prove his genealogy if he does not come in. Certain ones were disallowed in the recovery in Nehemiah and Ezra because they did not show their pedigree.

W.B-w. The Spirit of God says, "This is that Aaron and Moses".

J.T. In verse 27 it is "this is that Moses and Aaron". From the priestly side Aaron is first; from the apostolic side Moses is first, so that there is perfect balance.

The first reference may imply Aaron's priority of age, the latter to Moses' priority morally and officially. This appears more and more in the history.

Ques. Moses' family is not much spoken of; why is this?

J.T. They are mentioned as Levites, some of them with distinction in the days of David (1 Chronicles 26). But considering the great place Moses had in the testimony, the comparatively small place his family had is to be sorrowfully noted. The fact may be intended to remind us that authority alone in the father cannot be a guarantee for a godly family. Besides, Zipporah, being a Midianite, would not tend to develop "a wholly right seed". Her history would show this.

J.T.Jr. Moses' grandson was an idolator -- the first paid priest (Judges 18:30). Phinehas came of the line of Aaron.

J.T. In connection with the terrible conflict with Benjamin (Judges 20), Phinehas, the faithful priest, is mentioned. But Jehonathan, the grandson of Moses, is mentioned as an idolatrous priest, as already remarked, in chapter 18:30. J.N.D.'s note shows that some copyist sought to conceal this by corrupting the text.

J.D. You would fear for a brother in fellowship taking a sister outside.

J.T. When Levi was born Leah said, "Now this time will my husband be united to me" (Genesis 29:34). The name signifies union really -- Levi.

J.D. "A man of the house of Levi went and took a daughter of Levi" (Exodus 2:1).

J.T. That is according to the divine way, and the result is according to God, as Exodus 6 shows.

E.G.McA. Aaron and Moses, and Miriam also.

J.T. Yes. They were together used for the deliverance of Israel; they were successful in speaking to the people, as chapter 4:29-31 shows.

Pharaoh is the next consideration. The success of the ministry in Egypt depends on how these two meet

Pharaoh. They overthrew the whole Egyptian system by their ministry, and delivered God's people from it.

Rem. There seems to be something more in your mind about marriage.

J.T. We know mixed marriages are wrong. How can you expect the children to be "wholly a right seed" (Jeremiah 2:21), and material for the assembly, where a mixed marriage is taken on? It will rather be a mongrel condition -- the book of Ezra deals with that. Of course we may have a family turning aside even when the father and mother are in fellowship, but that may mean that the truth is not maintained in the family.

Rem. Right household conditions and manhood are closely connected (Exodus 1:1). We read of Moses' father as a "man" (Exodus 2:1).

J.T. A man and his household runs through the book of Exodus. Manhood is seen in that you recognise your own parents according to what is due to them; and then bring up your own children according to what is due to the Lord and to them -- bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Thus the line is maintained.

J.T.Jr. Would it be seen too in the way you work with others? When Moses and Aaron go in before Pharaoh, "they said, The God of the Hebrews has met with us: let us go, we pray thee, three days' journey unto the wilderness, and sacrifice to Jehovah our God; lest he fall upon us with pestilence or with sword" (Exodus 5:3). This would be the result of God's operations in bringing the two men in unity.

J.T. Yes. The testimony takes the form of a system (chapter 7:1,2). It runs through chapters 7 to 11. It is completely successful. Egypt is brought down by the power of the ministry and that is what happened in apostolic testimony, as seen in Acts, the world was brought down morally.

We come now to chapter 12. The next thing is, how, as going out of Egypt, are we to be maintained?

It is a question of the food we eat. If I am to be maintained I must eat what God provides for such circumstances. Each has to learn to go on by himself. One must possess the ability to get on by himself, and stand for the rights of God under difficulties. One says, "As for me and my house, we will serve Jehovah" (Joshua 24:15). Aaron failed in this. In the absence of Moses he gave way to the idolatrous wishes of the people. This shows the importance of each one learning to stand on his own feet in dependence on God. "Having accomplished all things, to stand. Stand therefore" (Ephesians 6:13,14). This is not simply "doing what you can", but doing all that should be done see note in New Translation.

J.D. I think we would appreciate a few words on the character of food.

J.T. It is one of the most important things we can look into. The first is self-denial in what you are eating, chapter 12. That is, unleavened bread. The second is the manna; something you admire; it is a question of Christ, what He was here, in our circumstances, chapter 16. It is important to have these two thoughts before us.

A.E.H. Moses on the mount would not be getting food that would puff him up, but Aaron with the people lent himself to that.

J.T. The people made much of him. Those mentioned are the two ideas one had before one as to chapters 12 and 16: the first is that we are reduced, the flesh starved; and the second, Christ, as in current circumstances, as seen in the gospels. The first is self-denial, the second appreciation of Christ. The manna was "on the face of the wilderness". God said, "I will rain bread from heaven for you". It was from heaven, but here below in everyday circumstances, available to the people. It builds up manhood according to what was seen in Christ in the scene where He was in the days of His flesh, but in which He is no longer; His people are in it; and to be here as representative of Him, we must feed on the manna.

MANHOOD IN EXODUS (3)

Exodus 20:1-6; Exodus 21:1-6; Exodus 24:9-11

J.T. In the early part of chapter 19 we have the statement by Jehovah, "And now, if ye will hearken to my voice indeed and keep my covenant, then shall ye be my own possession out of all the peoples -- for all the earth is mine -- and ye shall be to me a kingdom of priests" (verse 5). It is perhaps needful to dwell a little on priesthood, God having in mind that it should apply to all the people.

So as to carry the thoughts relative to our subject forward, priesthood is mentioned here, and later in this chapter there are certain ones in Israel alluded to as priests without naming them. In Exodus 19:22 God says, "And the priests also, who come near to Jehovah, shall hallow themselves, lest Jehovah break forth on them". That is a collateral thought with what we have had. Priesthood is founded on manhood according to God, but also on sonship as applied fully in the New Testament -- the Son is the Priest. God expresses His thoughts for us and carries them forward. The full setting of priesthood is seen in chapters 28 and 29.

It is a feature of the position of God's people from the beginning. Every one who has the Holy Spirit is a priest; he may not be functioning for the want of intelligence or spiritual energy, but he still is a priest as having the Holy Spirit. What enters into this, I think, is seen in the first passage read, where God speaks of "them that love me", lovers of God. It is hardly worth naming a priest who does not love God, for he is to serve a God whom he loves -- a known God. To know God is to love Him. We have in this passage a statement, "I, Jehovah thy God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the sons to the third and to the fourth generation of them that hate me, and shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments". That

is a point I think we might rest on. Are we among the lovers of God? It is an advance feature of manhood. It is said of our days in 2 Timothy 3:2-4 that "men shall be lovers of self, lovers of money, ... lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God". Alas, that is manifest. Yet God here alludes to "thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments". No one can be regarded truly as a lover except as keeping the commandments.

G.A.T. "I love my master" (Exodus 21) -- is that the thought?

J.T. That is the next passage. It is an advanced thought: it is love of a three-fold kind. It goes up to the master, is horizontal to the wife and descends to the children. Love to God is ascending, love to a wife is horizontal, and love to children is descending. We come to an experienced lover in chapter 21, that is, typically, Christ Himself; He is the Bondman who loves.

J.D. Paul says in Romans 8:28, "All things work together for good to those who love God".

J.T. It is a testing passage. We are apt to say loosely, It applies to all the saints. Let us get the actual wording: "all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to purpose". It takes us back to the counsels of God; hence you are comforted that what is transpiring amongst the brethren is for good. Lovers of God come in for good no matter what happens. "The Spirit itself bears witness with our spirit, that we are children of God" (Romans 8:16). This chapter is to bring out the victorious character of christianity. It ends triumphantly in each true believer, and as a dispensation, and that is very comforting. Loving God is a great feature of manhood; that is, manhood as in His purpose; manhood implies perfection or full growth.

S.McC. In Judges 5:31, Deborah's song, "Let them that love him be as the rising of the sun in its might". It is a victorious idea.

J.T. Very beautiful! It might be connected with Psalm 19:5 where you have the tabernacle for the sun, "And he is as a bridegroom going forth from his chamber; he rejoiceth as a strong man to run the race".

W.G.T. If we say that we love God, the next thing is, do we keep His commandments?

J.T. Yes. "He it is that loves me" (John 14:21). Anyone really right has a fear in claiming to love God, unless keeping the commandments.

S.P. Is this reciprocal in character? In Exodus 19:4 God speaks of bringing them to Himself, but here in chapter 20 it is a movement of love from the people to Him, "them that love me".

J.T. I think that is the thought, the beginning of what we call the ten words. God is asserting His rights in chapter 20, and no person can deny that God has rights over His creatures; above all He has rights to their affections. Young people are told, "Remember thy Creator in the days of thy youth" (Ecclesiastes 12:1). God's rights to the affections of His people are the spirit of the law. It refers to God's rights. The great commandment is, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy understanding. ... Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself" (Matthew 22:37-39). It is a question of love fulfilling the law.

A.B. The apostle says, "Things which eye has not seen, and ear not heard, and which have not come into man's heart, which God has prepared for them that love him" (1 Corinthians 2:9).

J.T. That fits here; it is a quotation from Isaiah 64:4, and shows what jewels you get out of the prophets. There is in it a suggestion for those of us who try to serve the Lord's people -- as to how to use the prophets; that we not only quote them, but clothe them more richly. Paul changes the words used by the prophet here.

W.G.T. As to love, 1 Corinthians 13 stresses it in a remarkable way as greater than faith and hope. Chapter 12 introduces the thought of spiritual manifestation; chapter 13 is love and chapter 14 the prophetic line.

J.T. In 1 Corinthians 16:22 the apostle says, "If any one love not the Lord Jesus Christ let him be Anathema Maranatha"; and in chapter 12:3 he says, "No one, speaking in the power of the Spirit of God, says, Curse on Jesus". The idea of curse is turned round; such was the dreadful condition among christians at Corinth that there might be such a spirit there as would curse the Lord Jesus. "No one can say, Lord Jesus, unless in the power of the Holy Spirit"; the Spirit would enable you to say that in the assembly in affection. The Holy Spirit in our hearts would cause all the out-goings to be clothed with love.

J.McK. What is the difference between the priests of Exodus 19:6, "ye shall be to me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation", and Revelation 1:6, "and hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father"?

J.T. In the New Translation the passage in Revelation reads, "and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father": the saints are a kingdom by themselves, and in addition to that they are "priests to his God and Father". We have a further reference to priesthood in Revelation 20:6, "Blessed and holy he who has part in the first resurrection: ... they shall be priests of God and of the Christ". There they are definitely marked off as having part in the first resurrection. They are priests of God. We are characteristically that and also "of the Christ". That is, the saints are an official priesthood; that is of great importance now in regard to what is current; we are not national, but priestly; it is our proper function, it gives the saints more power than any. They are determining victory, "priests of God and of the Christ".

C.T. "A holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 2:5), is

what we are now. "Priests of God and of the Christ" (Revelation 20:6) is a millennial function.

J.T. God in Malachi 2:7 called attention to what priesthood really is. "The priest's lips should keep knowledge, and at his mouth they seek the law; for he is the messenger of Jehovah of hosts". As we have been saying, love is a great basis; it never fails, as we see in 1 Corinthians 13. Then at the end of the chapter, "And now abide faith, hope, love; ... and the greater of these is love" (1 Corinthians 13:13).

W.B-w. That explains the fact that keeping the covenant precedes the priesthood in this chapter, "if ye will ... keep my covenant, then shall ye be my own possession ... kingdom of priests" -- priesthood is on the principle of love.

J.T. As loving God, we keep His commandments. Thus we are qualified as priests. Christ, in type, saying, I love, in Exodus 21:5, shows how infinitely fitted He was to be High Priest.

E.G.McA. Would those who love God actively be more conscious of all things working together for good for them, than those who do not love Him actively? With many christians love is not active towards God.

J.T. I think that is manifestly so. Our exercises just now turn on what is current in the world. How is it affecting us? We find it difficult to see good working out in what seems outwardly so adverse. It would relieve us a great deal if we could see the good working out to those that love God. We should look for it.

J.D. What is the point in "I ... am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the sons to the third and to the fourth generation of them that hate me, and shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments"? How would the first part work today when we are not under law but under grace?

J.T. That is what God does, or may do, according to His sovereign right. Deuteronomy 24:16 directs

that "fathers shall not be put to death for the sons, neither shall the sons be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin". This, of course, is the law, which was to govern men. There is no difficulty in the statement, "visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the sons to the third and to the fourth generation". This may happen even in this dispensation of grace. It has happened to the Jews. Vengeance may be deferred, and it may not. Those that do not love the Lord Jesus will be cursed, that is, at the Lord's coming (1 Corinthians 16:22), while Galatians shows that wicked teachers may be cursed now (chapter 1:8,9). There are people that are not to be saved at all. Some do not think of that, but Paul says, "But if also our gospel is veiled, it is veiled in those that are lost" (2 Corinthians 4:3). When they are tested it is found that they hate God. On the other hand, the sons of Korah were saved. Psalms are inscribed to them. The sovereign mercy of God is seen there. God works of Himself and who can question Him in visiting the iniquity of the people that hate Him? On the other hand, who can question Him in exercising His rights in mercy?

G.A.T. "Who sinned, this man or his parents, that he should be born blind? Jesus answered, Neither has this man sinned nor his parents" (John 9:2,3).

J.T. That is to bring out the sovereign work of God, "that the works of God should be manifested in him". That is a great principle; acting sovereignly, God may convert the son of a very bad man.

W.G.T. A man might influence his children and his grandchildren in a right or a wrong way.

J.T. A grandson of Moses was an idolatrous priest (Judges 18:30). That is a very solemn thing.

W.B-w. The Canaanites were dispossessed of their land. Is that governmental?

J.T. Yes; but God waited and would have Israel wait until their iniquity was fully developed. "The iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full" (Genesis 15:16).

Abraham must wait for that. The patience of God is remarkable; He waited long before He struck, though the Canaanites were wicked above all people.

W.B-w. The Lord says to the Pharisees at the end of John 9, "Your sin remains". Is that judicial?

J.T. Yes. "But now ye say, We see, your sin remains." God in His sovereign work selects whom He will to save. He follows up tribes, peoples, families, fathers, heads of houses: follows them up in a governmental way. It is a serious matter, because in the passage before us the generations of those who hate Him are visited.

E.G.McA. Are those who hate Him spoken of in Romans 2:8,9? "But to those that are contentious, and are disobedient to the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there shall be wrath and indignation, tribulation and distress, on every soul of man that works evil".

J.T. Yes. The wrath of God is revealed against anyone on that line. The apostle puts off the curse until the Lord comes, "If any one love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha". Maranatha means when the Lord comes. Then we have in Galatians, as already remarked, an immediate curse threatened. The apostle further says, "I would that they would even cut themselves off who throw you into confusion" (Galatians 5:12).

J.D. Do you think we see the government of God in the way He addresses Esau in the prophet Obadiah 10,11: "Because of violence against thy brother Jacob, shame shall cover thee, and thou shalt be cut off for ever. In the day that thou stoodest on the other side, in the day that strangers carried away captive his substance, and foreigners entered into his gates, and cast lots upon Jerusalem, even thou wast as one of them"? Government followed Esau and there was no blessing.

J.T. Yes. "I loved Jacob, and I hated Esau" (Malachi 1:3.) This is not said until the last book of the

Old Testament. There are people in this world called lost by the Spirit of God.

J.D. There are those who are characteristically opposed to the children of God.

J.T. Yes, as Cain. How can a man love God if he does not love his brethren?

T.S. We are either in one category or the other; those who love the brethren or those who hate them.

J.T. The Spirit in 1 John speaks in remarkable abstractness, saying, for instance, "Whoever has been begotten of God does not practise sin, because his seed abides in him, and he cannot sin, because he has been begotten of God" (chapter 3:9). This, however, cannot be made to conflict with the fact stated plainly elsewhere, that believers, viewed in their ordinary or mixed condition while down here, are capable of sinning. The man put away at Corinth was a believer, but fell into gross evil; he was delivered "to Satan for destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus" (1 Corinthians 5:5). The second epistle shows that he was restored.

T.S. Men are steadily taking on these anti-christian characteristics you have been speaking of.

J.T. "Men shall be ... lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God" (2 Timothy 3:2,4). Wrath awaits those who are regarded as "lost", and who are characterised by the sinful features already mentioned; but discipline in the assembly is usually exercised with a view to recovery, as we have noted. The object is to save those disciplined. In Hebrews 9:19, we read "For every commandment having been spoken according to the law by Moses to all the people; having taken the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, he sprinkled both the book itself and all the people". The section of Exodus from chapters 20 to 23 contains the words of the book, and the writer of the Hebrews is applying the blood of the covenant to the book as well as the people. These

chapters are full of instruction as preparing us for ascension which is the next thing. To be prepared for ascension we begin with Christ in chapter 21. In the type heaven hears a man who says plainly, "I love my master, my wife, and my children". It is like the word to John, "Come up here" (Revelation 4:1).

W.B-w. Do you apply the ascension to going up to the mount?

J.T. Yes. It comes out in Exodus 24:1, "Go up to Jehovah, thou and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel; and worship afar off". Then they went up (verse 9). These chapters are to prepare us to go up; but the basis morally of ascension is that we love God and keep His commandments. This is working out according to the pattern of Christ as presented in Exodus 21, who says plainly, "I love my master, my wife, and my children, I will not go free"; God honours remaining in obedience in the exercise of love. Typically heaven claims Christ here; that is the position of chapter 24.

W.G.T. Are chapters 1 to 3 of Revelation the present dispensation -- "the things that are"?

J.T. Yes. "Write therefore what thou hast seen, and the things that are, and the things that are about to be after these" (Revelation 1:19). It helps us as ministering the truth, to set our subjects in order. What John is to write is set down by the Lord in the order of first, second, third. First, "what thou hast seen"; then "the things that are"; and then "the things that are about to be after these". That is the order of the subjects in the book of Revelation.

J.D. How many things are taken in by the expression, "the things that are"?

J.T. It is chapters 2 and 3 of the book -- what relates to the assemblies. What happens in the world generally follows, beginning with chapter 4. Although the events related under this head are after "the things

that are", this has to be understood also in a moral sense, for much of the third series are historically concurrent with the second. They extend back to Paul's ministry -- "For the mystery of lawlessness already works; only there is he who restrains now until he be gone" (2 Thessalonians 2:7). That all enters into the third sub-division of John's book, namely Revelation 4 to the end, and in these chapters we have protracted history which includes events extending back to the beginning of christianity. "And there are seven kings: five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; and when he comes he must remain only a little while" (Revelation 17:10). "One is" refers to the time of writing. Prophetic history as regards the world to some extent has been running concurrently with ecclesiastical history.

J.T.Jr. The book of Revelation alludes to bondman. It would link with Exodus 21, John being the apostle who was the expression of love.

J.T. Yes, the word bondman in this book involves love; that is the underlying thought. I hope we shall see it active in priesthood in Exodus 28 and 29. The word in Isaiah 8:16 is, "Bind up the testimony, seal the law"; this implies priesthood, for the priests were custodians of the law. The Hebrew bondman prefers to remain; and then he is brought to the door, and his ear is bored; resulting from that, "he shall be his bondman for ever" (Exodus 21:6). He has entered into that now. The service is finished and he is free, but instead of taking freedom he accepts this new kind of bond. Death is involved in it. The Lord accepted death to remain a bondman. A wonderful expression of love! He takes it on definitely because of love -- threefold love. It is worth while, like Jacob serving for Rachel, the seven years were as single days because of his love for her.

A.J. Being brought to the door would be a family allusion -- a public testimony, as to how the Lord entered into death for us.

W.G.T. Coming into bondmanship was for a limited period -- the six years, he accepted it for that time.

J.T. That is not an eternal position, but what he enters upon as saying, "I love", is an eternal position he is ever ready for; anybody that comes in sees that. The Lord Jesus died in love. "Christ also loved the assembly, and has delivered himself up for it" (Ephesians 5:25).

C.T. "I love my master." His Master is the first thought of.

J.T. God has that place. Christ's love in its activity is fully differentiated.

G.A.T. Is this the working out of the Lord's prayer, "Not my will"?

J.T. He submits to the will of God, but here in Exodus 21 there is no reluctance, this is entirely a love matter. We cannot say He is restricted to bondmanship, for He never ceases to be who He is, "over all God". It is a question of how far His love goes.

S.McC. "Emptied himself, taking a bondman's form" (Philippians 2:7). How far would that go?

J.T. It refers to His becoming Man, an allusion to the attitude of His mind. He became Man to serve. So the Lord would do any service amongst the disciples. It is the attitude of His mind, but we must not restrict Him to that. He lays aside His garments, as seen in John 13, but He puts them on again. He has the liberty of the house. He is the One that built it. He takes the place of house-father in Emmaus, see J.N.D.'s note to Luke 24:30. He is Son in the house; His Person remains unchanged.

J.D. "Then the Son also himself shall be placed in subjection to him who put all things in subjection to him, that God may be all in all" (1 Corinthians 15:28). Does that apply?

J.T. That is not exactly bondmanship. It just sets out the position of subjection; that is all; even then

we cannot say, He must be that. In this respect, we cannot apply must to Him; His Person remains unchanged, and, as in manhood, He is said to be "the true God" (1 John 5:20).

E.C. Bondmanship is only required as long as the need is existent.

J.T. The type here is to show what love in Christ has done. The type also shows the variety of His love -- ascending, horizontal and descending.

A.Pf. What would horizontal love be?

J.T. Love for the assembly. "This time it is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh" (Genesis 2:23). Adam recognised Eve's status as on equality with his. Thus love for his wife was for a person equal to himself. "That the world may know that I love the Father" (John 14:31), is ascending love; all His service is carried on in love. Love is the kernel of everything. Love to God is ascending. Descending love is to the saints viewed as children, and the Lord addresses the disciples as children.

Rem. Love existed between divine Persons before incarnation.

J.T. "Thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world" (John 17:24). That is a wonderful fact. The Father loved the Person now known as the Son before the world was. All Persons of the Deity were on equality, no inferiority of position then.

J.D. When a person loves like this, God says, Come up to Me into the mountain and be there (Exodus 24:12). Is that the thought in ascension?

J.T. That is the teaching in these chapters; first, thousands of those that love God, and then a special One that loves Him -- Christ, as a Man among men, comes into the scene of love here below. John says, "Hereby we have known love, because he has laid down his life for us" (1 John 3:16). Love is fully attested, so that we might know it. It underlies all these chapters until we come to chapter 24, then you get ascension; not only the ascension of Christ, seen in Moses, but

also that of the people. The people with one voice accept the words of Jehovah, and thus, in type, they are fit to ascend.

W.B-w. Are the thousands of those who love characteristic of the assembly?

J.T. The principle is that love is there; but now, chapter 21, in the typical allusion to Christ love is fully attested in the death of the Lord Jesus. He would remain a Bondman because of love, and testified to this by death.

W.B-w. The ear is bored through with an awl; why the ear?

J.T. The ear refers to the intelligence, power to take in things. It refers to the Lord's position in humanity. "He wakeneth morning by morning, he wakeneth mine ear to hear as the instructed" (Isaiah 50:4). It is the greatness of love that is before us. "Who, in view of the joy lying before him, endured the cross" (Hebrews 12:2).

A.B. "Even as the Christ loved us, and delivered himself up for us" (Ephesians 5:2).

J.T. That enters into this passage very manifestly.

E.G.McA. Does this passage indicate the readiness to accept bondmanship?

J.T. Yes. We are "to know the love of the Christ which surpasses knowledge" (Ephesians 3:19). Paul says, "For the love of the Christ constrains us" (2 Corinthians 5:14) -- that kind of love.

Rem. The bondman here says distinctly, "I love".

J.T. It refers to the Lord's attitude towards the Father and towards the saints. He leaves no room for question as to His love; it is manifest.

W.B-w. This love fits in with the Lord's supper, His body given for us, not as bearing the wrath of God on the cross. It is love in Man in the house.

J.T. Yes. The door would allude to the family circle, where the family is; the master is there and the

wife and the children, and the door is the public position, where there is going in and out.

W.B-w. The door-post is mentioned too.

J.T. Israel in Egypt knew what that meant, the blood of Christ kept the destroyer out, inside was the realm of love.

A.Pf. How does the love of God enter into this?

J.T. That is not here at all. It is love in a Man. The love of God is descending love, but that is another matter. The great fact of love here is introduced in a Man. It brings out the greatness of the love of Christ. I want to know the love of Christ, and to take it as an example. I want to learn how to love.

J.D. "For the love of the Christ constrains us, having judged this: that one died for all, then all have died" (2 Corinthians 5:14). This was the incentive in Paul's service.

J.T. It is stressed at Corinth, because of those who were not lovers of Christ in the true sense. Every Lord's day the Supper brings it before us. The Lord's supper, given in this epistle, implies that we love Him and love Him continually.

A.B. Paul says, "If any one love God, he is known of him" (1 Corinthians 8:3).

J.T. That is another point, loving God.

Ques. "He that loves God love also his brother" (1 John 4:21). Is the latter horizontal love?

J.T. Yes, the brother is my equal.

W.B-w. Paul as constrained by the love of Christ has got to the centre, and he would deal with persons who were not in accord with it.

J.T. Yes; and he prays elsewhere "that the Christ may dwell, through faith, in your hearts, ... to know the love of the Christ" (Ephesians 3:17,19).

E.G.McA. In Romans 8:35 he enquires, "Who shall separate us from the love of Christ"; and then goes on to show that nothing can separate us from it, or from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our

Lord. As Christ remains a Man, there is that love which we are brought into, and a link between Him and us for ever.

J.T. We are inseparable from it.

E.G.McA. "We more than conquer through him" (Romans 8:37).

S.P. In Revelation 3:9 He says to Philadelphia, they "shall know that I have loved thee".

J.T. Others are to know of His love for the assembly.

J.T.Jr. In Exodus 21 to 23, sin coming out is contemplated in relation to man; "he that striketh a man" and "he that stealeth a man", etc. It alludes to sin working in us. The Lord Jesus is a great model as we have seen, but, alas! sin works on our side.

J.T. Prominence is given to the word "man", and sin against him. Of course we know that in the history of the assembly that is what has happened; man has not been rightly valued or protected. The Lord says Himself, "How much better then is a man than a sheep" (Matthew 12:12).

W.B-w. Each of these things is in contrast to manhood in Christ.

J.T. Typically manhood in Christ is in view all through.

G.A.T. A brother lays down his life for the brethren.

J.T. That is a great thought. John has that in mind. The Lord Jesus set the example, which we are to follow.

W.G.T. Man may fail, but there is always the point of recovery. Following the directions of these chapters we get adjusted with the brethren. "Quit yourselves like men" (1 Corinthians 16:13).

W.B-w. What is the difference in the book of the covenant in Exodus and Deuteronomy?

J.T. Deuteronomy is a second covenant as we learn in chapter 29: "These are the words of the covenant that Jehovah commanded Moses to make with the children of Israel in the land of Moab, besides

the covenant that he made with them in Horeb." The words of the first covenant are used as a text for Moses to speak, as we would use Scripture in ministering. He took up the first covenant as it was and used it to bring out the second covenant -- "besides the covenant that he made with them in Horeb" (Deuteronomy 29:1). What is in mind is that he takes up the first, and amplifies it with increased love in his heart for the saints, so that it becomes another. In Deuteronomy Moses is enlarged as a lover of Israel and lover of God. He is greater in Deuteronomy than in the earlier books. Speaking brings out what the ministry really is amongst us today. Scripture is the basis of all ministry; but we are to minister Christ. John 21:25 says, "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which if they were written one by one, I suppose that not even the world itself would contain the books written". The first covenant is opened up so as to make another. It is a question of Moses' love for the people.

As to skill in ministry, Moses in seven verses of Exodus 12 gives the gist of all Jehovah said to him about the passover, and he adds to the details when he speaks to the people. Verses 21 to 27 are Moses' own words, as if he were to say, I am going to give you a word about the passover; and he gives in seven verses what he received in twenty verses. This brings in the way to minister, that it should be according to what is needed for the moment; reducing rather than extending. He brings it into their range, and adds new thoughts too -- the hyssop and the bason. That brings out the levitical principle and shows how to use Scripture; clothing it with thoughts God has given you. The book of Deuteronomy is like that.

G.A.T. The Lord spoke to the two going to Emmaus about "the things concerning himself" (Luke 24:27).

J.T. The Lord went over the ground we have been taking up these last two days, and we do not want to be saying anything different from what He would say.

W.B-w. The power for condensation is in the minister.

J.T. That is the idea -- the ability to condense or amplify as the circumstances may require.

A.E.H. In facing difficulties among the brethren, Deuteronomy affords peculiar help.

J.T. That is a good way to look at it.

W.B-w. You would not read a whole chapter in beginning to speak a word to the saints.

J.T. It is not good to bring in much scripture. Scripture is basic, and you can enlarge on it. Two or three short scriptures ought to be enough; three is good testimony.

S.McC. You might only have one. The Lord "found the place where it was written" (Luke 4:17).

J.T. To the two going to Emmaus, "he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself". In the assembly it is "the law of Moses and prophets and psalms" (Luke 24:44). In these instances the Lord was unfolding the truth as to Himself in its fulness, and hence should not be taken as models for us in giving addresses. The same is true of Paul's long discourse at Troas.

C.T. "They were astonished at his doctrine, for his word was with authority" (Luke 4:32). It was what He said, not so much what He read.

J.T. The eunuch was reading Isaiah 53, and Philip began there and preached Jesus to him.

Returning to our book, in Exodus 24 we read verses 9 to 11, which relate the fact that Moses and the others mentioned went up. This alludes to what is possible in assembly service. It does not say they went up to the mountain, but that Moses was to go up (verse 12) -- Christ alone.

J.D. What was there, according to chapter 21 -- love to the master, wife and children -- would give impetus to the service; spiritual power for ascension.

J.T. Love is regulated; its objects specified -- "I love my master, my wife, and my children" (Exodus 21:5). Love is active in the Lord's heart as He comes in. In assembly it is love first for Christ, answering to His love for us, that should be in action; when we go on farther it is love to the Father, or to God, that should be in action. It is a time of love; differentiated love. The kind of love applicable at any particular time is to be understood.

W.B-w. The seventy elders, or nobles set out developed manhood in those who go up.

J.T. Yes. First -- "Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu". We would say Nadab and Abihu should not be brought in, but they are, and they fit in here. Later they died under God's judgment (Leviticus 10:2), but here it is not Eleazar and Ithamar, but the elder sons, the chief of them, and then "seventy of the elders of Israel", so that you have a very august company going up. Love underlies it.

W.G.T. What is the thought in "transparent sapphire"?

J.T. That we are to leave all envy or other adverse feelings behind, in assembly service. Do not go up in the murkiness of natural feelings; all is transparency there.

S.McC. We might be inclined to think Nadab and Abihu should not have been there.

J.T. They fit in here. We might say Jethro should not take the place he took earlier. Nadab and Abihu are Aaron's sons here. Judas was really an apostle, and was owned as such until he went out. We have many instances of persons being used of God who afterwards came under His judgment.

J.D. Those who went up, "saw the God of Israel; and there was under his feet as it were work of transparent sapphire, and as it were the form of heaven for clearness". Does this involve intelligence

in us? Is it the knowledge of God needed for His service?

J.T. It is the realm of spiritual privilege, which can hardly be defined, you could not give an account of it. As in the enjoyment of our own peculiar place with God, we are made to feel that we are in the presence of infinite things. It makes you small, but you are in holy liberty, filled, as the apostle would speak of it "even to all the fulness of God", (Ephesians 3:19).

J.D. In our chapter in Exodus we have the expression "as it were the form of heaven for clearness". The term "as it were" seems to suggest something indescribable in mere words, similar to the expression in 2 Corinthians 5:20, where the footnote in the New Translation is helpful.

J.T. This wonderful realm of things cannot be exactly defined, you are in the presence of infinitude. What can you say?

N.B. All this results from the Lord Jesus taking a bondman's form (Philippians 2:7)).

J.T. Yes -- "his name is called Wonderful" (Isaiah 9:6). What transpired before Manoah and his wife was wonderful (Judges 13). Manoah was not equal to his wife; for as the angel did wondrously he was not able to take it in. His wife could, however, having spiritual instincts and exercises. The saints are to understand mysteries.

G.A.T. "They saw the God of Israel" (Exodus 24:10), but in chapter 20:22 "Jehovah said to Moses", why is the title changed?

J.T. It is God in verse 11, but it is qualified by "of Israel" in verse 10, and thus is specially relative here. We are in the realm of God. God is the great End of all things. In such glorious circumstances we are filled even to all the fulness of God. My spiritual vision is tested. Can I describe it as beholding it? Following this great scene, as it is to be understood now, it means "that God may be all in all" (1 Corinthians 15:28).

E.G.McA. It is a remarkable word, "they saw God, and ate and drank"; it is a most august occasion.

J.T. God includes all that relates to Deity; "Father" is more limited. The Father judges no one (John 5:22).

S.McC. "They saw the God of Israel", it says, and "they saw God and ate and drank". There are various thoughts linked with the God of Israel, but "they saw God" stands by itself.

J.T. As already remarked, as we bring the thought into christianity, it may be connected with 1 Corinthians 15:28. We are putting christian thoughts into it, which is right.

W.B-w. In assembly service the covenant God comes after the Supper.

J.T. I doubt that God should be formally brought into the Lord's supper. Jesus is spoken of as the Mediator of the new covenant in Hebrews 12:24. The Supper is the Lord's supper, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood" (1 Corinthians 11:25). It stands directly related to Christ in His supper. It is wise to keep the words conveying the Lord's supper in 1 Corinthians 11 steadily before us as partaking of it. Much that is stated in the gospels is left out there. The Lord in giving the wording of His supper to Paul, says of the cup, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye shall drink it, in remembrance of me". He is stressing the memorial aspect in what He gave to Paul, and this refers to Christ, not to God.

J.D. What is the thought as to God being all in all?

J.T. What is behind the divine economy is inscrutable. "No one knows the Son but the Father" (Matthew 11:27). We are dealing with the economy which goes right through.

J.D. "Then the Son also himself shall be placed in subjection to him" (1 Corinthians 15:28). Does that engage us with the Lord's Person in the economy?

J.T. Yes, but you cannot see all that enters into that from the divine side. There is that which we do not, and cannot know. When thinking of His subject position, I have to bear in mind that He is "over all, God blessed for ever" (Romans 9:5). The general position is in mind in 1 Corinthians 15:28, "God ... all in all".

MANHOOD IN EXODUS (5)

Exodus 28:1-4, 40-43; Exodus 29:36-46

J.T. We shall look at priesthood. These chapters are taken up with much detail. In chapter 28, we have the garments of the high priest and his sons; chapter 29 is the consecration of Aaron and his sons, giving the general conditions that should be in Israel in the verses read. Priests are already recognised as in Israel in chapter 19 and the youths in chapter 24:5 functioned as priests, but nothing said about the garments. In other words, it was just such as they were, just what there was; but now we have come to the end of our subject in regard of manhood, and God would have us to understand His thoughts of manhood in priesthood. I think that is the meaning of the clothes. They are put on and as put on they are in accord with what is there, especially in the high priest. The wise-hearted are to provide these clothes. "Thou shalt make holy garments for Aaron thy brother, for glory and for ornament." The matter will be easier to consider if we look at these garments as expressive of divine thoughts. They are not put on superficially. The person on whom they are placed is equal to them. They convey divine thoughts. God would have His priests rightly regarded. He knows us and furnishes us with these thoughts of dignity. Insignia of office often denote the dignity of the person, it is a misdemeanour to regard them otherwise. Their clothes are put on. The principle is in the bride, the Lamb's wife. "And it was given to her that she should be clothed in fine linen, bright and pure; for the fine linen is the righteousnesses of the saints" (Revelation 19:8). She is equal to that. The question is, How do we regard Christ and the saints? We must use our eyes in relation to the dignity attaching to each other, and see that we speak rightly of the saints, because when we get to

heaven we will be speaking too, and it would never do to speak other than rightly of each other to God and to Christ. I think in this way the furnishing of the habiliments of the high priest and his sons keeps our minds right.

J.D. Would you say something on the introduction of the priesthood following the directions concerning the holy oil for the lamp, which is to be kept burning. Is the thought introduced in connection with the maintenance of the testimony before men?

J.T. Priesthood comes in in this way as it is required; the need for it is obvious. The instruction regarding the tabernacle began in chapter 25. We proceed in the pattern to the end of chapter 27, where we have, "And thou shalt command the children of Israel, that they bring thee olive oil, pure, beaten, for the light, to light the lamp continually. In the tent of meeting outside the veil, which is before the testimony, Aaron and his sons shall dress them from evening to morning before Jehovah: it is an everlasting statute, for their generations, on the part of the children of Israel" (verses 20,21). Then we have service -- "And thou shalt take thee Aaron thy brother, and his sons with him, from among the children of Israel, that he may serve me as priest -- Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar, Aaron's sons". This is their service; I want you to have right thoughts about them in this service. Everything must flow out from God. These garments indicate His thoughts. The prodigal's father said, "Bring out the best robe" (Luke 15:22). It is to display divine thoughts.

C.T. That is why they are called the holy garments.

J.T. Quite so. "Thou shalt make holy garments for Aaron thy brother, for glory and for ornament". We are in the presence now of dignity in manhood, really the supreme thought of God in manhood.

A.E.H. These divine thoughts take on the character of preserving what is inward, right feelings, thoughts,

and motives; and on the other hand the shutting out of what is wrong and evil. Priesthood in that way stands in the presence of a great system of evil.

J.T. God is guarding the dignity of His priesthood, so that every time I look at the high priest I must be careful what I say about him. We talk freely about the brethren, but no matter who they are we must conform with God's thought.

S.McC. Psalm 99:6 says, "Moses and Aaron among his priests". Would that suggest the dignity of the personnel in the priesthood?

J.T. Yes. Moses is not called a priest. He really has more liberty with God than Aaron.

S.P. What is the particular reason for introducing Aaron here as "Aaron thy brother"? In the remainder of the chapter he is just called Aaron.

J.T. It is to bring out the link between him and the mediator. Christ is both Moses and Aaron in the New Testament, "the Apostle and High Priest of our confession" (Hebrews 3:1). The link is here in the brother, not simply Aaron, but "Aaron thy brother". The thought runs through the epistles to the Corinthians. The brother is linked with Paul in the writing of those letters, so modifying the element of authority. Aaron is the modifying element. In chapter 16 when the people wanted to go back into Egypt, Aaron, not Moses, speaks to them. While Aaron is speaking they turn their faces away from Egypt and towards the wilderness. The gospel of Luke represents that feature of Christ. If Matthew and Mark do not succeed, bring Luke in. Luke is helpful to people who are in a bad way. Luke will always give you something hopeful about them, therefore you can follow that through to recovery. Keep on patiently. When Aaron spoke they looked toward the wilderness and they saw the glory which then appeared for their support in that view. Luke's side of the position is very important because it is the hopeful side. There are so many delinquents amongst

us, alas! Matthew is usually severe, cuts people off quicker, and makes punishment more severe. He brings in Gehenna. Luke is always hopeful. Luke begins with a delinquent priest, Zacharias, but there is something hopeful about him and he is secured. After nine months he is ready for recovery.

G.A.T. Luke is the physician that would go with him.

J.T. Just so, he would diagnose the case. The man at Corinth was recovered quicker than they expected.

J.D. We are so liable to think of those who have turned aside as impossibilities, but Zacharias is an unbelieving priest and Luke is hopeful. This ought to encourage the brethren to keep on praying for anyone we might think an impossibility.

J.T. It is very interesting to look into hopefulness in Luke.

E.G.McA. You mean Luke handled the case of Zacharias with these garments in view, although he had to give an account of his unbelief?

J.T. I think so. When John the baptist is born the neighbours would bring in natural thoughts and call him Zacharias after his father. That is a poor thing to call him after a man under discipline. Elizabeth says, "No; but he shall be called John" (Luke 1:60). Is the father on natural lines? "He wrote saying, John is his name". Heaven had announced his name.

J.D. "Thou shalt speak with all that are wise-hearted, whom I have filled with the spirit of wisdom, that they may make Aaron's garments to hallow him". We are coming over to God's side and viewing the saints accordingly, when we clothe them with these priestly thoughts.

J.T. Take Luke's gospel, how he clothes Zacharias, and the shepherds watching over their flocks: "An angel of the Lord was there by them". They deserve it; they have status already, light from God about the birth of Jesus. The multitude that comes in joins in that. What do they do now? They say, "Let us make our

way then now as far as Bethlehem". They are priests and praise God about it. We do not hear of either Simeon or Anna until the second of Luke. They are clothed properly. A divine thought was revealed to Simeon "a man in Jerusalem" -- "that he should not see death, before he should see the Lord's Christ. And he came in the Spirit into the temple". The Spirit of God clothed him with priesthood immediately. Anna is also thoroughly fit for the clothing. In the Acts the saints come into view in the same way. "Barnabas ... a Levite, Cyprian by birth, being possessed of land, having sold it, brought the money and laid it at the feet of the apostles" (Acts 4:36,37). This is the first time he is brought in and he has already sold the land. What can you say about him? He is a son of consolation. His status is settled. Right through the Acts you see that.

J.T.Jr. Of Saul it says, "Behold, he is praying" (Acts 9:11).

J.T. That is a priestly garment. The Lord clothed him so that Ananias would know his status.

S.P. Barnabas in disposing of his property would ornament what the saints would see.

J.T. He gets the name, "Son of consolation" from the apostles. They put the garment on at once.

C.T. Moses strips Aaron of the garments. Are they the same garments?

J.T. We have a word as to them here in chapter 29:29,30. It says, "And the holy garments of Aaron shall be his sons' after him, to be anointed therein, and to be consecrated in them. The son that is priest in his stead shall put them on seven days, when he cometh into the tent of meeting to serve in the sanctuary". He is to become accustomed to them. Will he act as his father did? It is a question of what he can do. Eleazar did very well and Phinehas did very well. He is the one the genealogy terminates in. He knows how to dignify his office. "I glorify my ministry",

Paul says in Romans 11:13. You do not detract from it. We have to begin with Christ; that is the way the chapter proceeds. The sons are mentioned at once, but you do not get their clothes until the end of the chapter. It is not Christ only, but also the sons. So that heaven says, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight" (Matthew 3:17). It is not all my delight -- God reserves space for the sons. That is the idea here; the sons are mentioned at once, but you do not get them clothed until the end of the chapter. Aaron is the first one to be occupied with. It is a question of Christ through the chapter. See how careful God is that the saints should have His mind about Christ, that is clothing Christ with divine thoughts. God would bring us into that. We are to have wonderful thoughts of God about Christ. "God, thy God, has anointed thee with oil of gladness above thy companions" (Hebrews 1:9).

W.B -- w. "Serve me as priests", not as sons, it is the priestly side here.

J.T. In the word at the beginning of the book, "Let my son go, that he may serve me" (Exodus 4:23), God is saying, although the son is there he must have these garments. That is, priesthood is to mark us, and holiness. It involves holy garments.

J.D. One feels the deep necessity for manhood in matters of discipline. "Take heed in the plague of leprosy, that thou take great heed, and do according to all that the priests the Levites shall teach you: as I commanded them shall ye take heed to do" (Deuteronomy 24:8.

J.T. Yes. The Levites and priests have a great place in Deuteronomy; hardly any distinction is made between them. The Levite is elevated in Deuteronomy. The actual bearers of the ark were Levites, but called priests there. Certain books bring in these high, rich thoughts, books equal to them.

A.Pf. Paul writes, "But I commend to you Phoebe, our sister, who is minister of the assembly which is in Cenchrea" (Romans 16:1), there clothing her and all the rest of those mentioned, in priestly garments.

J.T. Quite so. J.N.D.'s note says, ' She did the needed service [of a deaconess] in the assembly there; she was not properly a servant '; see also the note to 1 Corinthians 4:1. It is a question of what a sister can do, and if she does it, it will clothe her. Bring in this idea of clothing to maintain proper dignity amongst us.

E.G.McA. In letters of commendation proper clothing is necessary.

J.T. In writing Paul speaks well of Phoebe and many others. She did the needed service.

J.W.D. Where we see these qualities, the priest blesses God in relation to them. Something concrete that you see amongst the saints fills the heart with movement Godward and thus creates a living point of affection.

J.T. Phoebe carried the epistle to Rome. She is a worthy messenger. The epistle would be read, and chapter 16 has about twenty salutations. God is clothing His saints with dignity based on what they are and what they do. We will get full recognition both in heaven and among the brethren according to what we are.

G.A.T. Martha has been doing the needed service but complaining.

J.T. Martha fails Luke here. He does not finish with Martha; he leaves her in a bad way. She received the Lord but criticizes Him and her sister; that is not priestly clothing. The next thing is the Lord is seen praying. I suppose He would pray for her, for Luke 11 is assembly furnishings and undoubtedly He was thinking how poorly she acted. John comes in and gives us a full view of Martha serving rightly. She adorns the position in the feast at Bethany.

J.T.Jr. What is the thought in Luke giving us no more than that?

J.T. He would go as far as he could -- the Lord's prayer was answered in John's gospel.

A.L. We are clothed with what we are and what we do. David would not keep on the dress that Saul gave him. He did not try it but went wearing his ordinary clothes.

J.T. The clothes he had used in slaying the lion. We see here how all this applies to the sons of Aaron, who are mentioned by name, "Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar". Keep your mind on the high priest. One man draws out the mind and heart of God, nothing unsaid, perfectly clothed priests.

J.T.Jr. Peter in preaching in Cornelius' house says, "Jesus who was of Nazareth: how God anointed him with the Holy Spirit and with power; who went through all quarters doing good" (Acts 10:38). Peter turns their minds to Christ, converging them on the High Priest.

J.T. "God was with him".

E.G.McA. "And these are the garments which they shall make ... that he may serve me as priest". There is something in connection with the Lord's people which gives more liberty for the priest.

J.T. That is just it. For instance, the Lord brings us here today and the brethren are very sympathetic with what is being said. The Lord is able to do much more in those conditions. At Corinth, the apostle indicated he could not get along because of conditions. He could not open up the mind of God for them. He waited until they were generally right themselves. The Lord is hampered when there is a low state amongst us. We must clothe all the saints as mentioned, so that Aaron may minister, he would be hindered otherwise.

J.D. "Epaphras, who is one of you, the bondman of Christ Jesus, salutes you, always combating earnestly for you in prayers, to the end that ye may stand perfect and complete in all the will of God" (Colossians 4:12). Do you think Epaphras is a good example for us?

J.T. He is an excellent example, an approved man. He combats in prayer. There was great opposition to what he had in his mind.

H.B. There is much said in verse 4 as to the turban and breastplate, etc.

J.T. The breastplate is the prime thought in the list. "And these are the garments which they shall make: a breastplate, and an ephod, and a cloak, and a checkered vest, a turban, and a girdle; and they shall make holy garments for Aaron thy brother, and his sons, that he may serve me as priest. And they shall take gold, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, and twined byssus, and shall make the ephod of gold, blue, and purple, scarlet and twined byssus, of artistic work" (Exodus 28:4-6). The ephod is generally the idea of priesthood. The breastplate cannot be put on without it. It is dependent on the ephod which refers to the general idea of priesthood. Then there is the long cloak that goes with it, completing the covering of the priest. The next thing is the two shoulder-pieces. "It shall have two shoulder-pieces joined at the two ends thereof, where it is joined together. And the girdle of the ephod, which is upon it, shall be of the same, according to its work of gold, blue, and purple, and scarlet and twined byssus. And thou shalt take two onyx stones, and engrave on them the names of the children of Israel: six of their names on the one stone, and the six names of the rest on the other stone, according to their birth. According to the work of an engraver in stone, as the engravings of a seal, shalt thou engrave the two stones with the names of the sons of Israel; surrounded by enclosures of gold shalt thou make them. And thou shalt put the two stones upon the shoulder-pieces of the ephod as stones of memorial for the children of Israel; and Aaron shall bear their names before Jehovah upon his two shoulders for a memorial. And thou shalt make enclosures of gold; and two chains of pure gold; of laced work shalt thou

make them, of wreathen work, and fasten the wreathen chains to the enclosures" (Exodus 28:7-14). That is one great thought after the ephod is mentioned, these two shoulder-pieces on which are engraved the names of the children of Israel according to birth. It is the great general thought of Christ upholding the saints as the family of God, not yet in testimony, but as a family according to their birth. The breastplate is not that, although the same people are repeated in twelve precious stones in a square. Their names are not actually given at all. It is the names of the saints according to the position of each in the testimony from divine counsel and selection as they surrounded the tabernacle. They are all wonderfully precious in the mind of God, it is a question of His counsel. Beginning with Judah each has his place in the testimony, and the eternal position too, that is the breastplate. The Lord has them there before Jehovah, we are supported as a family and we are supported in the testimony as well, that is the idea of the breastplate.

W.G.T. The Lord would have this chapter in mind when He said to the disciples, "Rejoice that your names are written in the heavens" (Luke 10:20).

J.T. He had the Levites in mind. It is a question of a ' Who is who? ' book up there. He would say, each of them is like the firstborn -- not first, second and third, as on the shoulder. In the family, properly, Christ is the firstborn, but from the Levitical point of view everyone has the same dignity and status. Every Levite represents the firstborn in Israel. Every Levite is firstborn. There could be nothing like it in the universe. This chapter is worth taking in. It gives us equality with each other and promotes mutuality.

G.A.T. They are set in carefully, and are not to die out.

J.T. They are there according to birth. Reuben would have the first place in the shoulder-pieces. When it is the family, there is firstborn and second born,

but when it comes to the breastplate there is no firstborn at all; Judah has first place. In Numbers there are four sets of three each surrounding the tabernacle and the breastplate represents them as they stood there.

E.G.McA.. "To the assembly of the firstborn who are registered in heaven" (Hebrews 12:23).

J.T. That is an allusion to the Levites. It is the plural word for firstborn.

W.B-w. When I come together in assembly with the brethren I look at them all as firstborn ones, not in responsibility as a family.

J.T. We come into the family according to our birth.

A.Pf. What is the difference between Christ the firstborn and the firstborn ones?

J.T. "When he brings in the firstborn into the habitable world, he says, And let all God's angels worship him" (Hebrews 1:6), "firstborn of all creation" (Colossians 1:15). He is also "firstborn among many brethren" (Romans 8:29). It is a question of Christ's personal dignity. No one else could have it, but He. Coming back to our chapter this position on the shoulder-pieces supports us in the family, and the position on the breastplate supports us in testimony, as set there according to divine selection. Paul is brought into it later on. He has a prominent place.

J.T.Jr. The disciples questioning who would be the greatest, in Luke 22:24, indicates what is apt to be in our minds. The Lord brings in the great thought of service.

J.T. In Matthew 20:20 the mother of the sons of Zebedee wanted a place. The Lord says, that is the Father's matter, a question of divine counsel. When it is a servant, see the provision the Lord made for Paul, a wonderful place on the breastplate. Paul says, "Who has loved me and given himself for me" (Galatians 2:20). He was to endure. "Thou hast testified the things concerning me at Jerusalem, so thou must bear witness at Rome also" (Acts 23:11). No one really suffered

more than the apostle Paul, apart from the Lord Himself. What a place the apostle Paul had in the Lord's mind, and He supported him peculiarly day and night in his service.

C.T. Why is the breastplate square?

J.T. It is very regular this universal thought embracing all the saints; it is particularly a matter of the testimony. They were located around the tabernacle on this principle.

W.B-w. Why is it the Urim and Thummim?

J.T. We have already spoken of the mystery. It would bring in the mysterious side of the matter. The Urim and the Thummim is a very mysterious thought. The Urim is sometimes mentioned by itself. It is a remarkable thing. You can enquire there; where love is in a regular way, where the saints are taken account of according to divine counsel and arrangement; and get light from God. A right state among the brethren opens up the way for the unfolding of divine thoughts. Moses had much more liberty in unfolding his thoughts about the tribes in the end of Deuteronomy, than Jacob had in Genesis 49. Jacob had nothing like the atmosphere Moses had. Moses was king in Jeshurun in Deuteronomy 33:5, the people all loved him. Then the idea of the Urim and Thummim is light and perfection. There is liberty if a right state of things exists among the brethren.

A.E.H. Is it perfection toward God, and light toward man?

J.T. Quite so.

J.McK. "And thou shalt put into the breastplate of judgment the Urim and the Thummim, that they may be upon Aaron's heart when he goeth in before Jehovah; and Aaron shall bear the judgment of the children of Israel upon his heart before Jehovah continually" (Exodus 28:30.

J.T. Yes. In Moses' blessing, when he comes to Levi, he says, "Thy Thummim and thy Urim are for

thy godly one" (Deuteronomy 33:8). That is remarkable because the Urim is first here. It is to bear out that if conditions are good you have perfection before light, that is the state of the saints.

W.G.T. Levi represents spiritual people.

J.T. That is how he is mentioned, "Thy Thummim and thy Urim are for thy godly one". That is Levi. I think the order of Paul's epistles help us, because where there is a good condition locally the Spirit of God is freer to open up things. "Thummim", that is perfection and then if you have Urim the light shines.

J.D. Numbers 27:21 helps. The Urim is sometimes mentioned by itself. "And he shall stand before Eleazar the priest, who shall inquire for him, by the judgment of the Urim before Jehovah: at his word shall they go out, and at his word they shall come in, he, and all the children of Israel with him, even the whole assembly". It is a question of light coming in for the saints.

J.T. Quite so.

W.B-w. "And the Tirshatha said to them that they should not eat of the most holy things, till there stood up the priest with Urim and Thummim" (Nehemiah 7:65).

J.T. Israel still waits for that, it is future.

G.A.T. We should be right together first before we expect light from heaven.

J.T. Local conditions have a great deal to do with it. Local conditions hindered Paul at Corinth.

N.B. The linen comes in at the end of the chapter.

J.T. And then as to Aaron's sons it is said, "Thou shalt make vests". The vest is not a public garment it is an inner one. It is a question of what the man is inwardly. "Keep thyself pure" (1 Timothy 5:22). "But youthful lusts flee" (2 Timothy 2:22). The vest is mentioned first. What young people need is this inner state of purity, to be in the service of priesthood. And then the girdles, they are recognised as servants. The high caps would stand for intelligence, governed by

priestly dignity. The high priest has a turban, it is a remarkable head covering. "And thou shalt make a thin plate of pure gold, and engrave on it, as the engravings of a seal, Holiness to Jehovah! And thou shalt put it on a lace of blue, and it shall be upon the turban -- upon the front of the turban shall it be. And it shall be upon Aaron's forehead, and Aaron shall bear the iniquity of the holy things, which the children of Israel shall hallow in all gifts of their holy things; and it shall be continually on his forehead, that they may be accepted before Jehovah" (Exodus 28:36-38), -- bringing out holiness of mind, how you speak about the things of God. Paul had to combat the opposite to this in the Corinthians. They used their own minds in the things of God.

H.B. Would the high cap be seen in Romans 1:9, God "whom I serve in my spirit in the glad tidings"?

J.T. Quite so. Chapter 29 brings the altar in as anointed; verse 37 refers to the general condition in Israel, only the altar is specially mentioned as anointed seven days. The place of sacrifice among the people of God is holy. Seven days would bring it into accord with Christ. In Leviticus it is said to be anointed seven times, alluding to the Lord Himself. That is the general thought in sacrifice and suffering. All this is to bring out the dignity of things, and holiness is needed in dealing with them. It is outside the world and must not be brought down to the level of man's ways at all. Looking after the meeting room is a dignified service, not common. "And thou shalt weave the vest of byssus; and thou shalt make a turban of byssus; and thou shalt make a girdle of embroidery. And for Aaron's sons thou shalt make vests; and thou shalt make for them girdles; and high caps shalt thou make for them, for glory and for ornament. And thou shalt clothe with them Aaron thy brother, and his sons with him; and shalt anoint them, and consecrate them, and hallow them, that they may serve me as priests. And

thou shalt make them linen trousers to cover the flesh of nakedness; from the loins even to the hips shall they reach" (Exodus 28:39-42). This is the general everyday condition among the people of God, contemplating manhood in priesthood in sonship, indeed in brotherly relations, with all these glorious thoughts put upon us by God, and we subjectively answering to them. What a time God has and heaven has every day among the saints here below!

E.G.McA. What is the altar today?

J.T. It is the power of endurance, continuance in suffering, in a holy way. Christ alone is the full expression of it. The measurements indicate what moral power there was in the Man, what He could endure in the way of sacrificial judgment.

G.A.T. You were speaking about taking care of the room?

J.T. That is not a common thing, it is not like working in your own house. We are in relation to the house of God in these matters.

A.B. The household of Stephanas devoted themselves to the saints for service. The footnote says the verb is connected with the saints, rather than service. This amplifies what you are saying.

W.G.T. In Matthew 5:23,24 you cannot use the altar if you have anything against your brother: "Leave there thy gift before the altar, and first go, be reconciled to thy brother".

J.T. That is a good illustration. You would discredit the altar if you offered on it knowing a brother has ought against you. "Then come and offer thy gift." The morning and evening lamb would stimulate the heart of God. It is very beautifully taken up in Numbers. That is to bring out the general position for God amongst His people when manhood is secured in sonship in the Lord Jesus. The position is fixed immutably in Christ. It is the state of things that God gets every day as a result of the morning and evening lamb.

J.T.Jr. In the early chapters of the Acts, they go to their own company after being threatened. We find that we go to our own company, into the midst of those who have the same feelings.

J.T. Read us what follows that in the Acts.

J.T.Jr. "And they, having heard it, lifted up their voice with one accord to God, and said, Lord, thou art the God who made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and all that is in them; who hast said by the mouth of thy servant David, Why have the nations raged haughtily and the peoples meditated vain things? The kings of the earth were there, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord and against his Christ. For in truth against thy holy servant Jesus, whom thou hadst anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the nations, and peoples of Israel, have been gathered together in this city to do whatever thy hand and thy counsel had determined before should come to pass. And now, Lord, look upon their threatenings, and give to thy bondmen with all boldness to speak thy word, in that thou stretchest out thy hand to heal, and that signs and wonders take place through the name of thy holy servant Jesus. And when they had prayed, the place in which they were assembled shook, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and spoke the word of God with boldness" (Acts 4:24-31).

J.T. That is exactly what we are at here, the general state of things in the company.

W.B-w. "It shall be a continual burnt-offering throughout your generations at the entrance of the tent of meeting before Jehovah, where I will meet with you, to speak there with thee". It is a collective setting at the finish.

J.T. There are communications under these conditions. The tabernacle enters into all these things.

E.G.McA. In that passage in the Acts all are filled with the Holy Spirit, as seen in verse 45 here, "I will

dwell in the midst of the children of Israel, and will be their God".

J.T. How successful the apostolic service was, and then Barnabas, an addition, ornamentation coming in. God says, "It shall be hallowed by my glory", a wonderful scene! glory present. Think of that, God sanctifying everyone of us, because of conditions. And then it goes on, "And I will hallow the tent of meeting, and the altar; and I will hallow Aaron and his sons, that they may serve me as priests. And I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel, and will be their God. And they shall know that I am Jehovah their God, who have brought them forth out of the land of Egypt, to dwell in their midst: I am Jehovah their God". It is a wonderful ending to this great subject, manhood now, the full thought of it in Christ and His people, the sons of God.

J.D. The Philippian assembly would be an answer to this, the opening up of the bowels of the servant. The apostle found a congenial state where he could open up what would answer to this.

J.T. Paul's epistles help us on this line. In Colossians Paul was able to open up more than in Corinthians, and the Ephesians furnished the apostle ample room to open up his thoughts.

E.G.McA. God takes delight in dwelling in the midst of this service.

G.A.T. It is very important what company we are found in. "And having been let go, they came to their own company" (Acts 4:23).

J.T. Quite so.

C.T. "I am Jehovah their God."

J.T. To make clear who He is, go back to Exodus 3. "To us there is one God, the Father", (1 Corinthians 8:6).

ELDERSHIP

1 Chronicles 11:3; Nehemiah 8:13-18; Acts 15:6-23

I have in mind to speak about eldership among the people of God. It is a thought that began very early, involving the idea of rank as over against the great modern developments. We have the word rank applied to our Lord Jesus as the first from among the dead, "each in his own rank: the first-fruits, Christ" (1 Corinthians 15:23). We have the thought applied to Michael also; he is called an archangel (Jude 9).

What is in mind now is to speak of rank as based on experience with God as essential to government in the assembly; for if this truth is largely lost in the world it is to be maintained in the assembly. Every divine thought is to find expression in the assembly, and no thought is in a way more significant than government. As creating man, God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the heavens, and over the cattle, and over the whole earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth on the earth. And God created Man in his image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them" (Genesis 1:26,27).

It is in mind now to stress experience with God as finding, if it exists, its own proper place among the saints in our times. If it does not exist we can only speak of it in the abstract, but if it does, it should be recognised. The thought begins in Paul's address to a youthful brother, Timothy, "Let no one despise thy youth, but be a model of the believers, in word, in conduct, in love, in faith, in purity" (1 Timothy 4:12). The men whom Paul, under God, selected to ordain elders, were young; they were not themselves elders in the sense of age and long experience. What enhanced

their quality was that they were children of Paul, each is called a child of Paul, spiritually so. Paul had become an elder, "being such a one", he says, "as Paul the aged" (Philemon 9); not simply being an old brother. In delegating Titus and Timotheus to appoint elders he certainly would avoid any charge of incongruity in using young men to appoint old ones. The spiritual link and character derived from Paul by these young men, qualified them as his children, and overcame all that. If anyone questioned Timotheus or Titus, Paul would soon call attention to the fact that they had overcome the discrepancy of youth in what they were doing; no one could despise their youth. They were so morally great that their comparative youth was no handicap to them. Hence the idea of eldership, or experience with God, should start with the very youngest here. The beginning is noted in the word, "Let no one despise thy youth". It means that I am putting on such features of maturity in my manners and ways that no one can rightly despise it; if they do, they discredit themselves.

I have selected these three scriptures, because they bring out this thought of eldership in function, for it is only as a thing, or a person, is in function, that you can determine what he is. If a brother never says anything in the meeting, he is not functioning. When he begins to speak in the assembly, and speak in a priestly way, then we begin to name him, but we cannot do it earlier except in a negative sense which, of course, we are loath to do. Sometimes one wonders whether the devil has not a hand in the silence that some brothers maintain in the assembly. It is said of the Lord that He taught the disciples how to pray. One of them said to Him, "Lord, teach us to pray, even as John also taught his disciples" (Luke 11:1). The Lord immediately taught them how to pray, and gave examples of prayer too; and He goes on to the very greatest thing that may be obtained by prayer, saying "How much rather shall

the Father who is of heaven give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?" (verse 13). How can anyone be silent in the assembly in the presence of such a word from the Lord Jesus? The very greatest gift is the Holy Spirit. That is something that we can receive as a gift; it can be obtained by asking. The next thing we get from Luke about the Lord is that "he was casting out a demon, and it was dumb" (verse 14). He was doing it. His service as yet was not completed, He was doing it; He seems to prolong the process so that it might be understood, so that there should not be any silent ones. Any brother who is constantly silent in the assembly is open to a charge of being under adverse influence. I am not saying that is so always, but one is questionable if he does not speak in the assembly. The Holy Spirit coming into a believer cries! "But because ye are sons, God has sent out the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father" (Galatians 4:6). It is urgent that there should be some response to God from the great gift that He has given us, that is, the Holy Spirit.

I have been saying that young ones should develop in that way, and that no one should despise their youth. "Let no one despise thy youth." It certainly will be despised if you are frivolous, negligent, or careless in regard to the things of God, and you will become questionable as to any value at all in the assembly. So that eldership begins when we are young, as we avoid giving occasion to any one to despise our youth.

Now in the first scripture read we have, "And all Israel assembled themselves to David to Hebron, saying, Behold, we are thy bone and thy flesh" (1 Chronicles 11:1). They make a special speech to him, someone would do it, of course; some person, but it is accredited to them all. They say, "Behold, we are thy bone and thy flesh. Even aforetime, even when Saul was king, thou wast he that leddest out and broughtest in Israel; and Jehovah thy God said to thee, Thou shalt feed my people Israel, and thou shalt be prince over my

people Israel". A pungent and very appropriate speech. That was based on experience and observation as to David's manner even while Saul was king. I have been speaking of functioning; it is as functioning in it that you can be rightly named in any position. They had observed David serving under difficult circumstances -- when Saul was king. Saul eyed him from the very beginning and envied him, and would have slain him, but nevertheless David functioned as a leader in Israel, as they say, "Thou wast he that leddest out and broughtest in Israel; and Jehovah thy God said to thee, Thou shalt feed my people Israel, and thou shalt be prince over my people Israel". He was the real king. This passage ought to be encouraging to all who have ability from God, who serve as priests, or with gift in the assembly; however much envy there may be, or opposition, there is no reason why you cannot function according to the ability divinely given; David did, and it had been observed. They had seen it earlier and they are speaking of it now. They kept quiet about it evidently until Saul was dead -- many of them at least -- but they had observed that David had led out Israel, and brought Israel in. He had qualified as a king; that is to say, a general state of things in view of what is right has come about. We can always count on that in local gatherings. The enemy is ever ready to work and, alas! usually finds means of operation, but we can always reckon, as dependent on God, that He will bring about a general state of things bearing in the right direction; and He brings the elders in; there is room for eldership. A divided state in a gathering tends to preclude eldership coming into evidence. They are not even mentioned in the letters to Corinth; they may have been there, but they are not mentioned. It is, I believe, because of the divided -- almost schismatic -- conditions that existed. Such a state of things tends to preclude the operation of experience with God.

We are robbing ourselves of a divine provision if we do not make room for those who have experience with God. Room is made for the elders according to verse 3. "And all the elders of Israel came to the king to Hebron; and David made a covenant with them in Hebron before Jehovah". The passage does not say he made a covenant with all the people, it is a question of trustworthiness. However few or many there are that can be trusted by God, such will be trusted, and brought into a position where they can function. David made a covenant with them. That is to say, the Lord is operating, He is watching, that we may have conditions suitable to God, and when the time comes for stabilisation the elders will be recognised. The Lord will never be satisfied until the elders are recognised. Assembly government requires them; and so here; "David made a covenant with them in Hebron before Jehovah". That is, David took the initiative; conditions had come about for stabilisation; Israel had been in the throes of bad government and evil conditions generally, and now the time has come for stabilisation. The general view is that David is the king; for he is qualified. In the midst of disadvantageous conditions he led out Israel and brought in Israel. Some of the leaders in Corinth would have led out the people without bringing them back. They were leading them into partisan positions; into divergence one from the other. If I lead a party of brethren out it is unlikely that I shall lead them back. I may lead them out but not back. Christendom is full of such mischief. Schismatic formations are brought out but the saints are not brought back. Bringing back means recovery to the assembly; there is no other terminus of God on earth. David led Israel out and led them back. True leadership is thus marked, and the elders come in at this point. David has qualified already as king of Israel; not only of Judah, but of Israel, and this gives room to the

elders. David recognises the elders of Israel and makes a covenant with them.

Then we read of the elders, "and they anointed David king over Israel according to the word of Jehovah, through Samuel". That is, they go back to the selection of David by Samuel, they go further back than the people. The people revert back to Saul's reign, and what David did in spite of adverse conditions, but the elders go back to Samuel. We are taught by that, and as advancing in the things of God we shall go back to the beginning always, as John does, "That which was from the beginning" (1 John 1:1). He writes to the fathers as those that know Him that was from the beginning, "I write to you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning" (1 John 2:13). Old brothers are apt to talk about ancient things, but that is not enough. They sometimes like to talk of things which they remember and others do not. Here it is a question of Samuel. It was he that God used to select David, and the stabilisation of the position must include the beginning of the matter involving the word of God. It is not now by their choice or the result of the observation of the people that David was anointed king; the point now is the word of the Lord; everything must rest on that; it is a sure foundation.

In Nehemiah 8, we have a similar position. They had a fine time on the first day at the water gate with Ezra reading the Scriptures to them, and the Levites giving the sense; happy conclusion to the first day of the conference, but when we come to the part of the chapter I read, verse 13, it is said, "And on the second day were gathered together the chief fathers of all the people, the priests, and the Levites, to Ezra the scribe, even to gain wisdom as to the words of the law. And they found written in the law which Jehovah had commanded through Moses, that the children of Israel should dwell in booths in the feast of the seventh month, and that they should publish and proclaim

through all their cities, and at Jerusalem, saying, Go forth to the mount, and fetch olive-branches, and wild olive-branches, and myrtle-branches, and palm-branches, and branches of thick trees, to make booths, as it is written". The first scripture we have been considering involves stabilisation. David is king over all Israel. He makes a covenant with the elders, then they anoint him according to the word of the Lord; that is stabilisation, what you may call the sure foundation of God. It is an immense thing to understand in these days of shiftiness, and wreckage, "Yet the firm foundation of God stands" (2 Timothy 2:19). The elders understand, and David understands.

The feast of tabernacles involves love, and this comes out the first day of the meetings. It was a very full day and a very fruitful one. The Levites, with Nehemiah, gave the sense of the Scriptures to the people, and the people were to be happy. They were to eat the fat and drink the sweet, and send to those that had nothing; "And Nehemiah, that is the Tirshatha, and Ezra the priest the scribe, and the Levites that explained to the people, said to all the people, This day is holy to Jehovah your God: mourn not, nor weep. For all the people wept when they heard the words of the law. And he said to them, Go your way, eat the fat, and drink the sweet, and send portions to them for whom nothing is prepared; for the day is holy to our Lord; and be not grieved, for the joy of Jehovah is your strength" (chapter 8:9,10). That is what you might call the urgency of persons in responsibility, that at a particular time you should be governed by a particular thing, that we should know how to control our minds and our feelings. When it is a time of joy we should be joyous. There is a time to rejoice, particularly in assembly service, it is no time for weeping, it is a time for gladness, spiritual gladness. But you can understand that the urgency of Nehemiah's word could hardly sustain the joy, though it brought it about for

the moment. Exhortation in a gathering often brings about a condition which may fade away later, but still you remember that you had such an experience even if for only a matter of a few minutes, and it was worth while. You like to revert to that again and prolong it. Normally the service of God precludes sorrow or depression. Having control of our minds by the Holy Spirit we can prevent what is unsuitable. We thus have ability to dismiss from our minds what causes sorrow at a particular time and allow in our minds what causes joy. That balanced condition should never be lost. The idea of joy in the Holy Spirit is always to be present in the assembly. A suitable word often makes room for it among the brethren.

Then the fathers come together. They are not called elders here, they are called fathers -- a word that runs along with elders only that it brings in the family thought. "And on the second day were gathered together the chief fathers of all the people, the priests, and the Levites, to Ezra the scribe, even to gain wisdom as to the words of the law". That is, these older brethren had deeper thoughts. No doubt they gained from Nehemiah's and Ezra's exhortation to be joyous, and perhaps led in the joy, but they want to go deeper than the thought of an exhortation. The effect of an exhortation may pass away quickly; these older brethren mean to go further than that. Let us value the chief fathers, the priests and the Levites, let them function! Do not get in their way! They speak on the second day, they come to Ezra, the priest, with the express desire as the passage says, "to gain wisdom as to the words of the law". Then we read, "And they found written in the law which Jehovah had commanded through Moses, that the children of Israel should dwell in booths in the feast of the seventh month". They did not find that on the first day, nor is there a word about it in the first day, the great day of the meeting at the water-gate. It is the second day when the chief fathers, and

the priests, and the Levites are allowed their own proper place among the saints; they want to go deeper. We all love to say, We had a good time, good meetings. It is very rarely we hear anything else in these special meetings. Thank God we do have good times, but the elder brethren want to go deeper than that. They want to go below the surface of a three days' meeting, or a day's meeting, and see if we cannot stabilise joy as well as rule.

In David we have the stabilisation of rule according to the word of the Lord by Samuel, but here we have the stabilisation of joy. It is in the feast of tabernacles, the last of the feasts. It is the result of these old brothers and the priests and the Levites coming to Ezra. It is a question of the Bible, of reading all the books of Scripture. You will notice in the last verse of the chapter, "Also day by day, from the first day to the last day, he read in the book of the law of God. And they observed the feast seven days; and on the eighth day was a solemn assembly, according to the ordinance". Seven days! they covered a good deal of Scripture, no doubt. And we may conclude that they read in an orderly way. There were the law, the prophets, and the Psalms. The Lord Jesus opened them up to the disciples according to Luke 24. The Bible is much larger now than it was in Nehemiah's time. We have the New Testament added to it, but the same principles apply; we must search its holy pages; look at this scripture and that scripture; search them as for hidden treasure. There is no doubt that the arrangement of the Bible as it is, in chapters and verses, is very wise. This arrangement is not inspired, but it is such as love would do, and God approves, for it proves to be most useful. So here every day, one day after another, all the days of the feast they read the book of the law.

But then I am coming to what they stabilised; they brought in what was typically the feast of love; the feast of tabernacles; the arrangement of the booths as

prescribed in the books of Leviticus and Deuteronomy, for both books tell us of this feast. The interest and intelligence of these chief fathers, these priests and these Levites in making inquiry from such a man as Ezra the priest is impressive. He was a ready scribe in the law of God. A scribe is an accurate man. If you were to ask Ezra he would be accurate in his replies, as Aquila and Priscilla were when they were instructing Apollos, they "unfolded to him the way of God more exactly" (Acts 18:26). Hence these old men would probably say to Ezra, What about the book of Leviticus? Think of the Lord Jesus Christ, the great Ezra, the great Priest, the great King! think of Him too opening up from all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself. He did this to persons on the way from Jerusalem to Emmaus! I would like to ask the Lord, What is the difference between the account of the feasts in Leviticus and that in Deuteronomy? He would tell me accurately. The Lord said to one man, "What is written in the law? how readest thou?" (Luke 10:26). It is a question not only of reading it, but how you read the Bible -- that is the idea. The Lord is concerned about us as to the way we read Scripture.

Well, the fathers here found the passage in Leviticus. "And they found written in the law which Jehovah had commanded through Moses, that the children of Israel should dwell in booths in the feast of the seventh month, and that they should publish and proclaim through all their cities, and at Jerusalem, saying, Go forth to the mount, and fetch olive-branches, and wild olive-branches, and myrtle-branches, and palm-branches, and branches of thick trees, to make booths, as it is written". There is a slight variation in the branches: what are called pine are "wild olive" branches. In the anti-typical sense there are today many wild olive branches. They are real christians, but they are not altogether subject. Some are honest, but not subject. Those who are fathers among the saints now are

interested in them. One of them would say of any such, I know he is converted, I have discerned the evidence in him of the work of God, but he is not breaking bread, meaning he is wild to that extent. There is nothing optional at all in regard to being in fellowship! Every christian should be in fellowship, but even if he is in some sense wild, nevertheless he is brought to this feast. Get him among the brethren and love him, love him into fellowship, get him into the booth, as one might say. Booths are small dwelling places, but see where they are located. "And the people went forth and brought them, and made themselves booths, everyone upon the roof of his house, and in their courts, and in the courts of the house of God, and in the open space of the water-gate, and in the open space of the gate of Ephraim". We had something about the roof today, but it was broken through, but not this time. I suppose this would be a flat roof, such as are in the east, where a few brethren could sit down and have a love feast. Do not think I am theoretical in what I am saying. We may segregate in twos or threes or more to talk together of the things of God, and even a wild brother may be there. I mean wild in the sense that he is not abiding by the word of God. "If any one thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him recognise the things that I write to you, that it is the Lord's commandment" (1 Corinthians 14:37). If I am not abiding by that epistle I am wild; but I am invited to this feast. If I go out as I went into the booth I visited then it is evident my will is still working, and I may not be invited any more.

One great feature in this passage is the law; "the law which Jehovah had commanded through Moses". Moses wrote the law by divine direction. Why should I not abide by it? It is the law of God by the hand of Moses. They made booths "in their courts, and in the courts of the house of God, and in the open space of the water-gate, and in the open space of the gate of

Ephraim". Each of these positions has some meaning, which I cannot dwell upon now. Then it is said, "all the congregation of them that had come back from the captivity made booths, and dwelt in the booths. For since the days of Jeshua the son of Nun until that day had not the children of Israel done so. And there was very great gladness". That is to say, there was opportunity for the mutuality of love and the continuance of gladness. Although we may not have Nehemiahs and Ezras, we may learn how to provide such occasions, for we are taught of God to love one another. Get close together! Invite the brethren to our houses! That is the idea of it, that is the way of stabilisation of love among the brethren. I believe God is turning to account the pressure of the moment to promote love among the brethren. Here it is not a question of pressure, but of getting together in booths. Primarily it was a wilderness provision, but it was to be continued in the land. Love for one another enables us to enjoy sharing small quarters together. We are glad to meet each other and opportunities to speak in holy communion as regards the things of God, are appreciated as love exists.

Well, the third part of my subject is in the Acts, and refers to the meeting of difficulties that arise amongst us. This chapter brings in the elders, and how the solution of the difficulty mentioned is through them. The apostles and elders came together to consider the matter. Now we have no apostles and no official elders, but their service in this important meeting is recorded by the Spirit, and hence it is to be kept in mind in our care meetings.

We recognise these facts of the Scripture, and although we have not apostles or official elders, we have light in this chapter as to how counsel was taken and difficulties met at the beginning. In Jerusalem in the presence of a great difficulty, schism among the people of God was averted by the wisdom that appeared in

the apostles and the elders. So Peter, in standing up to speak, says, "Brethren (lit. Men, brethren) ye know that from the earliest days God amongst you chose that the nations by my mouth should hear the word of the glad tidings and believe".

From the earliest days, literally "ancient" days, brings in the idea of time and experience with God; Peter's commission was from the very beginning. So Peter's word fits exactly; it is light governing what was in question. He reverts back to the beginning of ministry in christianity, and that he was deputed to speak to the gentiles. "Brethren, ye know that from the earliest days God amongst you chose that the nations by my mouth should hear the word of the glad tidings and believe". His experience qualified him to meet the serious crisis that had arisen. Who could question the moral weight of the apostle as he stood up to speak in that meeting? He did not desire to be personally credited, but to credit the testimony at that time. When Peter stands up and speaks to the apostles and elders, he refers to himself as having something from God from the earliest days, involving not only authority, but experience. He is a man of moral weight. This made way for relating the conversion of those of the nations through Paul and Barnabas, and the whole multitude are glad to hear of it. They were ready to listen to Paul and Barnabas speaking about the work of God among the gentiles. What they related would create a good atmosphere in the meeting.

In the matter of judgment another important point is the word of wisdom. It is a gift, and that is what James has. He says, "Brethren (lit. Men, brethren) listen to me:" he is a man that should be listened to. He reverts immediately to old things, "And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Brethren, listen to me: Simon has related how God first visited to take out of the nations a people for his name. And with this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written:

After these things I will return, and will rebuild the tabernacle of David which is fallen, and will rebuild its ruins, and will set it up, so that the residue of men may seek out the Lord, and all the nations on whom my name is invoked, saith the Lord, who does these things known from eternity. Wherefore, I judge, not to trouble those who from the nations turn to God; but to write to them to abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from what is strangled, and from blood. For Moses, from generations of old, has in every city those who preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath". Then the assembly is brought into the matter and following that the Holy Spirit; thus we have a conclusion according to God. "Then it seemed good to the apostles and to the elders, with the whole assembly, to send chosen men from among them with Paul and Barnabas to Antioch". Finally "it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us" (verse 28).

I want you, dear brethren, to follow the reference to age and experience with God in all these passages, to see how the cumulative thought of the testimony is brought down to bear on any given matter, and if there is a difficulty let us have all that is available to lead to, and to lend weight to a right judgment. Thus unity is maintained.

WHAT PLEASES GOD

Matthew 3:13-17; Hebrews 11:5; 1 Thessalonians 4:1

I wish to occupy you all and myself in this service, with what pleases God. In His abode above there is nothing displeasing to Him. The creature cannot compass the divine realm, because it must of necessity take on infinite proportions. We read of "the third heaven" (2 Corinthians 12:2), which is, I suppose, the limit of the creature's approach. We have the expression "above all the heavens" (Ephesians 4:10). How many there are is not stated. I suppose third would imply gradation, leading to what is wholly spiritual, a gradual leading to what is uncreated.

It is so in our own persons, we are very conscious of the physical, but we progress to the wholly spiritual condition. We must, of course, always remain creatures and never go beyond created conditions -- the heavens being included. I think we always stand related to the physical, involving our bodies of glory, but there may not always be the consciousness of this. In earlier days, there was at times unconsciousness of the physical. Paul said he did not know whether, as in paradise, he was in or out of the body. That extraordinary experience he had fourteen years before he wrote the second letter to the Corinthians. There would be increase of spiritual consciousness as he entered on the realm beyond the first and second heavens, reaching the third. How he knew it was the third, I cannot say; he had no doubt about it, however, according to the way he records what occurred. It is a most remarkable incident, especially as he says he did not know whether he was in the body or out of it. God knows, he says. Clearly the experience was intended to affect his service and testimony, and would give increased spiritual body and power to it.

I refer to these matters to increase our interest in what is spiritual; interest in the realm of God, in the heavens. Solomon spoke of the heaven of heavens,

that it is not capable of containing God, and we have the wonderful statement that He dwells "in unapproachable light; whom no man has seen, nor is able to see" (1 Timothy 6:16). The nearer we approach God in His own realm the more we are conscious of infinitude, and our own smallness. I am speaking of what pleases God, and I am sure Paul was conscious of that when he got there. Jesus went beyond all the heavens. That is a glorious thought. He is our Priest, "For such a high priest became us, holy, harmless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and become higher than the heavens" (Hebrews 7:26). How much higher is not stated. He has gone beyond all heavens, so that man now has a wonderful place in the divine realm, and, as in Christ, fills the heart of God. Jesus as up there that "he might fill all things" (Ephesians 4:10), is personally the same as He was on the banks of the Jordan.

The place man in Christ has in the divine realm certainly should appeal to us, because we are men. Paul says that Christ has given gifts to men; He had every saint in His mind in those gifts, so that we should all be equal to the position designed for us up there; and the time is nearing when we shall be eternally there. It is finishing time now; the gifts and the Spirit remaining here, with a view to finishing us for the wonderful place we are to occupy, where we are to please God. The heavenly city, one of the greatest conceptions, is presented as a cube. It is solid and would be altogether out of the question if it were merely physical. Myriads of men are required to fill what is described as the heavenly city. It is composed of men, not angels; although angels have to say to it at the gates; we compose it, they do not. All shall fit according to the divine design; there will be nothing to displease God. God and the Lamb are there, there is no discrepancy whatever.

Now the verse read in Matthew bears on it. God has found what pleases Him. John the evangelist uses that word considerably; in chapter 1 particularly, where we

read of persons being found. I wonder if everyone here has been found, for you have been sought. The divine eye has moved to seek and to find you. Take the sphere of glory John depicts in John 12. The Lord was about to enter Jerusalem; it was a great movement, and there was great interest in the matter; crowds were there and the Lord said in effect, ' There is something wanting in this display '. What was wanting was the young ass. Can an ass add to the glory of Christ? Yes, if you look at him according to what he is symbolically. The Lord found what was needed, so that we may be sure that if any one of us is needed by the Lord, He is looking for you, He will find you if you are available. He needs you to complete the position. We are not yet finished, and whilst unfinished there is something needed. These last days are very interesting days to heaven. God is going on with His work, looking for and finding souls in spite of all that man is doing. He found the ass. The Lord must be carried into Jerusalem. It is not simply that you should get blessing, but there is a place to be filled and you are needed to fill it. The Lord is looking for you. We do not want you to miss it. Perhaps I am speaking to someone who has not been found. The best place to be found is in a meeting like this. There is a place to be filled and the glory requires you should be there to fill it. The Lord found a young ass and used it. If God finds what He needs He uses it at once. The question is what pleases God; the ass evidently did and the Lord had no difficulty in riding on it. The Lord rode on the ass into His capital, in glory. What became of him afterwards, Scripture leaves; symbolically that ass is of great interest to heaven.

In Matthew we have another scene; not Jerusalem, although the Lord had been there. According to Luke He was, as a Babe, taken to the temple at Jerusalem by His father and mother. Now He is about thirty years of age, and He comes from Galilee. There may be persons

here who belong to distinguished religious bodies; I do not know. There are some distinguished bodies; some very old so-called christian religions in the world. For such, this room would not be suitable, it would be altogether too mean. The greatest architectural skill has, for centuries, been employed for the abodes of those systems of renown. I mention all that because the Lord, about to take up His ministry, came from Galilee. That is a point for young people in moving to your place in fellowship -- whence you came. Jesus came from Galilee, we are told in Matthew, and Matthew never loses sight of Galilee. According to him the Lord meets His disciples for the last time in Galilee. Surely it must have something to do with the pleasure of God. A cathedral has no element whatever that is pleasing to God, in spite of what it may be in the eyes of men. It is therefore important for me to inquire, Do I please God in my initial movements? There are initial movements. First there is God's sovereign movement toward you, to do something in you, to change the texture of your being. However well bred and brought up, there must be a change in the texture of each if he is to be for God's pleasure. God moves to do that. "The wind blows where it will" (John 3:8); that is sovereign action; no one can interfere with it; "thus is every one that is born of the Spirit". This is a divine movement toward you. At the time you were not intelligent about it, but it happened. Then there is the evangelical movement by some one so that your soul might be illuminated by the gospel. The Lord Jesus does that. We are told in Matthew that the "people sitting in darkness has seen a great light, and to those sitting in the country and shadow of death, to them has light sprung up" (Matthew 4:16). That is the light of the gospel. John says "the light appears in darkness, and the darkness apprehended it not". This refers to judaism. But in Galilee it was apprehended by some, as Matthew testifies. In our chapter,

Matthew 4:18-22, Peter, Andrew, James and John are called and they follow Jesus. This is pleasing to God.

The Lord came from Galilee, the place under reproach. He came purposely every step of the way to the Jordan. He was going to be baptised. The place, the river, the baptiser -- all are in the Lord's mind. I am speaking now of the Lord of glory, and how He moved here below; what He was in heaven's eye. John sees Him coming. I want to bring out this matter of heaven's proclamation of pleasure in the Lord, and the connection in which it is found in Matthew. It is a matter of His mind at the time, and of His walk; how He came and whence He came; and how and what He had in His mind as coming. Righteousness is prominent. His mind was full of that thought. Now He is there, and John is there at the Jordan, also others. How heaven watched those steps from Galilee! He is there to bring out the moral question -- because in coming to God, and dealing with divine things, we are apt to be very shallow, often mere imitators. It is imperative that we should dig deep in self-judgment, owning righteousness. In 2 Timothy 2:22 it is the first thing we are told to follow. The mind of the Lord Jesus here is taken up with what is suitable at the moment. It is a question of righteousness -- of the Jordan, John and Christ's baptism. He must be baptised by him. John deprecates it, saying he needed to be baptised of the Lord, but what was in the Lord's mind was to govern the moment. If He has a mind about a matter that is what I want to understand. He says "it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness". Now that is most necessary in days of shallowness such as ours. This matter of all righteousness must come up. What a conversation went on between John and Jesus! Heaven heard all that conversation, and observed how the Lord Jesus prevailed over John. He would say to each of us, ' I want to prevail in your soul '; we shall do well if we let

Him have His way. John forbade Him at first, but this attitude did not last long. In having to do with the Lord we must not forbid Him in any way. The Lord is ready to do the best for us and our wisdom is to submit. John suffers Him to have His way; we should also. If we do not, we shall suffer loss. John is subject, he allowed the Lord to prevail in this matter. John baptised Him.

John the evangelist seems to know John the baptist in a special way. He tells us that John the baptist saw Jesus coming to him and he said, "Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). There is no forbidding in John the evangelist's account. He says, "But 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 I have seen and borne witness that this is the Son of God" (John 1:33,34). John the evangelist is always aiming to get souls to come to the knowledge of the Son of God. This great Person coming to do things for God, baptises with the Holy Spirit. The Lord Jesus does wonderful things. Just now, as regards the assembly, He is doing the finishing things. There are positions to be occupied, and He is filling them, baptising believers into the body. He wants some who are here tonight with this in view; and He is perfecting those of us who are already in the body. All is for the Father's pleasure. Here "the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him: and behold, a voice out of the heavens saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I have found my delight". God had been looking for it and He found what pleased Him, and He proclaimed it.

I want to point out that in Mark and Luke, the Lord Himself is addressed. He is to have the sense of heaven's delight in Him. The voice says, "Thou art my beloved

Son, in thee I have found my delight". Here in Matthew 3 the voice says, "This is my beloved Son" -- it is addressed to others. When the Father intimates His pleasure in the believer, there is the understanding that it has to be maintained; it is to be a continuous matter, but it can only be by the Holy Spirit. Matthew says, "Then Jesus was carried up into the wilderness by the Spirit to be tempted of the devil" (Matthew 4:1). Will He be pleasing to God then? Yes, every moment! Never more so. Mark 1:12 says, "And immediately the Spirit drives him out into the wilderness"; the Holy Spirit takes the initiative. The position here is that things are thoroughly against you. Many do well when things are favourable, but recoil from what is adverse. Mark says the Lord "was with the wild beasts", but He was never more delightful to God. The Lord is a divine Person, but He is here as Leader for us; a guide for us. If I am to continue in the pleasure of God, it is only as I let the Holy Spirit have His way with me. The Lord, as perfect in manhood here, let the Spirit have His way with Him. That is very remarkable. Mark says, He was driven into the wilderness; Luke that He was led by the Spirit in the wilderness. As to believers, we are instructed that "as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God" (Romans 8:14).

My next point is Enoch in Hebrews 11. It is a question of the pleasure of God before translation. If I am to continue to be pleasing to God, it is to be by the Holy Spirit, and His presence and support must be accompanied by self-judgment. The word to us is, "but if, by the Spirit, ye put to death the deeds of the body, ye shall live" (Romans 8:13). That is self-judgment making room for the Spirit. Now Enoch is representative of the saints as about to be translated. He lived only a little more than one-third of the average life of the patriarchs mentioned before him. He lived only three hundred and sixty-five years. In these years he

was pleasing to God. No doubt the allusion would be to the three hundred years during which he "walked with God". The life of Jesus was short, it was taken from the earth. It was infinitely precious to God. What delight God has in the presence of Jesus up there all the time! Enoch is in a certain sense a type of Christ; but he is more exactly a type of the assembly; that is, as translated -- not going through the great tribulation -- and expressing what pleases God before the translation.